Archive for the 'human rights' Category

Defenders’ Days in Stockholm: international conference for human rights defenders starts today

October 12, 2026
Over a hundred human rights defenders come to Sweden to meet at Defenders’ Days.

Today, 12 October 2026, Defenders’ Days opens, bringing together more than 100 human rights defenders from around the world to share experiences, build networks, and strengthen their work. Among the participants are a Palestinian editor-in-chief who has lost friends and colleagues during the war, a Venezuelan journalist who was detained because of her reporting, and a Ukrainian lawyer working to document war crimes. What they have in common is their commitment to defending human rights, one of the world’s most important and most dangerous callings. 

Defenders’ Days is an international conference for human rights defenders, providing a safe space where participants from across the globe can meet, exchange experiences, and learn from one another. For many, it is also a rare opportunity to pause, regain strength, and find support in work that is often marked by threats, harassment, and significant personal risk. 

“We are witnessing democracy and respect for human rights come under pressure in many parts of the world. At the same time, human rights defenders continue to stand up for others, often at great personal cost. For a few days, they have the opportunity to come together, build networks, and strengthen one another for the work ahead,” says Sofia Walan, Executive Director of Civil Rights Defenders. 

The conference brings together journalists, lawyers, democracy activists, environmental defenders, and human rights defenders from more than 50 countries. The programme includes training sessions and workshops on topics such as digital security, psychosocial well-being, advocacy, and leadership. 

Equally important, however, is the opportunity to meet others who share similar experiences. 

“Defending human rights can be both challenging and isolating. At Defenders’ Days, participants can connect with people who understand their reality. It creates new partnerships, provides renewed energy, and serves as a reminder that they are part of a global movement working together to defend freedom, democracy, and human rights,” says Sofia Walan. 

Defenders’ Days was launched in 2013 and is organised by Civil Rights Defenders. This year’s conference takes place on 12–14 October and brings together participants from more than 50 countries. 

Read more about Defenders’ Days here.

Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 to “Navi” Pillay – great choice

October 9, 2026

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 to “Navi” Pillay “for her efforts to promote peace and international law”

In the Committee’s words: At a time of existential challenges – including more wars and conflicts than the world has seen in a long time – international law is no longer just a supplement to peace and security. It is an absolute necessity. In historic international court cases, Navi Pillay has shown that legal measures can help prevent acts of war and violence. She has also contributed to strengthen the institutions of international law. Her independence, expertise and steadfastness have made her one of the most respected international jurists of our time.

Navi (Navanethem) Pillay’s commitment to universal legal principles and her firm moral compass are constants in a long career. A common thread runs from her early work defending Nelson Mandela and others who stood up against apartheid to her service as a judge in some of the key international court cases of our time. Navi Pillay has held states and national leaders accountable and brought hope to victims of violence and conflict. In all the positions she has held, she has stressed the responsibility of individuals and states to comply with the rule of law.

She is widely recognised with 7 internatioanl human rights awards to her name {https://trueheroesfilms.com/equip/digest/?sort=recent&laureate=CBB674B1-A53A-7C47-7ACA-F62D11908BD2]. Still, be preprared for severe criticism from Israel and its lobbyists for her presumed anti-Israeli bias. [and yes: see e.g. https://www.misbar.com/amp/en/editorial/2026/10/24/following-her-nobel-peace-prize-win-naive-pillay-targeted-israeli-smear-campaign]

She has appeared regularly in my blog [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/navanethem-pillay/]

https://www.nobelprize.org

https://www.ewn.co.za/2026/10/10/un-hails-justice-navi-pillays-nobel-peace-prize-win-as-recognition-for-human-rights-defenders

https://realnewsmagazine.net/african-bar-association-congratulates-judge-pillay-on-2026-nobel-peace-prize-win/

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/world/dolkun-isa-questions-nobel-peace-prize-for-navi-pillay-seeks-accountability-over-uyghur-rights

https://1news.az/en/news/20261026095009633-Trump-said-that-Norway-has-turned-into-a-shithole-country

https://www.bbc.com/audio/play/w3ct8km3

NGOs call for the release of Egyptian investigative journalism platform Matsadaash

October 6, 2026

On 30 September 2026 the MENA Rigths Group and partner organisations called for the immediate release of six journalists working at the independent investigative journalism platform Matsadaash.

Photo collage of the six Egyptian Matsadaash journalists, arrested between September 28 and 29, 2026, courtesy of The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy (TIMEP).

We, the undersigned civil society organisations and independent media outlets, come together to condemn the escalating crackdown on independent Egyptian investigative journalism platform Matsadaash, which now includes the arrest of six journalists, constituting the entirety of the newsroom.

Late into the evening of Monday, September 28 and early Tuesday, September 29, 2026, Egyptian security forces conducted raids on the homes of journalists Mohamed Ashraf Abu Emeira and Abdallah Qadry and took them into custody. Raids on the homes of other journalists working for the platform continued across several governorates over the hours to come. By the end of the day on Tuesday, Islam Barakat and Omar Helal were arrested at their homes in Gharbiya and Port Said, and Mohamed Mahmoud and Mohamed Adel were arrested in Cairo.

During the home raids, officers confiscated phones and laptops, including devices belonging to family members; refused to display a warrant; and refused to disclose where the journalists were being taken. As of the writing of this statement, the reasons for their arrest has not been shared and their location remains unknown. 

In 2018, Matsadaash was founded by a group of Egyptian journalists committed to producing in-depth reporting and open-source investigations. Matsadaash has operated openly for years and has built a reputation for credible and accurate reporting on a range of public interest issues across Egypt. The detained Matsadaash journalists are known across the region. 

This is not the first time that Matsadaash has come under attack by the Egyptian authorities. In 2023, a Matsadaash editor was arrested. Although he was ultimately released 48 hours later, the platform has also previously been the target of smear campaigns intended to silence its critical work. Egypt is one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists, with 19 currently behind bars.

We, the undersigned, call on Egyptian authorities to immediately release Mohamed Ashraf Abu Emeira, Abdallah Qadry, Islam Barakat, Omar Helal, Mohamed Mahmoud, and Mohamed Adel from custody.

Signatories

  • Access Now
  • Aegis Safety Alliance
  • Agência Lupa
  • AITAS
  • AlJumhuriya Collective – Syria 
  • Al Manassa
  • American Committee for Middle East Rights (ACMER)
  • ARIJ (Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism)
  • ARTICLE 19
  • Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression (AFTE)
  • Beam Reports 
  • Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
  • Center for International Policy (CIP)
  • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
  • Daraj Media 
  • Delfi Estonia Fact-Check
  • Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN)
  • Egyptian Front for Human Rights
  • Egyptian Human Rights Forum (EHRF)
  • Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights
  • EgyptWide for Human Rights
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • Ellinika Hoaxes – Greece
  • El Nadim Center against Violence and Torture
  • EuroMed Rights
  • FactCheck Georgia
  • FactReview 
  • FairSquare
  • Fareq Platform
  • Full Fact
  • Global Voices
  • Gohoud to Support Human Rights Defenders
  • Greece Fact Check
  • Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR)
  • Hibrid.info
  • Hounna Feminist Platform
  • Human Rights Watch
  • HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement
  • INSM
  • International Consortium of Investigative Journalists
  • International Fact-Checking Network
  • International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
  • Intersection Association for Rights and Freedoms
  • Kawaakibi Foundation
  • Law and Democracy Support Foundation (LDSF)
  • Mada Masr 
  • Medical Dialofuss
  • MENA Rights Group
  • Muwatin Media Network
  • Najda Human Rights
  • Newtral
  • OCCRP
  • Pagella Politica / Facta news
  • PEN Lebanon 
  • Press Trust of India
  • Project Kontinuum
  • PolitiFact
  • Politiken
  • Raseef22
  • Refugees Platform in Egypt (RPE)
  • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
  • Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center
  • REDWORD for Human Rights & Freedom of Expression
  • Samir Kassir Foundation
  • Share3 Media 
  • Sinai Foundation for Human Rights 
  • SMEX
  • Start Point Organization
  • Syria Justice and Accountability Center
  • Syrian Journalists Association (SJA)
  • Taafi initiative
  • Tafnied for Fact-Checking
  • Tech4Peace 
  • The Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and Legal Profession (ACIJLP)
  • The Checker – Iraq
  • The Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms
  • The Public Source 
  • The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy (TIMEP)
  • Women for Justice Foundation
  • Verificat 
  • Verify 

https://menarights.org/en/articles/ngos-call-release-entire-newsroom-egyptian-investigative-journalism-platform-matsadaash

https://www.icj.org/egypts-matsda2sh-case-end-the-crackdown-on-media-workers-with-fake-terrorism-charges

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/10/egypt-court-order-to-shut-down-and-fine-mada-masr-a-devastating-blow-to-media-freedom

https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/10/27/egypt-prominent-journalist-lina-attalah-detained

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/11/egypt-un-experts-condemn-arrest-disappearance-and-detention-entire-newsroom

Two human rights defenders continue to be prosecuted in Greece in spite of everything..why??

October 6, 2026

On 3 October 2026 Human Rights Watch and others lament the weird insistence of Greece to go ahead with the prosecution of two prominent human rights defenders as a politically-motivated attempt to silence their efforts to expose abuses against migrants, The trial of the two activists, Panayote Dimitras and Tommy Olsen, is set to begin on the Greek island of Rhodes on 6 October 2026. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2025/11/21/human-rights-defenders-in-greece-on-trial-for-baseless-charges-for-assisting-people-on-the-move/

“The upcoming trial of Panayote Dimitras and Tommy Olsen is a blatant attempt to criminalize and silence their legitimate human rights work,” said Eva Cossé, senior Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Prosecutors should drop this politically motivated case against Dimitras and Olsen once and for all.”

Dimitras, founder and president of the Greek nongovernmental group Greek Helsinki Monitor, and Olsen, a Norwegian national and founder of the nongovernmental group Aegean Boat Report, are being prosecuted alongside two Cameroonian asylum seekers on charges of “forming or joining for profit and by profession a criminal organization with the purpose of facilitating the entry and stay of third country nationals into Greek territory.” If convicted, they face up to 20 years in prison.

The charges brought against the activists in early 2023 stem from their peaceful human rights and humanitarian work, Human Rights Watch said. The indictment seeks to criminalize the defendants’ practice of notifying Greek authorities and international bodies of the whereabouts of newly arrived asylum seekers and migrants on the Greek islands, to help ensure that they have access to the country’s asylum procedure and not be pushed back to Türkiye.

Dimitras and Olsen have for years documented and exposed human rights violations against asylum seekers and migrants, including violent pushbacks by Greek authorities, that have been characterized as “systematic” by the European Court of Human Rights.

On May 15, a Norwegian appeals court rejected Greek authorities’ request to extradite Olsen, who lives in Norway, to Greece through a European Arrest Warrant. The Norwegian court concluded that the acts described by Greek authorities do not constitute criminal offenses under Norwegian law, noting that assisting someone in initiating an asylum procedure is a lawful act protected by international treaties. The court also found that extraditing Olsen to Greece would present a real risk of violating his right to freedom of expression.

Because Greek prosecutors have maintained arrest warrants, including the European Arrest Warrant, against Olsen, Olsen faces arrest and detention if he travels to Greece to defend himself. Dimitras who lives in Greece, is not in detention but is subject to a travel ban preventing him from leaving the country. The court summons specifies that, under Greek law, defendants will be tried in their absence if they do not appear or are not represented by a lawyer.

Proceeding on that basis would amount to an in absentia prosecution under international law. Under international law, including the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Greece is a party, anyone convicted in absentia, who later returns to the country where the conviction was issued, should have the opportunity to a fresh determination of the merits of their case by a court there.

The prosecution of Dimitras and Olsen is part of a wider, well-documented pattern of Greek authorities misusing criminal and administrative law to harass and intimidate human rights activists and civil society organizations defending the rights of asylum seekers and migrants. In January, a Greek court on the island of Lesbos acquitted 24 humanitarian workers of similar charges, after prosecutors subjected them to a devastating seven-year legal ordeal.

Despite this high-profile acquittal, Greek authorities have failed to change course, Human Rights Watch said. In February, the Greek government passed a migration law that makes membership in a nongovernmental organization an aggravating circumstance in migration-related criminal offenses, in some cases elevating them to felonies, with draconian penalties.

In 2023, the then-United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor, stated in a report to the UN Human Rights Council that “human rights lawyers, humanitarian workers, volunteers and journalists [working on migration in Greece] have been subjected to smear campaigns, a changing regulatory environment, threats and attacks, and the misuse of criminal law against them, to a shocking degree.” Lawlor has also said that the criminal investigation against Dimitras and Olsen “strongly appears” to be arbitrary.

“The Norwegian court firmly recognized that helping people present themselves to seek asylum is not a crime,” Cossé said. “Greek authorities should take a cue from the court and end this farce by dropping the case and halting the weaponization of criminal law against human rights defenders.”

https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/10/03/greece-rights-defenders-on-trial

https://euobserver.com/241141/they-want-to-shut-me-up-norwegian-activist-fights-20year-greek-prison-threat-over-asylum-aid

https://www.fidh.org/en/issues/human-rights-defenders/greece-migrants-rights-defenders-tommy-olsen-and-panayote-dimitras-to

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/continued-judicial-harassment-and-trial-against-human-rights-defender-panayote-dimitras

https://ecre.org/mediterranean-ngo-questions-states-willingness-to-save-lives-after-latest-tragedy-%E2%80%95-trial-of-human-rights-defenders-in-greece-postponed-until-april-2027-%E2%80%95-european-court-cond/

Senior police officer Vineet Kapoor: “Human Rights Hero” from Madhya Pradesh

October 6, 2026

1 September 2026

The Essex Human Rights Centre was glad to have the chance to speak with Vineet Kapoor (MA in the Theory and Practice of Human Rights, 2005-6) and UK Chevening scholarship recipient.  He is a senior police officer in the Indian Police Service, currently serving as Deputy Inspector General of Police for Community Policing for the state of Madhya Pradesh. He was recently awarded the Human Rights Hero Award during the World Human Rights Summit on Youth Education, which took place at UN Headquarters in New York.

HRC: Congratulations Vineet on your recent award!  We would love to know how you became interested in policing

VK: Thank you! I get immense satisfaction when I can directly impact on the protection of rights and the creation of an environment of safety. Law enforcement and policing have a direct interface with public life. Fear and insecurity are the greatest breeding grounds of violence, exploitation and human rights violations. The police are entrusted with the responsibility to create an environment of safety and security which enables ordinary people to access justice. It also is a first responder to individuals and communities in crisis.

HRC: How has your study of human rights impacted upon your approach to policing?

VK: I was already a police officer when I came to Essex to study on the MA in in the Theory and Practice of Human Rights. I realised after joining the police that there is a deep connection between human rights protection and policing practice and this needs to be studied in detail. I was on a study leave from my job in the Indian police service, and I went back to the Indian police when I completed my studies to contribute to the mainstreaming of human rights in policing practice.

The human rights MA taught me how to see my police work and policing in general from a human rights perspective. I was able to appreciate what state accountability boils down to, how it affects both the encroachment on individual and community rights and the restoration of those rights. It helped me to better understand how the police service can deliver outcomes that make a direct contribution to state accountability.  

Accountability is the most important thing I could understand through my police work after completing this degree. I could see the context of the law enforcement agency as the primary duty holder representing and working through the authority it derives from the state. It also helped me to understand the practical implications of civil and political rights and how police actions or inactions affect how human rights are enforced. It also helped me to understand economic, social and cultural rights from the perspective of police service delivery and how the interface between development and human rights can be affected by the quality of police service delivery. In particular, police services will be ineffective if insecurity, inequality and incompetence are allowed to prevail over strong governance practices. This is why development must be seen from a human security angle. There is a crucial connection between development and freedom, between human security and human development and poverty, inequality, corruption, intersectionality, gender-based and caste and class-based discrimination. The minority and vulnerability-related implications to police service delivery became clear to me as a police officer working in a democratic, developing country.

Over the two decades since my MA degree, I directed my services to improve police accountability by transforming police syllabi and police training mandates. I was instrumental in first changing the state syllabi of my native state of Madhya Pradesh to mainstream human rights and improve training and human rights pedagogy to make the training more relevant and impactful. Impressed with this achievement, I was invited by the national government to make a standardised syllabi for the civilian police for the entire country, which embedded human rights into the syllabi for all police ranks. I have also been responsible for bringing gender justice and child rights-based improvements in police practice and accountability standards through training, mentoring and monitoring approaches. 

During the past five years, I have been involved in mainstreaming human rights norms into community policing. This has resulted in the incorporation of human rights, child rights, women’s rights, elderly people’s rights, cultural rights into community police-based public safety work. I have also implemented police reforms with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) enabled work, especially SDG 5 for women’s security, SDG 11 for urban safety and most importantly SDG 16 which covers peace and safe institutions where police have a crucial role to play.

HRC: What were your impressions of the work on police reforms and human rights-based policing when working with the UN?

VK: In the conflict zones where I served, I found that when the police services are no longer neutral and when political actors become partisan, life, liberty, community safety, peace and development are negatively impacted, and humanity can become dangerous to its own self. This context of lawlessness taught me the value of good governance and human rights-embedded police work and why and how I should devote my energies to mainstream human rights in police training and police public interface and in police accountability through monitoring mechanisms.

HRC: You also received a PhD in Police Training Culture and Organizational Development. Can you provide some details of the focus of your research?

VK: I realised that there is an endemic problem of human rights compliance in police practice. Through my exposure to UN peacekeeping as well as my Essex MA degree where I studied the sociological and criminological aspects of human rights, my understanding of what I had to do in my research became clearer. As a police officer myself, I could understand how police personnel think and act and how the police organizational culture promotes a particular version of police and how this culture undermines human rights as a norm. This enabled me to understand the theoretical and practical aspects of organizational cultures and subcultures in the police and draw inferences to improve police education and capacities to serve with an ethical and human rights orientation. 

I studied five police training academies in five states in India, examined police training cultures and subcultures. I drew patterns of the organizational socialisation of the police in the training institutions and examined the capacities of the trainers to impart human rights education. This was done by finding gaps and then drawing inferences to improve training design, training content and training pedagogy – all of which make a crucial difference to human rights capacity building and promoting human rights as a professional value. This later helped me to improve my police training syllabi designed and the government asked me to work on drafting syllabi based on this research. The research had a field-based relevance, practice-based value as well as clear impact.

……

UN Report warns of transnational reprisals human rights defenders cooperating with the UN

October 1, 2026

People around the world continue to pay a steep price for cooperating with the United Nations on human rights, facing persistent intimidation and reprisals amid disturbing trends in transnational repression and digital surveillance targeting civil society actors, a UN report published on 16 September 2026 finds. The report urges States to refrain from any acts of intimidation and reprisals, ensure accountability for violations and abuses, and protect those who engage with the UN.

The UN Secretary-General’s report on reprisals documents cases involving human rights defenders, victims of human rights violations and abuses, journalists, lawyers and trade unionists who were targeted by State or non-State actors for cooperating, or seeking to cooperate, with the UN on human rights between 1 May 2025 to 30 April 2026. It covers 32 States*.

The report is not meant to be exhaustive, as many victims refrain from reporting violations or abuses for fear of retaliation. Others chose not to have their cases included or agreed to only do so on condition of anonymity, because of the serious risk of further reprisals.

“Speaking up for human rights should never come at the expense of one’s own personal safety and security. Shrinking civic space and increased surveillance online and offline are fuelling a hostile climate that hinders civil society’s cooperation with the UN and its human rights mechanisms,” said Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights Claudia Fuentes Julio, who leads the UN system’s efforts to address reprisals.  

“No one should be forced to choose between their right to cooperate with the UN and their own safety or that of their families and communities,” she added. “Safeguarding our engagement with civil society is not only fundamental to the rights of individuals; it is also essential to the UN’s ability to fulfil its mandate and respond effectively to the needs of the people it serves.”

The report shows a growing trend of transnational repression, in which civil society actors are targeted beyond the borders of their own countries. Documented acts include arbitrary detention, physical attacks, surveillance, threats, online harassment, movement restrictions, confiscation of passports, and intimidation of family members, affecting at least 43 individuals and four organisations.

Digital technologies are increasingly being used to monitor, intimidate and silence those seeking to engage with international human rights mechanisms, underscoring the urgency of strengthening protections for those engaging with the UN in digital spaces.

Continued misuse of legislation, including counterterrorism, cybercrime and national security laws and regulations, remains a concern. More than half of the States mentioned in the report have applied, enacted or amended laws that criminalized or further restricted core civil society activities.

“It is particularly alarming and entirely unacceptable that young activists, women, environmental defenders and Indigenous Peoples reportedly continue to face heightened risks of being targeted for exercising their rights to engage with the UN and stand up for their communities, lands and environment,” said the Assistant Secretary-General.

The report also documents attempts to obstruct civil society participation in UN fora, including by seeking to block or delay accreditation, as well as harassment of participants on UN premises themselves. It also refers to attacks directed at independent human rights experts – including Special Procedures mandate holders, and the wider chilling effect these actions risk having on individuals and organizations seeking to cooperate with the UN.

At the same time, the Secretary-General’s report highlights important efforts across the United Nations system and by Member States to address these issues. It includes initiatives to support safe and meaningful participation of human rights defenders and other civil society on UN premises and measures to strengthen prevention, protection and accountability for reprisals.

* The 32 States referred to in the report are:

Afghanistan; Algeria; Bahrain; Belarus; Burundi; Cameroon; China; Costa Rica; Democratic Republic of the Congo; Egypt; Equatorial Guinea; France; Germany; Guatemala; Guinea-Bissau; India; Iran (Islamic Republic of); Israel; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Libya; Nicaragua; Pakistan; Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia; Sri Lanka; South Sudan; Thailand; Turkmenistan; Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of); Viet Nam; Yemen; State of Palestine.

re Vietnam: Yesterday I posted about a recent case.

see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/19/transnational-repression-human-rights-watch-and-other-reports/

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/09/report-warns-transnational-repression-and-reprisals-against-individuals-and

​​The need to press on with human rights data collection

September 29, 2026

Collecting and disseminating data on transitional justice mechanisms can help lay the foundation for a more just future.

Open Global Rights Logo

In 2024, Transitional Justice Evaluation Tools (TJET), a project Geoff Dancy has co-directed for five years, released a global database of human rights accountability mechanisms dating from 1970 to 2020. The project’s website has attracted tens of thousands of users, many seeking background information on cases of interest or exploring processes used in different contexts. 

But some commentators question the purpose of collecting data on truth, justice, and reparations in the current moment. For instance, according to the Oxford Handbook of Transitional Justice, we have now arrived at the end-times of transitional justice—just like we arrived at the end-times of human rights over a decade ago. If this claim were true, it would raise a good question: what’s the point of gathering data if the liberal world order is unraveling, and faith in the transitional justice project is waning along with it? 

A commitment to prevention, recognition, and accountability

Critical theorists often presume that a neoliberal obsession with standardizing knowledge and decontextualizing political problems drives the collection of human rights data. This is an oversimplification. The TJET team’s values are not tied to a particular method or way of thinking but by three commitments that have formed through decades of community engagement and research.

Our first commitment is to prevent atrocities. Avoiding catastrophic political violence, while not the sole aim of justice, certainly seems like a necessary precondition for a just society. Our second commitment is to recognize and acknowledge survivors of mass violence. This means centering survivors in the processes and outcomes of transitional justice, even at the risk of disagreement and contestation. And our third commitment is to transparently document not only human rights violations but also efforts at human rights accountability.  With these values in mind, we can return to the question: why, during turbulent times, is it important to publish and update an archival database on transitional justice? 

The first reason is preparedness. We may well stand at the end of a pro-accountability era. For instance, our data show a clear decline in the number of human rights criminal prosecutions since 2010. And truth commissions, while still frequently established, seem to be accomplishing less. Now, states seem keen on fighting wars rather than preventing them. While arms transfers occur at their highest rate since 1990, foreign assistance for governance and institution-building is drying up.

However, there is no reason to suspect that these dismaying trends will last forever. Today’s authoritarian regimes are tomorrow’s transitional regimes, and today’s conflict zones are tomorrow’s post-conflict zones. When global conditions shift back from extremism to moderation, a repository of past experiences—including what did or did not work—may be helpful.

The second reason is remembrance. States do their level best to hide, bury, or erase information on human rights violations. The United States, for example, keeps at best unreliable national data on shootings by police, and in 2025, it cut funding to a Yale University team tracking the Russian abduction of Ukrainian children. China is hiding an enormous series of concentration camps in the country’s west, and Israel is concealing extensive torture of Palestinians detained since 2023 under emergency laws. These are just a few instances of contemporary states suppressing knowledge of the human rights abuses they commit. There are many, many more.

At the same time, data on accountability for violations also regularly disappears. For example, truth commission reports are often very difficult to find—sometimes because governments limit access to them and sometimes because they live on outdated websites. Information on prosecutions can be equally difficult to track. Justice ministries often do not publish updated case files, and older news articles on prosecutions disappear from the public record. Efforts at cross-national or comparative data collection fall into disuse or disrepair when deprived of continued support and attention. This is problematic because knowing what has happened—and what is happening—to hold human rights violators accountable for their actions is a public good. Many transitional justice mechanisms represent hard-won achievements for victims and human rights defenders. To forget those efforts, intentionally or unintentionally, is a form of silencing. 

To cite just one example, Sri Lankans discovered a mass grave of Tamils in Chemmani, near Jaffna, in early summer 2025. They expressed their outrage and demanded justice. What many did not realize is that investigators had previously discovered evidence of this mass grave over two decades ago, during the successful prosecution of a soldier who participated in the 1996 gang rape and murder of 18-year-old Krishanthi Koomaraswamy. Memory of this trial, including the soldier’s mention of the mass grave in his confession, was suppressed and largely forgotten. 

Building a better future by learning from experience

This brings us to a third and final reason for collecting and publishing data on transitional justice: meliorism, or openness to the possibility that we can make the future better. Keeping the most extensive possible record of prior attempts at accountability can provide practitioners and advocates with experiences on which to build. Our project is called Transitional Justice Evaluation Tools, but we do not seek to control these tools or define their use in evaluation. Our job is to provide data for any efforts at benchmarking, impact assessment, or comparison. After all, no one can learn from experience without information. That is why all our data are open, transparently sourced, and freely available.

Yes, we may be living in a new era of renewed impunity. However, that does not mean that the demand for truth and accountability or information on transitional justice will suddenly vanish. Unless we answer these demands with a shrug. 

Geoff Dancy is an associate professor of political science at the University of Toronto and a primary investigator on the Transitional Justice Evaluation Tools (TJET) project. He is a methodological pluralist who studies human rights discourse, the International Criminal Court, and the impacts of accountability mechanisms.

https://www.openglobalrights.org/the-need-to-press-on-with-human-rights-data-collection/

Over 130 human rights experts issue global call for States to end transnational repression

September 28, 2026

Visit ishr.ch

UN human rights experts released a landmark statement urging States, businesses, INTERPOL and international organisations to prevent and combat the spread of transnational repression, warning of its increasing impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law and those who take action to defend them. Over one hundred UN Special Procedures mandate holders and members of Treaty Bodies (full list below) adopted a landmark statement calling for a decisive international response to the increasing use of transnational repression by States as a tool to silence activism across borders. ‘An unprecedented number of UN experts made it clear today that any response to transnational repression should be strongly anchored in human rights obligations. Not only should governments hold perpetrators accountable, they should also proactively adopt laws and policies that centre the needs of victims, in particular at-risk diasporas and those in exile.’Raphaël Viana David, ISHR Senior Advocacy Manager ‘Transnational repression represents a growing challenge to the international human rights system and to the principles of the Charter of the UN itself,’ signatories said in their appeal, which provided a roadmap of measures to prevent and respond to transnational repression, and better assist and protect those targeted. ‘By creating fear across borders, transnational repression has profound consequences not only for those directly targeted, their families and communities, but also for civil society action, democratic principles, civic space, refugee protection, independent journalism and media freedom,’ the experts stressed, warning that this threatens the ability of individuals and groups to ‘promote, protect and defend human rights, and to engage safely with national, regional and international human rights mechanisms’, including at the UN. Arising from a retreat for UN human rights experts convened by ISHR in June, this joint statement comes a week after the UN Human Rights Council’s first dedicated dialogue on the issue of transnational repression, and arbitrary detention and amid broader efforts by the UN human rights system to address growing acts of transnational repression targeting those who engage with the UN. These efforts include statements and resolutions at the Human Rights Council, and a first brief by the UN Human Rights Office. Transnational repression tactics, the experts said, include extrajudicial killings, torture, harassment, arbitrary detention, travel bans, expulsions, deprivation of nationality, misuse of international law enforcement mechanisms, including INTERPOL Red Notices, intimidation of family members and associates, and more. Signatories flagged the ‘increasingly digital nature of transnational repression’, including through the use of social media, spyware and malware software, warning that all of these are being amplified by artificial intelligence tools. Signatories urge States to refrain from committing or supporting acts of transnational repression and to develop specific laws and policies to prevent, investigate and punish such acts, including when they don’t amount to a crime under domestic law. This includes directing resources to better track and analyse patterns of transnational repression, including digitally, building the capacity of national authorities across different areas, establishing inter-governmental coordination mechanisms and focal points, and regulating surveillance technologies. Signatories stress the need to combat the misuse of frameworks to counter terrorism and organised crime, to apply additional vetting to INTERPOL Red Notices and Diffusions, and to take into account a country’s transnational repression record when considering bilateral cooperation, agreements, and diplomatic assurances. States must also redouble efforts to protect and assist those being targeted or likely to be in the future, including through efficient reporting channels, adequate protection policies and programmes, psychosocial support, and expedited asylum, resettlement and humanitarian visa processes. Experts also call on other actors, including international organisations and businesses – to be wary of transnational repression and of their responsibilities in preventing it. Businesses, in particular tech companies, should conduct due diligence and strengthen privacy and data protection. INTERPOL should also step up efforts to tackle the misuse of Notices, Diffusions, and other mechanisms, including by cooperating with civil society and relevant States. ‘Powerful human rights abusers will not let a border stop them from quashing dissent. At a time when more States are pushing human rights defence into exile, the UN and all States who care about upholding human rights must heed the experts’ call and take action to protect those who seek refuge or engage in critique or dissent abroad.’Raphael Viana David The latest annual report by the UN Secretary-General on acts of reprisals against individuals seeking to cooperate with the UN cites 32 States. Of these, 13 States are cited for acts of transnational repression, affecting at least 43 individuals and four organisations. ‘Allegations of transnational repression across borders seemed to be on the rise, with examples from all regions, some enabled by the misuse of digital technologies,’ the report noted in its conclusions. ‘Transnational repression can cripple key accountability efforts at the UN and leave the global human rights system blind and deaf. States must ensure human rights defenders and activists who seek justice at the UN are safe from the long reach of abusive governments both while engaging with its mechanisms and afterwards.’Madeleine Sinclair, director of ISHR’s office in New York. ISHR has long campaigned to denounce reprisals against those engaging with the UN, and for the UN and States to ensure that human rights defenders and civil society organisations can safely cooperate with human rights experts and mechanisms. This year, ISHR’s campaign is focused on the impact of transnational repression. ISHR urges States, UN officials, businesses and all stakeholders to follow the recommendations in the statement and take proactive steps to address, prevent and punish acts of transnational repression, to enhance assistance and protection of victims, and to ensure everyone can safely engage with the UN and other international human rights bodies.

READ THE FULL
STATEMENT HERE

see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/19/transnational-repression-human-rights-watch-and-other-reports/

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/over-130-human-rights-experts-issue-global-call-for-states-to-end-transnational-repression

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/human-rights-council-reprisals-debate-highlights-growing-trend-of-transnational-repression

https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/united-nations-human-rights-experts-release-joint-statement-on-transnational-repression

https://mzv.gov.cz/coe.strasbourg/en/news/czechia_hosts_debate_on_digital.html

Reprisals against human rights defenders threaten civic space in Malaysia – serious concern about human rights defenders Amir Hariri Abd Hadi and Chew Chuan Yang

September 25, 2026

ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation denounce the intimidation and restrictions of human rights organisations MANDIRI and HAYAT, and their representatives, MANDIRI Executive Director Amir Harir Hadi, and MANDIRI Finance Director and HAYAT Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Dobby Chew. The recent incidents signal an intensified, worrying pattern of harassment against human rights defenders in Malaysia, directly undermining the ability of civil society to advocate for accountability and reforms without fear of reprisal.  We stand in solidarity with Amir Hadi, Dobby Chew, and their organisations. Our organisations also urge the authorities to immediately reinstate affected bank accounts, lift the travel bans imposed on Amir Hadi and Dobby Chew, and drop the investigations against them. 

On 11 September, MANDIRI confirmed that Amir Harir Hadi’s personal bank account had been frozen under Section 44(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLA) 2001 until further instructions from the police. The bank accounts of Dobby Chew, as well as those belonging to MANDIRI and HAYAT have also been blocked. MANDIRI also confirmed that, as of 14 September, they have not received an official letter or notice from the police regarding an investigation into the matter.  

Authorities’ harassment of MANDIRI started in May 2026 after a call by Kamil Munim, political secretary to the finance minister and chief of the youth wing of the People’s Justice Party (PKR), for an investigation into alleged foreign funding that had been channelled to organisations, individuals, and politicians. Munim urged the authorities to carry out the investigations in the interest of protecting national security from political activities.  

A week prior, on 3 September, Amir Hadi confirmed that he had been banned from travelling abroad, shortly after Dobby Chew faced issues returning to Kuala Lumpur from Jakarta. Dobby has since been informed that he is also under a travel ban. 

‘Restricting the movement and financial operations of human rights organisations and defenders without transparency, due process, or clear legal justification is disproportionate and unnecessary. Such measures interfere with the legitimate work of civil society organisations, hampering their ability to operate independently, defend human rights, and support communities that they serve,’ said Alfred Wu, Head of the Asia-Pacific Programme at ARTICLE 19.

Both Amir Hadi and Dobby Chew voluntarily presented themselves to the Bukit Aman police station on 14 September to seek clarification regarding the frozen bank accounts and travel bans, having received no prior contact or information from the authorities on these restrictions. 

In recent months, human rights defenders have come under increasing pressure. Examples include investigations into the former CEO of the Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center), Pushpan Muruguah, for allegedly committing an activity detrimental to parliamentary democracy; investigations into political commentators and academics; the arrest of youth activists Hamdin Nordin, Fakrurrazzi Khairur Rijal, and Ahsanul Akmal Sulam in connection with allegations of misuse of power involving the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC); probes into activist Shakila Zen for allegedly defaming a royal institution by linking it to sand mining activities; and travel restrictions imposed on three activists from the electoral rights group BERSIH, Asraf Sharafi Azhar, Anas Nor’azim, and Alyaah Hani.  

‘Taken together, this string of incidents points to a troubling pattern of pressure against those who dare speak out and seek accountability. This risks entrenching a culture ofintimidation and silencing critical voices, which cannot be normalised. As Malaysia moves towards its next general elections, the authorities should instead be doing the opposite: ensuring a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders to operate in and hold those in power accountable without fear of reprisal. A protected civic space is not only essential for credible elections, but for a healthy and resilient democracy,’ said Josef Benedict, Civicus Asia Pacific Researcher.

Serious concern about the arrest and detention of human rights defenders, Amir Hariri Abd Hadi and Chew Chuan Yang in Malaysia

The Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) has called on authorities to stop targeting human rights defenders and instead ensure transparency and accountability in matters involving corruption.

The call came after Mandiri executive director Amir Hariri Abd Hadi and finance director Dobby Chew were arrested on Sept 22 under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLA).

On 22 September 2026 Frontline issued a call for the release of Amir Hariri Abd Hadi and Chew Chuan Yang in Malysia.

https://www.article19.org/resources/malaysia-reprisals-against-human-rights-defenders-threaten-civic-space

https://www.sinardaily.my/article/741140/focus/national/stop-targeting-rights-defenders-cij-tells-authorities-after-mandiri-case

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/amir-hariri-abd-hadi-and-chew-chuan-yang-arrested-under-anti-money-laundering-law

UN report on SLAPPs: the lawsuits that silence those who speak out

September 24, 2026

A journalist exposes corruption. An Indigenous leader defends their community’s land. An environmental activist raises the alarm on devastating pollution. Then comes a lawsuit. Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are designed to intimidate, exhaust and silence people who speak out on issues that matter to society. On 16 September, UN Human Rights presented a report during the 63rd session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, examining their impact on human rights.

The report was prepared following a request from the Council in Resolution 56/7 and draws on discussions held during an expert workshop organized on 28 May 2025.

At the expert workshop, a representative of UN Human Rights held that the use of SLAPPs constitutes an abusive instrumentalization of judicial systems. They not only distort the purpose of legal proceedings; they transform courts from instruments of justice into tools of repression.

see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/strategic-lawsuits-against-public-participation-slapps/

In their first session of the workshop, centered on the impact of these strategic lawsuits on journalists, journalist Clare Rewcastle Brown spoke from her personal experience. Brown said that she had been the target of multiple strategic lawsuits against public participation, regarding her work on the 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal.

The scandal involved theft and laundering of more than 4.5 billion US dollars from wealth fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad into American financial institutions. The brave reporting led to the conviction of former Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak on money laundering and abuse of power charges in 2022.

Unfortunately, the case also had consequences for the reporters. Two Malaysian business publications were suspended for three months, and two Australian journalists were detained and deported from Malaysia.

She was subject to intimidation by letters which alleged that her reporting amounted to libel, defamation, and an invasion of privacy. In 2017, a lawsuit on her reporting on a Malaysian political party led to lengthy proceedings ultimately depleted her pension and put her family at financial risk. 

Protesters hold placards, banners and shout slogans to protest in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 08 August 2015. © EPA/AHMAD YUSNI

Her case is a clear example of the use of SLAPPs to suppress the work of investigative journalists, the tense relationship between litigants and media freedoms, and emphasizes a need for reform. Brown was interviewed by UN Human Rights in May 2024, on her experience reporting on environmental violations and corruptions in Malaysia.

Irene Khan, the former Special Rapporteur on promotion and protection of right to freedom of opinion and expression, said these lawsuits occur frequently because they are a subtle form of repression than overt physical attacks. In many cases, they are effective at silencing dissent and often succeed to bankrupt or deter defendants.

Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, agreed that this is a misuse of the legal system predominantly by large corporations: 474 lawsuits have been initiated by private actors since 2015, and 68 percent involved criminal charges.

Satterthwaite outlined recommendations to put an end to this abuse of legislation: Judges must be trained to identify and discuss these lawsuits properly. Bar associations must develop ethical guidance to sanction lawyers who misuse the legal system. States must enact legislation to counter the use of such lawsuits and decriminalize defamation where appropriate.

The expert workshop also examined ways to counter SLAPPs.

Nikhil Dutta, Senior Legal Advisor at the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law, noted that responses designed to counter such lawsuits had been enacted in numerous jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, Colombia, Indonesia, Ireland, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the European Union.

Other approaches to solve these blatant human rights violations outlined in the expert workshop include enacting protections for public participation through legislation, empowering courts to dismiss abusive proceedings, establishing public funds for defense against SLAPPs, and establishing punitive damages on entities that file these lawsuits.

UN Human Rights has released a briefer on SLAPPs, a comprehensive summary of the report and the impact of these lawsuits on human rights, civic space, and victims. It suggests measures that States should take to tackle SLAPPs, including the decriminalization of defamation; the adoption of anti-SLAPPs laws; the possibility for courts to dismiss SLAPPs early; and the need to compensate victims and penalize abusive claimants.

The message is clear: states and others need to make it easy for people to speak up, to influence decisions that affect them, and to hold state institutions accountable. They must do what is in their power to ensure people do not face legal intimidation for defending human rights.

Freedom of expression and opinion is a precious good critical for protecting all human rights, and the law must not become a weapon to silence those who speak out.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2026/09/lawsuits-silence-those-who-speak-out