Archive for the 'Human Rights Defenders' Category

Exile is ‘a little bit less than death’ for Virginia Laparra forced to flee Guatemala

March 12, 2025

On 5 March 2025 Haroon Siddique in the Guardian wrote about Virginia Laparra, a Guatemalan anti-corruption prosecutor, who spent two years in prison after reporting her suspicion that a judge leaked sealed details of a case. She was forced into exile after being pursued by the country’s conservative elite.

In January last year, she was released under house arrest but in July was jailed for five years for another charge relating to her work. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/01/04/virginia-laparra-former-impunity-prosecutor-in-guatemala-released/]

Facing the prospect of going back to prison and further charges, Laparra left her two daughters behind to seek asylum across the border in Mexico.

In an interview with the Guardian in London after receiving the Alliance for Lawyers at Risk’s Sir Henry Brooke award honouring human rights defenders, Laparra said: “Nobody goes into exile voluntarily. Exile is the only thing left when nothing else has worked, it’s the only thing you’ve got left to defend your life and your freedom.

Protesters in Guatemala City demand the release of  Virginia Laparra. ‘This is a political dispute, not a legal one,’ said a member of her defence team.

Exile is just little bit different, a little bit less than death. [Your persecutors] take everything from you, take away your family, your children, your parents, your house, your way of life, your friends.’

Laparra headed a special prosecutor’s office working alongside the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (Cicig), a UN anti-corruption mission that was controversially expelled in September 2019 by the then president, Jimmy Morales. Widespread reprisals followed against those who had worked with Cicig.

When Laparra was taken taken into preventive detention, she said it was as “if I were the worst drugs trafficker in Guatemala. When we drove out of the underground parking in my building there were soldiers, the police, hooded, with heavy weapons on both sides of the street. It was like in a film.”

She spent her first five months in solitary confinement in a windowless 2.5 sq meter cell in a high security jail in Guatemala City, 200 miles away from her Quetzaltenango home, and allowed out for only one hour a day.

She also endured bleeding to the womb in prison but waited months for treatment. Laparra eventually had a hysterectomy and four subsequent operations, during which she said police surrounded “the hospital, the gynaecology area, the operation room, and I had on each side of my bed a member of the police”.

She was later transferred to Matamoros prison, another notorious facility where drug traffickers and gang leaders are held, after she angered the authorities by speaking to a journalist. “My idea was that at least if I’m going to die [in jail], let’s make sure the world knows what happened,” said Laparra.

She considered pleading guilty in the hope that she might be released as both her sentences were commutable, which in Guatemala usually means no jail time is served, but her daughters told her: “Don’t do that, you’ve been here too long to give up now.”

When things reached their lowest ebb, Laparra said she decided to kill herself before remembering the promise she made to her daughters each time they visited – that she would be there the next time they came.

After her release on house arrest last year, she received an award from Guatemala’s current progressive president, Bernardo Arévalo, a surprise victor in the 2023 election. But Laparra believes the award only inflamed the pursuit of her by the public prosecutor’s office led by the attorney general, María Consuelo Porras, who had also tried to stop Arévalo from taking office.

Porras, who has pursued many other anti-corruption prosecutors and judges, also forced into exile her predecessor as attorney general and has been sanctioned by the US for corruption and the Council of the European Union for undermining democracy.

The Fund for Global Human Rights, which nominated Laparra for the Sir Henry Brooke award, and Amnesty International, which named her as a prisoner of conscience in 2022, said they were “deeply concerned about the systematic pattern of criminalisation imposed by the Guatemalan judiciary and the public prosecutor’s office against former judges, prosecutors, human rights defenders and journalists who have worked tirelessly for years to fight impunity and corruption in the country”.

Laparra says she feels proud to have received the award but adds that her persecutors reacted to the news with anger online. “I thought that it wasn’t possible to keep hate burning for so long,” she said. “Surely, two years in prison would have been enough for them, I thought, but it wasn’t.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/05/virginia-laparra-lawyer-guatemala

Human rights defenders globally need increased political and financial support

March 11, 2025

During the 58th regular session of the Human Rights Council, ISHR delivered a statement during the Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders affirming that human rights, peace and security are deeply interconnected, and the importance of the international system to human rights defenders.

The international system – to which many human rights defenders turn for justice, solidarity and accountability – is under attack. 

Already weakened by double standards by States from all regions, human rights and the rule of law are being destroyed by a cabal of authoritarian leaders and unaccountable corporations. We thank the Special Rapporteur and other experts for their 27 February statement on this issue.  

It was gratifying to see the rapid solidarity of many States with Ukraine following Friday’s White House confrontation with one such authoritarian. It is disheartening that the shortsighted response of many of those same States to the existential human rights funding crisis is to increase security spending by reducing development assistance. Human rights, peace and security are deeply interconnected. 

Of course, no single State can fill the US gap or counter its influence, but a diverse group of States with a shared interest in universal rights and the rule of law must do so. Human rights defenders globally need your increased political and financial support, now. Our common interests are not served by lawlessness and raw power. 

Madame Rapporteur, thank you for endorsing the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders +25. Read with the 1998 Declaration, it elaborates authoritative standards on the rights of defenders, and State and non-State actors’ obligations to respect and protect them.  

Finally, alongside 196 organisations, ISHR calls on States to support a strong Norway-led resolution on human rights defenders and technology at this session. 

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc58-human-rights-defenders-globally-need-increased-political-and-financial-support

China on dissent: over 1,500 convicted in six years, report finds

March 11, 2025

Alan Lu for RFA on 5 March 2025 refers to a a new report which shows the extent of Beijing’s arbitrary detentions, with severe sentences for prisoners of conscience.

Chinese authorities have arbitrarily detained thousands of people for peacefully defending or exercising their rights over the past six years and convicted 1,545 prisoners of conscience, a rights group said on Wednesday.

Chinese Human Rights Defenders, or CHRD, a non-government organization of domestic and overseas Chinese rights activists, said the scope and scale of wrongful detention by Chinese authorities may constitute crimes against humanity.

“They were sentenced and imprisoned on charges that stem from laws that are not in conformity with the Chinese government’s domestic and international human rights obligations,” the group said in a report.

“Their cases proceeded through the full criminal justice system, with police, prosecutors, and courts arbitrarily depriving them of their liberty in violation of their human rights.”

Prisoners of conscience have faced severe penalties, with an average sentence of six years, increasing to seven for national security charges.

Three people, identified as Tashpolat Tiyip, Sattar Sawut and Yang Hengjun, were sentenced to death, while two, Rahile Dawut and Abdurazaq Sayim, received life sentences, the group said, adding that 48 were jailed for at least a decade.

Map of sentenced prisoners of conscience in mainland China, excluding Hong Kong and Macao.
Map of sentenced prisoners of conscience in mainland China, excluding Hong Kong and Macao. (CHRD)

Among the convicted, women activists and marginalized groups, including ethnic Tibetans and Uyghurs, were disproportionately represented among those wrongfully detained, the group said.

Out of all the prisoners of conscience aged 60 or older, two-thirds were women, it added.

“Human rights experts and international experts have raised that people over the age of 60 should generally not be held in custody due to the effects on their physical and mental health,” Angeli Datt, research consultant with CHRD, told journalists in a press briefing Wednesday.

“That two-thirds of them are women was really shocking to me,” she said.

“Worse still, the impunity Chinese government officials enjoy at home emboldens them to commit abuses abroad,” the group said.

China dismissed a Swiss report last month alleging that it pressures Tibetans and Uyghurs in Switzerland to spy on their communities.

‘Endangering national security’

The CHRD said that under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the scope and scale of the use of arbitrary detention to silence critics and punish human rights personnel had grown.

The organization documented a total of 58 individuals known to have been convicted of “endangering national security.”

“The overall average prison sentence for a national security crime is 6.72 years, though this figure excludes those sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve or life imprisonment,” it said.

In Hong Kong, more people were convicted of “subversion” and “inciting subversion” — terms that the U.N. describes as “broad and imprecise, making them prone to misapplication and misuse.”

In one 2024 case, authorities convicted 45 people for participating in a primary election, an act fully protected under both domestic and international law. Subversion charges accounted for 37% of all prisoners of conscience sentenced in Hong Kong during this period.

https://www.rfa.org/english/china/2025/03/06/chia-dissent-crack-down-humgn-rights/

https://thediplomat.com/2025/03/chinas-system-of-mass-arbitrary-detention/


8 March 2025 International Women’s Day

March 10, 2025

One in four countries report backlash on women’s rights in 2024

Women’s and girls’ rights are facing unprecedented growing threats worldwide, from higher levels of discrimination to weaker legal protections, and less funding for programmes and institutions that support and protect women.

UN Women’s latest report “Women’s Rights in Review 30 Years After Beijing”, published ahead of the UN 50th International Women’s Day on 8 March, shows that in 2024 nearly a quarter of governments worldwide reported a backlash on women’s rights. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/international-womens-day/]

Despite important progress, only 87 countries have ever been led by a woman, and a woman or girl is killed every 10 minutes by a partner or member of her own family.  Digital technology and artificial intelligence spread harmful stereotypes, while the digital gender gap limits women’s opportunities.

In the past decade, the world registered a disturbing 50 percent increase in the number of women and girls living in conflict, and women’s rights defenders confront daily harassment, personal attacks and even death. Recent global crises—like COVID-19, the climate emergency, soaring food and fuel prices—are only increasing the urgency to respond.  

“UN Women is committed to ensuring that ALL Women and Girls, everywhere, can fully enjoy their rights and freedoms,” affirmed UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous. “Complex challenges stand in the way of gender equality and women’s empowerment, but we remain steadfast, pushing forward with ambition and resolve. Women and girls are demanding change—and they deserve nothing less.”…

Today’s report also features the new Beijing+30 Action Agenda, a courageous roadmap to complete our unfinished business by focusing on:

  1. A digital revolution for all women and girls: We must ensure equal access to technology, equip women and girls to lead in AI and digital innovation, and guarantee their online safety and privacy.
  2. Freedom from poverty: Investments in comprehensive social protection, universal health coverage, education, and robust care services are needed for women and girls to thrive and can create millions of green and decent jobs.
  3. Zero violence: Countries must adopt and implement legislation to end violence against women and girls, in all its forms, with well-resourced plans that include support for community-based organizations on the front lines of response and prevention.
  4. Full and equal decision-making power: Temporary special measures like gender quotas have proven their effectiveness in rapidly increasing women’s participation.
  5. Peace and security: Fully finance national plans on women, peace and security and gender-responsive humanitarian aid are essential. Frontline women’s organizations, so often the first responders to crisis, must receive dedicated, sustained funding to build lasting peace.
  6. Climate justice: We must prioritize women’s and girls’ rights in climate adaptation, center their leadership and knowledge, and ensure they benefit from new green jobs.

Across these six Actions, putting young women and girls at the heart of our efforts is the best way to guarantee success, both today and tomorrow. These six plus one actions have the potential to unleash progress on women’s rights and put us back on track for 2030.

The Beijing+30 commemoration and the forthcoming UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW69) are clear opportunities to enshrine this Action Agenda into national policies, regional strategies, and global agreements.

In a pivotal year for women and girls, that is also a year of pushback and crises like no other, let us push women’s rights forward to create a world where all women and girls enjoy equal rights and equal opportunities. We can be the first generation that can live in an equal world.

Ahead of International Women’s Day, Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, said:

“The significance of International Women’s Day 2025 cannot be overstated. It is no longer a case of addressing unfinished business on the gender justice front, but one of bracing ourselves to resist active regression and a mounting assault on our rights.

“Thirty years ago, 189 governments came together at the Fourth World Conference on Women to adopt the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, a groundbreaking blueprint for strengthening women’s rights endorsed by thousands of activists. Despite significant progress since then, the world has failed to fully deliver on all the promises. From rape and femicide to coercion, control and assaults on our reproductive rights, violence against women and girls still threatens their safety, happiness and very existence in a multitude of ways.

“And crucially, we are now going backwards. The aggressive patriarchal crusade led by President Trump and other powerful leaders against the rights and bodily autonomy of women and gender-diverse people has already had devasting consequences not just in the United States but all over the world. By dismantling domestic efforts to tackle gender-based, racial and other forms of discrimination, erasing recognition of transgender identity, and ending international funding for abortion counselling or referrals, the US administration is shamefully erasing years of hard-fought gains.

“Let us be clear, this trend has deeper roots than President Trump’s recent election. For several years now, brazen anti-rights movements have conspired to turn back the clock to an age when patriarchal oppression was the norm. We cannot afford to be complacent in the face of this gathering storm, for women, girls and LGBTQI+ people are under attack the world over.

“Amnesty International calls on states and non-state actors who believe in universal values and a rule-based international order to resist this accelerated and well-resourced attack against women’s rights. We call on them to strengthen protections of women, girls, LGBTQI+ people and other marginalized groups against gender-based violence. We urge them to recognize and support the vital work of all women human rights defenders and all those on the frontlines of the fight for sexual and reproductive rights, and to implement concrete measures to protect and empower them.

“We appeal to all to respect sexual and reproductive rights and prevent rollbacks, including by revoking any laws that criminalize or punish people for exercising these rights, as well as fully decriminalizing, providing and funding universal access to abortion.

“Finally, this International Women’s Day, Amnesty International reiterates its call on states to recognize gender apartheid under international law as a crime against humanity. Doing so would fill a major gap in the global legal framework and help to combat institutionalized and systematic domination and oppression on the basis of gender, no matter where it occurs.

“Despite suffering setbacks and facing countless attempts to block, divide and undermine us throughout history, feminist, LGBTI+ and grassroots movements keep marching forward. We may be walking a rocky path, but we will never stop fighting for a world where women, girls and gender-diverse people are free to enjoy the full range of human rights without discrimination or fear of reprisal.”

On 7 March 2025 SaferWorld carried a post “Still standing: The resilience of women peacebuilders in a time of crisis”Still standing: The resilience of women peacebuilders in a time of crisis

As we mark International Women’s Day 2025, women’s rights organisations (WROs) and frontline activists in crisis and conflict settings are standing strong despite immense challenges. ..Yet, while their work is more critical than ever, the harsh reality is that many are being forced to operate with dwindling resources, due to global funding cuts and shifting donor priorities towards militarisation, over a genuine investment in long-term peace, security and gender justice. 

At a time when conflict, displacement and violence against women are escalating, and misogyny is a core pillar of the far-right agenda, these cuts will only deepen existing inequalities and undermine efforts to build sustainable peace and security globally. The reduction in funding for gender equality and Women, Peace and Security (WPS) initiatives threatens to reverse decades of progress and compounds the global rollback on women’s equality, safety and security. For example, cuts to the UK official development assistance (ODA) budget in 2021 led to a 30 per cent reduction in funding to programming with a focus on gender equality and to a 66% reduction in funding to WROs compared to 2017. WROs and women-led organisations – many of which are small community groups – often struggle to access direct, flexible and long-term funding, despite being the first responders in humanitarian crises and leading conflict prevention and peace efforts. When funding disappears, so do vital services, safe spaces for survivors of gender-based violence and conflict-related sexual violence, safe spaces for women peacebuilders to re-mobilise, legal aid for women and girls who have been displaced, and advocacy that ensures women’s voices are central in peace processes.  But despite these constraints, WROs and women peacebuilders are still standing. Their resilience is evident in their ability to adapt, mobilise local resources and continue working in the most difficult circumstances. But resilience alone is not enough – they need meaningful and sustained support. 

As the world commemorates International Women’s Day and gathers at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) to discuss gender equality and sustainable development, we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that women and girls play a central role in peacebuilding and conflict prevention efforts around the world.  

The international community, donors, funders and philanthropists will need to act urgently to ensure that WROs are not just surviving but thriving. This means:  

  1. Increasing direct, flexible and long-term funding and shifting power to local women-led organisations, women activists and women’s groups – we have seen the value in our work of providing sustained core funding to WROs, moving beyond short-term, project-based grants to ensure continuity of their critical efforts in conflict prevention, peacebuilding and humanitarian response. To make this shift meaningful, international organisations and donors should prioritise direct and flexible funding to frontline WROs rather than channelling resources through large intermediaries. This will ensure that funding reaches those who are best placed to drive lasting change within their communities. 
  2. Ensuring women’s leadership in conflict prevention, peace and humanitarian processes – women from all backgrounds and marginalised communities must have a seat at decision-making tables, not just as implementers but as equal partners in shaping policies and solutions that affect their lives. 
  3. Standing up for gender equality and women’s rights – urgently pushing back against reversals in women’s rights and gender equality, especially in fragile and conflict-affected contexts, where regressive policies and shrinking civic space are eroding hard-won gains. Women peacebuilders, human rights defenders and frontline activists are already standing up to these challenges, demanding that women’s voices remain central. Their leadership must be protected, amplified and meaningfully supported to sustain progress and counteract the global rollback on gender equality. 
  4. Protecting and supporting women human rights defenders and peacebuilding organisations – governments and international actors must recognise and safeguard the work of women human rights defenders and peacebuilding organisations in conflict zones, ensuring they can operate without fear of reprisals. 
  5. Strengthening accountability mechanisms – governments and multilateral bodies must hold themselves accountable to their commitments to the WPS agenda and support localisation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on WPS. 

Women’s rights organisations are the backbone of peace and resilience in crisis and conflict settings. This International Women’s Day, we celebrate their unwavering commitment – but celebration is not enough. The global community must act with urgency to fund, support and protect these organisations so they can continue to drive meaningful change. 

https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/press-release/2025/03/one-in-four-countries-report-backlash-on-womens-rights-in-2024

Read UN Women’s full report

https://www.saferworld-global.org/resources/news-and-analysis/post/1071-still-standing-the-resilience-of-women-peacebuilders-in-a-time-of-crisis

https://www.odisharay.com/pages/single_page.php?id=47565

https://www.omct.org/en/resources/blog/mujer-defensora-derechos-humanos-regimen-de-excepcion-el-salvador

https://www.ohchr.org/en/get-involved/stories/women-activists-fighting-safe-digital-space

First assessment of Human Rights under the Trump Administration by HRW

March 5, 2025

Amy Braunschweiger speaks with Human Rights Watch’s US Program Director Tanya Greene, who leads research within the United States, as well as Washington Director Sarah Yager, who advocates with the US government on global issues, about the slew of executive orders President Trump has issued, the damage to human rights his administration’s policies have already done, and where we go from here.The text – reproduced in full below, was published on 3 March 2025.

See also: https://youtu.be/N_hCOCVuJsA?si=t2lUEb3Fw8XWH7Vo where UN human rights chief Volker Türk has voiced deep concerns for hostilities happening across the globe, including a “fundamental shift in direction” of the US. He expressed concern over a peace deal in the Russia-Ukraine war that did not involve Kyiv.

President Trump has been governing by executive orders. Could you give us some quick background on executive orders and what they do?

TG: An executive order is a presidential directive regarding federal government operations and policies. Their reach and power can be extraordinary, including because they often impact federally funded non-governmental entities, like universities and housing providers. Executive orders should be based on existing law, and are often operationalized through agency action, such as the departments of labor, homeland security, or education.

Many of Trump’s executive orders are facing court challenges arguing that they are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal. For example, his executive order denying citizenship to children of undocumented people born in the United States has been stayed by the courts pending a legal challenge. It is widely seen as a clear violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution.

Although the implementation of executive orders is not always automatic, widespread responses have been preemptive, anticipatory, and fearful, which is likely what Trump intended in this blitz of actions.

SY: These executive orders show how split the United States is. In 2016, Trump’s executive orders reversed former President Barack Obama’s. Then Joe Biden reversed Trump’s orders. And today, Trump reverses Biden’s. But this isn’t typical. It shows the divisive nature of US politics.

It’s also not typical that so many of these current orders are harmful to human rights.

Many of Trump’s executive orders harm human rights, both in the United States and around the world. Meanwhile, billionaire Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” or DOGE, is laying off masses of federal employees at various agencies. What are we most concerned about inside the US?

TG:  Whatever its supposed intentions, DOGE is slashing and burning to the point that a growing number of federal agencies are crippled by lack of resources, staff, and competent leadership. DOGE is also taking down websites and data that we rely on, both as human rights defenders and as the general public seeks information. For instance, hospitals across the country can no longer obtain important public health data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Human Rights Watch is investigating the treatment of immigrant children, racial justice impacts, environmental concerns, healthcare access, rights of lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, and transgender people, and reproductive freedoms. You have a president that says diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is “dangerous, demeaning and immoral” but offers no ways to fight racial injustice, and yet one of his executive orders allows for resettling certain supposedly-persecuted white South Africans in the US, just after an earlier order closed the refugee admissions door on all other refugees worldwide.

Immigration enforcement raids and other enforcement activities in the last month have targeted all immigrant communities, disproportionately those of color. Enforcement has targeted immigrants regardless of how long they have been in the United States and without considering their contributions to their communities, as well as people in the process of an immigration proceeding, where a judge decides if they can stay in the US.  As a result, there are communities in which many people are terrified and some avoid going to church or the hospital, and many children don’t go to school.

There is also an order now in place defunding reproductive justice and abortion access both in the US and around the world.

The stock value of GEO Group, a company the US government has long contracted with to run private immigration detention facilities, went up immediately after Trump’s election, presumably in anticipation of ramped-up immigration detention in private facilities. Human Rights Watch has long called for investment in community-based public safety solutions rather than more prisons.

What are we worried about in terms of US foreign policy?

SY: The foreign aid freeze and termination of thousands of State Department grants is a key focus for us right now, though of course there are new concerns that rise up every day. The aid being stopped has had awful consequences around the world. People will die needlessly because of this one policy decision.

There is also an impact on civil and political rights abroad. Russian independent media outlets, which have been doing an amazing job exposing the Kremlin’s repression and debunking the official propaganda, received significant US-funding. Terminating aid will severely undercut that work. The same thing with Belarusian independent media.

Many human rights defenders targeted by their governments lived in US-funded safe houses, which are now closed.

Small human rights groups, some the only ones in their country, are on the verge of closing. We’re going to see the ripple effects and deaths in populations unable to stand up for their freedoms without this funding and the political support the United States gave.

Aside from the aid freeze, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth fired the military’s top lawyers. Military lawyers are supposed to ensure US military operations abide by international law, the laws of war.  This could mean far more harm to civilians, who are supposed to be protected, when the US military is in an armed conflict. In fact, Trump also just lifted limits on US commanders authorizing airstrikes and special operations raids outside of war zones, which rolls back 20 years of work to ensure only combatants are targeted and only in recognized armed conflicts.

These kinds of actions will have long-term ramifications on how people around the world view the United States.

When there’s so much happening in a short period of time, how does Human Rights Watch approach its work?

TG: We remember our priorities and how we can make a difference. There’s a lot of noise and distraction so we have to be thoughtful about putting limited resources into efforts that have impact. Our research on immigration raids or deportation flights might be used in partner litigation; our interviews with witnesses to abuses help support policymakers advocating in support of human rights.

As an organization with colleagues who deal with repressive states and authoritarian regimes globally, those of us working in the US are informed of effective strategies and lessons learned as we encounter them here. And we can share this information with partners on the ground and policymakers, too.

SY: We were not caught off guard by this. We were able to plan. I do think the speed, the apparent vindictiveness, and the level of chaos of Trump’s first month in office shocked many people. But we planned for this. We had a strategy that we are now implementing. We are going to engage with every policymaker that we can. We know for a fact many on both sides of the aisle don’t agree with what is happening. We are going to document the Trump administration’s impact on human rights around the world, and we’re going to try and block or end those policies. We are working together with our partners, some of whom focus on strategic litigation – litigation designed to advance respect for and protection of rights.

How is Human Rights Watch responding to this? What is our work inside the US focusing on?

TG: All the areas of work I mentioned are under attack by the new administration.

The immigration space is fraught with misinformation that stokes fears and prejudices, but we counter that with fact-finding and with the stories of the real people who are harmed by dehumanizing rhetoric and policies.  We will build on our track record of careful research on problematic immigration policies from previous administrations, including the first Trump administration, exposing harmful policies such as inhuman and degrading immigration detention and the separation of migrant children from their parents. We are continuing this work, documenting what’s happening to people and using it to advocate for change.

We’ve seen US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deporting Iranian families with children to Panama with an agreement that the US will pay for Panama to deport them to Iran. A country cannot lawfully send Iranian asylum seekers to Panama without hearing their claims and just be done with it – sending them back to a country to face persecution violates international refugee law. The administration is also preparing to deport unaccompanied immigrant children – not just cruel and terrifyingly dangerous, but a human rights violation.

In the democracy space, some US voters seem ready to trade freedoms away for supposed gains that are ultimately long-term losses, like increased surveillance, that will embolden and enable bad actors in government.

In the racial equality space, we’ve been working on education, and that is a battle zone. We are doing research to expose state-level policies that censor and distort school curricula in ways that are inconsistent with human rights norms—measures that target the histories and experiences of Black, Indigenous and LGBT people in particular. If those efforts succeed they will be exported to other states.

How is our work responding to changes in the foreign policy space?

SY: The Trump executive order putting in place a sanctions program targeting the International Criminal Court has already done damage. We are working to convince the Senate not to legislate more sanctions, and to make sure other governments step up to defend the court from US pressure.

We continue to focus on some of the conflicts where we think the Trump administration could play a valuable role. When it comes to Sudan, where the US government itself said a genocide took place, the US could pressure allies like the United Arab Emirates to stop supplying weapons to the Rapid Support Forces, one of the abusive warring parties there.

President Trump says he wants to be a peacemaker. There are ways he could do that, but so far we are seeing very worrying foreign policy proposals. For example, Ukraine’s future is being discussed by the United States and Russia without Ukraine, and in Gaza, Trump has proposed permanently and forcibly displacing the Palestinian population, which would amount to crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

Some people would say there is no way to engage with this administration on human rights.

SY: Engaging is certainly more challenging. But we don’t want to just walk away from our advocacy with US officials. Then you give up the power of the human rights movement, and any opportunity to change the minds of policymakers. There are still people in this administration who care about human rights. They may talk about it differently, they may be focused on particular places or issues. We’ll start there and make our case for the US role in lessening suffering and protecting rights around the world, not only because it’s good but because it’s smart and it’s in the US interest.

And there’s Congress, which needs to step up as a check on the power of the White House. We will continue to work with House representatives and Senators on both sides of the aisle.

TG:  The fear that the administration is cultivating among the public is dangerous, and information is so critical in response. That’s why we respond with research, arming people with facts. We know there are members of congress and state leadership like governors that support human rights. They are also empowered by our work.

What can people in the US do in this situation?

SY: If we want to see rights on the agenda, we need to see people in the United States reaching out to their representatives in Congress. They were elected to bring to Washington the needs and desires of their people.

Also, if you see a person acting with courage in these difficult times, thank them. We’re going so fast, and we push and yell and scream, and then when a policymaker, a celebrity, or the head of a local food bank steps out and does the right thing, we move on. Stop for a minute and recognize the people doing the right thing. Make the space for them to keep doing that important work of holding the line.

TG: Also, you too can be that person. Share the information. Have the conversations with your friends and family, provide what you know, encourage exchange of real information. It’s about building community. One of the strongest weapons we have is our unity, and we can each do something to build that.

Religious communities and school groups and community centers, there are many places we can plug in to make a difference. Support your local homeless shelter or food pantry. Sponsor or reach out to refugees and immigrants living in your localities. I think the big risk is feeling powerless and unplugging. I know the temptation is great. We each don’t have to do everything. But if we all do something, that’s more than nothing. And don’t be afraid to hear “no” or lose on your first try. No is the first step to yes.

And remember that there have been people in this country who have been targeted for abuse and destruction by the government their entire time in this country. Us as Black people, Indigenous people. And we’ve not only survived but thrived, and there are lessons to be learned from those struggles. And for the rest of the US population, we are a nation of mostly immigrants who came here to escape ills like human rights abuses or poverty. So gain strength from that.

We’re doing this work for the next generation as well as the present. Not only are we trying to protect rights for them, we are also modeling what to do when you have problems and face difficulties.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/03/03/interview-snapshot-rights-under-trump-administration

Guidelines for Universities Hosting Human Rights Defenders

March 1, 2025

A landmark document for universities seeking to support HRDs, civil society and democracy was launched this February by York University

The Guidelines, co-produced through a year-long collaborative process, aim to support universities involved in human rights protection work and share best practice on hosting HRDs.

This initiative, led by the UNESCO Chair in the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Expansion of Political Space, was facilitated by the Centre for Applied Human Rights (CAHR) at the University of York. Chairholder Professor Paul Gready highlighted the critical need for these guidelines: 

“Civil society is under attack in many parts of the world as it faces legislative, administrative, financial, and physical threats. Universities are spaces that uphold academic freedom and democracy, and they have a crucial role to play in protecting these values everywhere.” 

The Guidelines underscore the importance of universities in the human rights protection ecosystem, and their role in providing a platform for HRDs to continue their vital work in safer environments, and respite while rejuvenating HRDs for their future work.

At an event in July 2024 which discussed a draft of the Guidelines, Sharan Srinivas, Director, Protecting Rights Defenders, Open Society Foundations, emphasised the importance of building a community both within and outside of the university environment: 

“The Guidelines address critical issues in human rights work, such as risk, trauma and psychosocial support. The process has built a strong community, and it’s crucial to continue building solidarity and links within the human rights ecosystem. I hope universities can scale up this work, and I wish you well in your efforts.”

Professor Charlie Jeffery, Vice-Chancellor of the University of York, attended the event, and provided his support for the initiative. He said “Reading the draft Guidelines, and seeing the depth, purpose and quality of the discussions at this stage shows great enterprise and ambition. For me, the question of how to align these Guidelines with university values, and bring universities along with you is key. At York, CAHR not only aligns with our values but continues to push us further in our mission for public good.” 

Professor Gready thanked all the attendees for their generosity in sharing their experiences and expertise. He said “There is an enormous amount of work still to do to ensure these Guidelines have an impact. But these Guidelines will empower universities working with HRDs, who need our support in an increasingly volatile world.”

The UNESCO Chair is planning a series of regional “What Next?” events over the next 6-12 months to discuss how to implement the Guidelines as extensively as possible. To learn more about these events and the Chair’s work, please visit the UNESCO HRD Hub

https://www.york.ac.uk/cahr/news/2025/cahr-launches-guidelines-for-hosting-hrds/

Interview with Human Rights Defender Olga Kleitman

February 28, 2025

Human Rights First published this on 24 February 2025

Human Rights Defender & architect Olga Kleitman from Ukraine turned an empty building into a safe haven for those displaced by war in Kharkiv.

Spread of ‘foreign agent’ laws in Eastern Europe

February 27, 2025

Natika Kantaria is a human rights advocate with nearly a decade of experience planning and implementing advocacy campaigns in human rights. She has worked with international organizations and watchdog NGOs and collaborated with the public and private sectors. For the ISHR she wrote a piece on 26 February 2025 about a worrying trend: ‘Foreign agent’ laws have been introduced in various countries, violating international human rights law and threatening to silence human rights defenders. This pattern is particularly evident in Eastern Europe, where NGOs courageously resist and need the support of the international community. See e.g. my earlier posts:

Societies thrive when everyone can work, speak out, and organise freely and safely to ensure justice and equality for all. Legislation requiring NGOs to register as ‘foreign agents’ is a barrier to this virtuous cycle. Despite the European Court of Human Rights’ 2022 ruling that Russia’s 2012 foreign agent law violated freedom of expression and association, the governments of HungaryGeorgiaSlovakiaSerbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina have proceeded undeterred to introduce similar laws. 

These laws specifically target NGOs and not-for-profits that receive foreign funds and require them to register as foreign agents, organisations serving the interests of a foreign power, or agents of foreign influence. By doing so, they restrict the capacity of  human rights defenders to organise, participate and exercise their right to defend rights by:

  • imposing disproportionately high fines and heavy sanctions to NGOs refusing to comply, which may ultimately lead to the termination of their operations 
  • using vague wording, that ultimately gives too much room and power for government interpretation. For instance, the requirement for NGOs to register in official records or identify themselves as ‘agents of foreign influence’ lacks clarity and specificity.  
  • increasing the burden of NGOs by introducing heavy reporting and auditing requirements. The State’s alleged need for transparency as their primary purpose can, therefore, be effectively addressed through existing legislation regulating NGOs.
  • employing a negative narrative that stigmatises and delegitimises the work of the civil society organisations and human rights defenders. This rhetoric promotes hostility and distrust toward civil society and encourages attacks against defenders.

Furthermore, such laws contradict the commitments of these countries under international human rights law. Article 13 of the 1998 UN Declaration on human rights defenders recognises the right of defenders to solicit, receive and utilise resources.

Article 10 of the Declaration +25, a supplement to the UN Declaration put forward in 2024 by civil society, human rights defenders and legal experts, addresses States’ attempts to prohibit foreign contributions or impose unjustified national security limitations. It stipulates that States should not hinder financial resources for human rights defenders and outlines measures to prevent retaliation based on the source of their funding. These laws violate rights related to freedom of expression, association, and privacy, as outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Foreign agent laws also run counter to commitments made by countries at the regional level as members of the Council of Europe (CoE) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), including recommendation CM/Rec(2018)11, which emphasizes the protection and promotion of civil society space and OSCE guidelines for protecting human rights defenders. 

NGOs are increasingly becoming a primary target for repressive governments. According to the CIVICUS Monitor 2024 report, the countries mentioned above that have introduced ‘foreign agent’ laws have either ‘closed’ or ‘obstructed’ civil society space. In addition, the Trump administration’s rhetoric and its decision to freeze foreign aid have contributed to strengthening hostile narratives already present in ‘foreign agent laws’ in Eastern Europe and have emboldened governments in their efforts to publicly undermine these organisations.  

While the silencing of NGOs has become part of the agenda for many governments, and the rise of ‘foreign agent’ laws serves as a step towards establishing authoritarian regimes, civil society actors continue to mobilise in response. Strengthening engagement with international human rights mechanisms, fostering joint global advocacy, and providing support to targeted organisations and groups are essential steps that international NGOs and the international community should take to build resistance, reinforce coalition efforts, and protect the work of human rights defenders.

International and regional human rights mechanisms have called for governments to either repeal these laws, or not to adopt them in their current forms. On 7 February 2025, three UN independent experts issued a statement in relation to Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the government reintroduced the ‘Law on the Special Registry and Publicity of the Work of Non-Profit Organisations’ after its initial withdrawal in May 2024. The statement stressed that creating a register of non-profit organisations receiving foreign funding in one of the entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina will impose severe restrictions on NGOs and would grant government control over their operation, including the introduction of an annual inspection, with further reviews of legality of CSOs receiving foreign funding possible upon requests from citizens or relevant authorities.

In this unsupportive environment, donors have a fundamental role to play. ‘As civil society actors devise strategies to push back against these repressive tactics, private philanthropy and bilateral and multilateral donors have vital support roles to play,’ writes James Savage, who leads the Fund for Global Human Rights’ (FGHR) programme on the Enabling Environment for Human Rights Defenders. ‘They can help civil society prepare for future challenges, so that it is organised not only to respond to evolving forms of repression but also to get ahead of them by tackling their root causes,’ Savage concludes.

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/spread-of-foreign-agent-laws-in-eastern-europe-pose-increasing-threats-to-civil-society

Taner Kılıç, last of human rights defenders in notorious ‘Büyükada Trials, acquitted in Turkey

February 26, 2025

Taner Kılıç, a human rights activist and the final defendant in the so-called “Büyükada Trials,” was acquitted on Tuesday, marking the end of a case widely seen as a stain on Turkey’s human rights record, Turkish media reported. 

On July 5, 2017, 10 human rights advocates were detained during a workshop that was taking place in a hotel on Istanbul’s Büyükada, one of the Princes’ Islands. Among those detained were İdil Eser, then-director of Amnesty International Turkey; İlknur Üstün of the Women’s Coalition; Özlem Dalkıran, a member of the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly; and several others. Two weeks after their detention eight were jailed after a court appearance, while the other two were released pending trial. 

While the group was still in detention, pro-government news outlets published reports accusing them of being foreign agents and that the workshop in Büyükada was a “spying activity.”  However, an indictment prepared by the prosecutor three months later accused the group of “membership in a terrorist organization” and “aiding and abetting a terrorist organization.” They were linked to the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Gülen movement. 

Taner Kılıç, Amnesty Turkey’s honorary chair, who wasn’t among those who were initially detained but had been imprisoned on June 6, 2017 for alleged involvement in the 2016 coup attempt, was added to the indictment and his case was merged with the Büyükada trials.

In 2020 he was sentenced to more than six years in prison for links to the Gülen movement. 

That same year, Günal Kurşun from the Human Rights Agenda Association, along with İdil Eser and Özlem Dalkıran, were sentenced to two years in prison. Nalan Erkem from the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly, İlknur Üstün, Iranian-Swedish writer Ali Gharavi, German human rights activist Peter Steudtner, Veli Acu from the Human Rights Agenda Association, Nejat Taştan from the Association for Monitoring Equal Rights and Şeyhmus Özbekli from the Rights Initiative were acquitted.

On October 17, 2022 the Supreme Court of Appeals overturned the sentences, and in the retrial, Eser, Kurşun, Dalkıran and Kılıç were acquitted. However, the prosecutor objected to Kılıç’s acquittal and requested a review of the decision. As a result, the case was sent back to the appeals court. Ultimately, the final ruling favored Kılıç, with his acquittal upheld. [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/07/03/will-long-running-saga-of-trial-against-the-istanbul-10-end-on-friday-3-july/]

The Büyükada trials were harshly criticized by international human rights organizations such as Freedom House and Amnesty International. 

Following the initial convictions, Freedom House said it was “an assault on human rights.” 

“The conviction of Taner Kılıç, Günal Kurşun, İdil Eser, and Özlem Dalkıran in this politically motivated case lays bare the Turkish authorities’ ongoing assault on human rights and the justice system’s abdication of its responsibility to protect them,” said Marc Behrendt, director for Europe and Eurasia programs at Freedom House. “We call on the Turkish courts to reaffirm the rule of law and to fulfill their obligation to uphold fundamental rights and freedoms in Turkey.”

Amnesty International called the trials “an ordeal” and said it was a “baseless trial” that “represents a shocking example of the authorities’ attempt to criminalize the defense of human rights with implications for everyone in Turkey.” 
This injustice has become a stark symbol of the massive crackdown on human rights and on those who defend them,” said Amnesty International.

However Amnesty warns: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/02/turkiye-acquittal-of-taner-kilic-after-eight-year-ordeal-comes-amid-new-wave-of-repression-of-rights-defenders/

Global Civic Space Fellowships by Amnesty

February 26, 2025

Amnesty International invites applications for an 18-month part-time fellowship to explore the global phenomenon of shrinking civic space and document grassroots resistance strategies from marginalized and overlooked voices. Fellows will analyze current trends in civic space restrictions, investigate emerging resistance and human rights movements, and convene activists to co-create a practical toolkit for defending civic space worldwide. The fellowship aims to ensure that Amnesty’s work remains innovative, grounded in lived experience, and contributes to new knowledge on resistance strategies.

Deadline for all applications: 06/03/2024

Rate: Fixed Rate of USD 25,000 for the duration of the fellowship

Location: This fellowship does not include relocation. The consultant must work from their preferred location and possess the necessary work authorization.

OBJECTIVES AND DELIVERABLES

The Fellowship project aims to:

  • Support human rights defenders, academics, and practitioners with lived experience to document and analyze grassroots resistance strategies against authoritarianism and civic space restrictions in their regions.
  • Use this research to develop concrete recommendations and practical tools that can inform Amnesty’s global civic space advocacy.
  • Produce regular short written outputs, including blog posts and opinion pieces, to be independently published.
  • Convene activists and thought leaders in the region through virtual, in-person, or hybrid meetings to share ideas, incubate new strategies, and foster collective learning.
  • Deliver a final in-depth think-piece for Amnesty International’s internal strategy and advocacy, with external publication at Amnesty’s discretion.

ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS

  • Fluency in written and spoken English; fluency in a relevant regional language is desirable.
  • Demonstrated experience working on civic space resistance—either formally (academia, NGOs, journalism, law, policy) or through grassroots activism.
  • Strong writing and research skills, with experience producing publications related to civic space and human rights activism.
  • No formal academic qualifications or certifications are required to apply.

To apply, please submit:

  1. A short bio (maximum one page) outlining your recent experience.
  2. Relevant case studies or descriptions of past work on civic space issues.
  3. Your proposed approach to this fellowship opportunity, including how you would structure your research and engagement.
  4. Applications must be in PDF, Word, PowerPoint or Excel format.

https://careers.amnesty.org/jobs/vacancy/global-civic-space-fellow–4033/4061/description/