In 2025, the Business and Human Rights Centre documented nearly 800 attacks (790) against defenders in 80 countries raising concerns about business. This is more than two attacks on average every day and more than we’ve tracked in a single year since 2020. Nearly one third of attacks (30%) were against Indigenous Peoples, who comprise just 6% of the world’s population.
BHRC invited TotalEnergies, TotalEnergies EP Uganda, EACOP, Uganda National Oil Company, Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), Stanbic Bank, Kenya Commercial Bank, First Quantum Minerals, Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation (KOMIR), Dinant, Leonardo, Freeport McMoRan, PT Freeport Indonesia, PT Mineral Industri Indonesia, Silvercorp Metals, Salazar Resources, Curimining, Dutch Development Bank (FMO), Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), Exxon Mobil, Energy Transfer, Gibson Dunn and TigerSwan to respond.
The responses from TotalEnergies, TotalEnergies EP Uganda, EACOP, Uganda National Oil Company, First Quantum Minerals, Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation (KOMIR), Dinant, Freeport McMoRan, PT Freeport Indonesia, Silvercorp Metals, Curimining, Dutch Development Bank (FMO) can be found here.
The other companies did not respond.
Explore the data and read the analysis on attacks against human rights defenders who raised concerns about business in 2025
The late Honduran environmentalist Juan Lopez sits on a rock on the outskirts of Tocoa, Honduras, on September 28, 2021 [AFP]
On 12 May 2026 Al Jazeera reported that the Honduran authorities have arrested three people, including a powerful politician, accused of plotting the 2024 assassination of an environmental leader, an incident that became a symbol of government corruption. Adan Funez, former mayor of the city of Tocoa, was captured at his home on Tuesday on suspicion of masterminding the killing of Juan Lopez, following years of accusations by religious and environmental leaders.end of list
Lopez was an anti-corruption crusader who led a community effort against an iron oxide mining project in Colon, a rural region of northwestern Honduras, which activists said endangered the area’s dense jungles and crystalline waters, including protected reserve areas.
Accusations also emerged against Funez, a power-broker in the region’s decades-long bloody agrarian conflict. The death brought back stark memories of the global outcry over the 2016 murder of Honduran environmentalist Berta Caceres.
Funez’s arrest on Tuesday comes more than a year after Lopez’s assassination.
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Prize for Journalism honours high-quality investigative and in-depth journalism that defends and promotes the foundational values of the European Union. It was established to support press freedom and recognize journalists who contribute to democratic accountability and human rights protection. The prize is named after Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was known for her work exposing corruption and abuses of power. It is a European Parliament award.
The Ginetta Sagan Award honors women who are courageously defending the liberty, safety, and human rights of women and children in regions affected by serious abuses. The award provides $20,000 directly to the recipient, with unrestricted use. It recognizes women leaders who have created meaningful impact, often at great personal risk, and helps increase international visibility and protection for their work.
The award celebrates leadership, courage, and effective non-violent activism in difficult or dangerous environments
On 12 May 2026 PEN America sounded the alarm on a deepening global crackdown on free expression, reporting in its Freedom to Write Index that more than 400 writers are behind bars for the first time since the Index launched in 2019.
In 2025, a total of 401 writers were jailed across 44 countries – up from 375 writers in 40 countries the year before. Over the past seven years, the number of jailed writers worldwide has risen by 68 percent, underscoring a steady and alarming escalation in the suppression of dissent.
China remains the world’s leading jailer of writers, with 119 cases – making it the only country to exceed 100 writers held behind bars. The sharpest increase came from Iran, where authorities carried out 17 new arrests, driving numbers back toward the peak levels seen during the 2022 ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ protests. The spike signals a renewed and aggressive campaign to silence critical voices. The escalating suppression in Iran intensified in the aftermath of the June 2025 war with Israel, sweeping up both newly targeted writers and long-persecuted dissident voices. Among those arrested were online commentator Hossein Ronaghi, who was detained in June; a group of scholars and translators detained in November, including economists Parviz Sedaghat and Mohammad Maljoo, sociologist Mahsa Asadollanejad, and writer and translator Shirin Karimi; and human rights defenders and authors Narges Mohammadi and Sepideh Gholian, who were violently re-arrested while speaking at a memorial service in December.
Iran was one of three countries among the top 10 jailers of writers that were simultaneously engaged in armed conflict in 2025, along with Russia and Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territory. Authorities in these three countries repeatedly targeted writers who used anti-war language or themes in their poetry, music, scripts, commentaries, articles, or literary output, a key pattern that emerged in the 2025 data.
In Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territory, six writers have been detained by the Israeli government over anti-war statements. Palestinian writers and commentators Mohamed Al-Atrash, Nawaf El-Amer, Radwan Qatanani, Rula Hassanein,and scholar Anwar Rostom were detained on charges of incitement or with no charges at all, in addition to Jewish-Israeli journalist and commentator Israel Frey who was investigated for terrorism, because of their commentary on the war, the genocide, and the occupation.
In Russia the government held 18 writers in prison or detention in 2025, most targeted for their anti-war expression or suspected involvement in anti-war activity. In March, a Russian military court sentenced historian and columnist Alexander Skobov to 16 years in prison for his anti-war posts on social media. Other writers opposed to the war have fled into exile to avoid prosecution or jailing for their dissenting viewpoints.Overall, the top 10 top jailers of writers are China and its autonomous regions, including Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong (119); Iran (53); Saudi Arabia (27); Vietnam (24); Türkiye (22); Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (21); Russia (18); Belarus (17); Egypt (13); and Myanmar (10). [https://iranfocus.com/human-rights/57848-record-number-of-imprisoned-writers-worldwide-iran-ranks-second-with-53-jailed-writers/]
Several countries appeared in this year’s Index for the first time including Togo, Mozambique, and the United States. The U.S. case centers on the weeks-long detention of Sami Hamdi, a British opinion writer and columnist, who was detained in what PEN America views as part of the U.S. government’s weaponization of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Hamdi, an outspoken critic of Israel, was on a speaking tour and had just attended a conference when ICE officers stopped him at San Francisco International Airport and held him in custody for two weeks.
“The fact that the United States is in our Freedom to Write Index for the first time should be a sharp wake-up call for everyone in the country who claims to value free expression,” said Liesl Gerntholtz, managing director of the Freedom To Write Center. “No government can misuse its own detention and immigration systems to silence or intimidate independent voices and call itself a democracy.”
The First European Forum on Environmental Human Rights Defenders (EHRDs) invites individuals and organizations committed to the promotion, protection, and respect of environmental and human rights across Europe to express their interest in participation. This landmark Forum represents a significant opportunity for Environmental Human Rights Defenders, civil society organizations, institutions, policymakers, and advocates to engage in meaningful dialogue, collaboration, and knowledge exchange on pressing environmental and human rights challenges affecting the European region.
The Forum will be held on 3–4 June 2026 at the headquarters of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. The event is jointly organized by the Council of Europe, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, and the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention. Additional collaboration is provided by the UNECE Aarhus Convention Secretariat, several Human Rights Council Special Procedure mandate holders, and a range of civil society organizations actively working throughout Europe.
Purpose of the Forum
The Forum aims to strengthen networks among Environmental Human Rights Defenders and supporting organizations while fostering regional cooperation and advocacy. Participants will have the opportunity to:
Share experiences and best practices
Discuss emerging environmental and human rights issues
Explore strategies for protection and advocacy
Build partnerships across sectors and countries
Contribute to discussions on policy and accountability mechanisms
The gathering is expected to attract a diverse range of participants from across the Council of Europe member states, including grassroots defenders, activists, indigenous representatives, youth leaders, academics, legal experts, international organizations, and civil society actors.
Event Format and Languages
The Forum will be conducted exclusively as an in-person event. Online participation or virtual attendance options will not be available. Participants are therefore encouraged to prepare for travel and related logistical arrangements should their participation be approved.
Registration and Selection Process
Submitting an Expression of Interest does not automatically guarantee participation in the Forum. All applications will undergo a comprehensive review and selection process conducted by the organizers. Applicants whose participation is approved will receive an official registration confirmation letter. The review process will take place on a rolling basis to allow selected participants sufficient time to make necessary arrangements, including:
Visa applications
Travel planning
Accommodation bookings
Administrative preparations
Interested individuals are therefore strongly encouraged to submit their applications as early as possible.
Funding and Financial Support
Due to limited available resources, the organizers will only be able to provide financial support to a select number of Environmental Human Rights Defenders. Funding decisions will be based on several factors, including:
Resource availability
Geographic diversity
Gender balance
Inclusion and representation criteria
Nature of environmental and human rights work
Applicants who meet the general participation criteria but are not selected for financial support may still receive an invitation to attend the Forum through self-funded participation.
The organizers anticipate that the majority of participants will need to finance their own attendance. Institutions, donor organizations, and networks that support Environmental Human Rights Defenders are encouraged to assist participants financially where possible.
On 2 May 2026, several newspapers reported on plans to vet human rights defenders in Indonesia :
The government’s plan to screen and determine who qualifies as a human rights activist to decide who receives legal safeguards has met with backlash from civil society groups, who warn the move risks state interference in rights protections.
The plan came as the Human Rights Ministry is seeking to introduce changes to the 1999 Human Rights Law and issue a new ministerial regulation to strengthen legal protections for human rights activists, citing concerns over criminalisation against those involved in advocacy works.
To ensure legal safeguards can be provided for activists, Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai said his ministry would form an assessor team to evaluate whether detained individuals meet the criteria as human rights defenders.
The assessment will be based on strict criteria focusing on the individual’s actions at the time of the incident rather than self-declared status or public recognition. The team will review each case individually to ensure decisions are made based on the context of ongoing legal cases.
Legal protection, the minister stressed, would only be extended to those defending public interests, particularly vulnerable or marginalised groups. Those who are proven to have acted with personal or financial motives would be excluded.
“It’s possible that someone widely known as a human rights activist, at a certain moment, may be found by the assessor team to be acting for (financial gain). In such cases, they can’t be considered a human rights activist,” Mr Pigai said on April 29, as quoted by Antara.
He added those meeting the criteria would be shielded from prosecution from the earliest stages of legal proceedings.
On 15 October 2025, Fariba Nawa wrote about Mahshid Nazemi, Iranian human rights defender.
Mahshid Nazemi, an Iranian human rights activist, left her home one day in the fall of 2022 to walk to the corner store to buy yogurt for dinner. The sun had set in the valley in Isparta, a city in southwestern Turkey, and the air was crisp. Nazemi pulled the hat of her coat over her head. The streets were empty. She was tired and hungry. Suddenly, she saw two cars turn on their lights. A dated, navy-colored sedan with tinted windows drove behind her slowly as she walked. Nazemi became suspicious and stopped. The car braked and a pudgy, bearded man with a khaki shirt exited, cursing at her, calling her a prostitute. “Shut your mouth or we’ll send you to Iran in a suitcase,” Nazemi recounted the man saying. “Your sister is on death row. You want to go to Iran in a suitcase?”
A year later, she stood at the exact spot in Isparta, known for its roses and lavenders, as she retold her ordeal.
Nazemi’s case underscores a broader pattern of Iranian activists abroad facing intimidation and pressure from Tehran, despite the regime’s public denials of involvement.
For Nazemi, she says her plight began long ago as a woman in Iran, where women don’t have equal rights, and the situation has been likened to gender apartheid. Women can’t sing in public, their supreme leader has said riding a bike is shameful — though some women defy the taboo and ride bikes — their testimony is considered half of a man’s in court and their right to inheritance is less than men. Nazemi has survived a lot — imprisonment, sexual harassment, death threats and a deportation camp.
The night she was followed and harassed in the street would be a prelude to a series of dubious events terrorizing her life as a dissident in exile.
At that time, Nazemi was in Turkey, which has become an opposition haven for many Iranians. She was speaking out about political prisoners and crackdowns on protesters, while also helping dissidents in Turkey get legal aid and financial support. She’s been a dogged activist on behalf of women in her native Iran. Nazemi wasn’t doing that work alone. Her oldest sister Pouran Nazemi was at the forefront of the movement in Tehran. The renowned human rights defender has been in and out of Iranian prisons throughout her life. Nazemi said it was Pouran’s sacrifices that encouraged her to become an activist, too.
A selfie of Pouran (left) and Mahshid Nazemi nine years ago in Iran. The sisters haven’t seen each other in-person for a decade.Courtesy of Mahshid Nazemi
The sisters participated in previous uprisings in Iran, demanding democratic rights for women and minorities. They were both arrested in 2016, but Mahshid Nazemi was released. Her family told her to flee, so she went to neighboring Turkey and applied for asylum to a third country. When Pouran was also released from jail, she remained in Iran. But the sisters worked as a team online across the border. They talked to the opposition media, like Voice of America Farsi, making a case for regime change and a revolution.
Instead, the hardline clerical government arrested 22,000 protesters, including Pouran once again in 2022. The government also killed about 550 people inside Iran, calling them traitors and agitators. Then the regime came for those in the diaspora.
“Iran continues to target women human rights defenders abroad, and among the typical and easy-to-use methods are digital threats, such as phishing and hacking attempts, smear and defamation campaigns, as well as threats against family members in Iran,” said Michael Michaelsen, who studies Iran and transnational repression at the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto.
Nazemi has been the victim of all these tactics but she said the regime went a step further in sending their thugs to threaten her in person that evening in 2022. She reported the incident to the Turkish police, but they didn’t believe her until they found CCTV footage of the incident. A few days later, a Turkish immigration agent called and asked her to come to their office. She thought she might be getting asylum to a third country, somewhere safer than Turkey. But instead, the agent accused her of making a fake ID card, which Nazemi denied. It’s a scene she remembers vividly.
“I didn’t make a fake card. I’m not going to admit to something I didn’t do. If you want to deport me, do so,” Nazemi told the agent. Nazemi was detained and moved into a deportation camp. “The Islamic Republic must have informants in Turkish immigration offices. Otherwise, how would I have ended up in a deportation camp, right after reporting what happened about that night,” she said.
In the camp, Nazemi said the guards beat her, pulling out half of her hair. Another Iranian migrant, who was also detained, accused her of being transgender and threw soup in her face. Nazemi said she had to disrobe in front of the other detainees to prove she was a biological woman to prevent more abuse. She said the camp almost broke her. She had medication with her and one day she took a lot of pills at once. “I didn’t take them to die, actually, but to prove something, how badly they treated us that it got me to this point,” Nazemi said. Nazemi was hospitalized outside the camp, doctors pumped her stomach and she recovered. Police released her and she returned to Isparta and appealed the deportation. Turkey denied the appeal again, but by this time Nazemi’s story was out in the Western press.
The World shared her story, along with press coverage she received in the French newspaper Le Monde — that attention helped her get a visa to France after eight years of being stuck in the Turkish asylum system. She resettled in a French village in December 2023, and continued her activism — Nazemi has expanded her cause to advocate for Afghan migrants as well.
She still gets death threats on social media. Many of the senders say they are the “soldiers of the Islamic Republic.” The direct messages in her inbox on Instagram threaten her with execution, drowning, even rape. Nazemi is under French police protection and reports all the threats.
On 14 November 2025 Kate Kroeger and Kellea Miller wrote for the Alliance blog how philanthropy can show up in solidarity with movements defending democracy
There is a nearly six-fold increase in the chance of protecting societies from democratic backsliding when strong civil resistance campaigns are involved.
This striking finding from the University of Texas at Dallas and Johns Hopkins University—that social movements and resistance campaigns can increase the likelihood of protecting democracy to 51.7 percent from 7.5 percent—should compel funders to action, especially in this moment of rising authoritarianism around the world.
The philanthropic sector faces both an unprecedented opportunity and a moral imperative: to invest in the proven strategies that can safeguard democracy and our future, including the future of our planet. Yet, progressive movements leading civil resistance to authoritarianism, particularly grassroots organisations, remain chronically underfunded and the organisers, activists, and movements at the forefronts of this work during an era of overlapping crises are working with minimal resources while confronting burnout, reprisals, and trauma.
In order to be part of the solution, we must first clarify who and what we’re investing in. New research from Human Rights Funders Network projects that human rights-focused ODA will decline by up to $1.9 billion or 31 percent annually by 2026. By investing in grassroots organisations—including unregistered efforts—that focus on structurally excluded populations, philanthropy can stave off the worst outcomes of the funding crisis. The frontline movements and communities bearing the brunt of and addressing authoritarianism and climate change are not merely beneficiaries or recipients of aid. They are the leaders and strategists philanthropy can support and learn from. We cannot forget that it’s Indigenous communities who protect the majority of our planet’s biodiversity and lead the resistance to fossil fuel expansion thereby being one of the largest forces to combat climate chaos. Grassroots communities also grow the majority of the world’s food grown with agroecological methods. It’s relationship-building by movements that is key to shifting pillar loyalty to defend democracy. These are rooted, place-based, local innovations and solutions that have deep breadth and experience and can drive the systemic change our world desperately needs.
To address the breadth of crises we’re facing, philanthropy must act as an ecosystem and fund ecosystems. Now is the time to fund movements within communities, in networks and ecosystems with one another. It’s not about one issue or one community, but about ensuring that democratic resistance is funded at every level. In order to do so, philanthropy must demonstrate collective action instead of operating in siloed strategies. There are powerful examples of philanthropy coming together to address crises in recent memory, including during the peak of the Covid pandemic and in response to the invasion of Ukraine, that can be replicated. For example, in response to the pandemic, philanthropy was not only able to invest more than $20 billion dollars in communities around the world, but also effectively act as a convener for information sharing and to foster collaboration across governmental and private sector stakeholders. Funding social movement ecosystems is also a risk mitigation strategy, ensuring that risk is spread across groups both for funders and movements.
Realistic risk assessment and mitigation strategies allow philanthropy to act with courage. Philanthropic institutions must clearly identify the real risks facing them and prepare to address them in order to step up in this moment. While there are risks facing private foundations, including but not limited to being questioned by governmental entities about their grantmaking, many of these risks are short term and administrative and can be mitigated through, among other strategies, working in tandem with other funders. For movements, however, the risks are existential. Movements for climate and environmental justice are among the most targeted in the world, because they take on corporate interests, agribusiness, extractive industries, and organised crime. In 2024 alone, more than 320 human rights defenders were killed. Fully 85 percent of targeted killings of activists in Latin America are those of environmental and climate justice defenders. It is true that funders need to move cautiously to preserve their ability to fund these very movements and activists on the frontlines, but they must not confuse caution with abandoning those risking their lives to protect our planet and fight for human rights for all.
How philanthropy supports those defending democracy at the ground level is as important as the dollar amounts. If funders were waiting for an emergency moment to throw away their playbook and fund with trust and abundance, we have arrived at that moment. Long, arduous, and bureaucratic systems and processes for grantmaking are not designed to meet the moment of poly crisis we’re in. Funders can use this moment to redesign their processes to meet not only the needs of movements but the complexity and pace of current crises. It’s essential that donors normalise long-term, unrestricted funding, resource movement infrastructure, and support collective care for activists on the frontlines. Legal defense, digital security, crisis communications, media trainings, and spaces for defenders to build intersectional and shared strategies require resources in order for movements to survive and succeed. Defenders are operating under extremely risky conditions with bare bones support, while fighting burnout and reprisals. Investing in collective care, such as wellbeing spaces, health insurance, retirement, and transition funds, is as important for the survival of movements as infrastructure support.
Over the past few months, there have been numerous convenings and conversations on what philanthropy should do in the current political and funding landscape. The answer is clear. Philanthropy should invest in strategies that succeed in protecting democracy and our planet and time and time again, we’ve seen that those are led by grassroots and frontline activists and movements. These movements will continue to exist whether funders step up or not. The question, in the words of activist and former Co-Executive Director of Highlander Center Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson, is whether they’ll be resourced to win.
Kate Kroeger is the executive director of Urgent Action Fund for Feminist Activism. Kellea Miller is the executive director of Human Rights Funders Network. Samir Doshi is director of Just Transitions at CS Fund.
Cyrille Traoré Ndembi, 61, is the President of the Vindoulou Residents’ Collective, a neighbourhood on the outskirts of Pointe-Noire in the Republic of Congo. This retired community development specialist has been fighting to defend the residents’ right to a healthy environment since he moved there in 2019.
His house is located just ten metres from the Metssa Congo plant run by a subsidiary of the India-based Metssa Group. This recycling plant produced lead bars for export from 2013 to 2024, 50 metres from a school and in the middle of a residential area. Cyrille noticed severe health problems in his family including respiratory and digestive disorders. Blood tests on some residents showed lead levels far above the alert level set by the WHO.
Following Cyrille’s campaigning, and with the help of Amnesty International, the authorities ordered the plant’s closure in December 2024. Cyrille continues to fight for justice for his community.
“When I arrived in Vindoulou, I quickly realized the danger we were in. The air was unbreathable!
Black dust and fumes were spreading and invading our homes. Sometimes, when we went out, we couldn’t even see our nearest neighbour. The plant staff discharged oil and wastewater in front of our houses. Metal debris from the plant’s chimney fell onto our roofs. Once, I went to walk along the wall of the plant and debris fell on me like hail.
Right from the start, I had doubts about the legality of this activity in the middle of a populated area. I couldn’t understand how a substance as dangerous as lead could be recycled using processes that were, in my view, contrary to the standards and regulations in force.
‘My whole family was ill’
We arrived in Vindoulou in August 2019 and by January 2020 my whole family was ill. Our children were found to have the beginnings of pneumonia, bronchitis and bronchopneumonia. We also had diarrhoea and abdominal pains.
Across the neighbourhood, people had the same problems. I was told that the children who had moved away from Vindoulou no longer suffered from those symptoms.
The residents believed that nothing could make this company leave. For the community, it was David against Goliath. Some even called me King David.
I went door-to-door to convince people that something serious was going on. Everywhere I went, I reminded people of article 41 of our Constitution: every citizen has the right to live in a healthy environment.
I explained to people the benefits of getting organized together and taking up the fight. Today, our collective has over a hundred members.
From survivor to human rights defender
We tried to meet the directors of Metssa Congo. We met the plant’s manager, who said he was not authorized to comment on the subject. He promised us an audience with the CEO, but it never took place. They wouldn’t talk to us, simply saying that they had authorization to operate. We couldn’t even consult their environmental impact report, which is a document that we were entitled to access under the current legislation. After calling in a bailiff, I was finally able to consult another type of document, their environmental audit report produced after they had already begun operations.
In 2022, I went to meet Amnesty International’s representatives to alert them. From 2023 onwards, Amnesty investigated and provided funds to carry out blood tests on a sample of the population. We then had proof that people tested had high levels of lead in their blood.
At the time, the workers were against what I was doing. Now, most of them have joined us in our fight.Cyrille Traoré Ndembi
I took two blood tests, in March and September 2023. They showed blood lead levels above 400 µg/L. For the 17 other people tested, the levels were alarming. When the ministry carried out other tests in 2024, some ex-workers had levels of 1,000 µg/L – that’s enormous!
My youngest daughter just turned four. Of the nine children tested, she had the highest lead level, above 530 µg/L. I’m worried about her. She’s running fevers even though she has no infection.
Amnesty also helped us take legal action in 2023, to publicize our situation and, in the face of the administration’s inaction, to make a plea to the authorities. As a result, the minister [of Environment] came here and spoke to the population in December 2024. We as a collective did not have a formal audience with the minister. The authorities received Metssa Congo’s managers for an audience in Brazzaville [the Republic of Congo’s capital] several times, but never our collective! I’m not being heard. Ideally, we should be able to talk directly to the authorities.
I’ve been under pressure. Metssa filed a complaint against me alleging defamation in May 2024. I went to court, but Metssa didn’t show up. They were bolstered by the decision of the Supreme Court’s public prosecutor that allowed them to resume their activities after a suspension ordered by an administrative judge in April 2024.
One night, some young people came and threatened me. It was stressful, but I didn’t back down. At the time, the workers were against what I was doing. Now, most of them have joined us in our fight.
When the company’s operations were suspended again in June 2024 by the Ministry of Environment, we continued to fight because the word suspension meant nothing to us. We wanted to hear the word closure. When the decision was taken on 11 December 2024 to close and dismantle the plant, we were relieved, but the fight was far from over.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 