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.
In a Q&A on 16 April 2026 with Abdulhakim Idris, head of the Center for Uyghur Studies, Freedom Housediscusses his work exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s repression and how Chinese authorities have menaced him and his family in an attempt to prevent him from speaking out. Here some excerpts:
Abdulhakim Idris (Photo Credit: Center for Uyghur Studies)
The People’s Republic of China conducts the world’s most sophisticated and comprehensive campaign of transnational repression, targeting human rights defenders, journalists, students, artists, and members of religious and ethnic minorities. Uyghurs, an ethnic group from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, have fled repression in China for decades. Abroad, many members of the group face the threat of transnational repression via detention, unlawful deportation, rendition, coercion by proxy, surveillance, and digital harassment. Uyghur individuals are involved in over 20 percent of the incidents in Freedom House’s transnational repression database, which catalogues direct, physical cases around the world from 2014 to 2025.
Last month, Abdulhakim Idris, head of the Center for Uyghur Studies in Washington, DC, and a leading Uyghur scholar and advocate, was detained for nearly a day and subsequently expelled from Malaysia at the behest of Chinese authorities, preventing him from launching the Malay-language edition of his book about how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) pressures governments in the Islamic world to remain silent about its persecution of Uyghurs. As Idris explains, this act of transnational repression sets a dangerous precedent for every other American advocate, journalist, and researcher operating abroad. Below, Idris describes his work exposing CCP abuses, and how they sought to silence him—in Malaysia and elsewhere.
Freedom House: Could you describe your work as executive director of the Center for Uyghur Studies?
Abdulhakim Idris: As executive director of the Center for Uyghur Studies (CUS), I lead a mission at the intersection of human rights advocacy, academic research, and diplomatic engagement to address the crisis in East Turkistan (known formally as the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region). By producing rigorous, evidence-based reports and briefing global lawmakers, I work to expose Chinese Communist Party narratives and ensure the international conversation on its persecution of Uyghurs remains rooted in scholarly data and cultural expertise. My work translates this research into action, raising awareness through media advocacy and high-level briefings to reach the audiences most capable of effectuating change. I also work to engage Muslim-majority countries where Chinese economic pressure often buys silence. By briefing religious leaders and civil society across the Middle East, Africa, and Asia, I demonstrate that the persecution of Uyghurs is an assault on our shared faith and part of China’s war on religious beliefs.
My advocacy is deeply personal: 24 of my family members have been missing since 2017, including my mother, Habibehan Idris; my brother Abdurehim; my sister Buhedichehan; and all of my nieces and nephews. In August 2023, I learned about my father’s passing in Hotan seven months earlier in January 2023.
As a bridge between the diaspora and the international community, I provide the strategic recommendations and testimony needed to transform our personal data into global action.
How long have you been involved in advocacy on behalf of the Uyghur people?
I was born in Hotan, East Turkistan, in 1968. My journey began with a foundation in faith and scholarship; I studied Islamic Sciences and Arabic in underground madrasas in Hotan before leaving in 1986 to study at Al-Azhar University in Egypt. This background gave me a profound understanding of the religious identity that the CCP is currently attempting to erase.
In 1990, I became one of the first Uyghurs to seek asylum in Germany. Settling in Munich, I balanced my studies in Industrial Management with a mission to organize our people. I am one of the founders of the East Turkistan Union in Europe (1991), the very first Uyghur organization on the continent. Over the next two decades, I focused on building the institutional architecture of our struggle. I am proud to be one of the founders of both the World Uyghur Youth Congress (1996), where I served as chairman of the executive committee, and the World Uyghur Congress (2004), where I have held different leadership roles.
Since moving to the United States in 2009, I have continued this work in Washington, DC, serving on the board of the Uyghur American Association. In 2017, my wife, Rushan Abbas, and I cofounded Campaign for Uyghurs (CFU) to bring more urgent awareness to CCP abuses against Uyghurs.
In recent years, the nature of the struggle has changed. As the Chinese government intensified its repression campaign, our response needed to become more robust. This led me to establish the Center for Uyghur Studies, where I have combined advocacy with the intellectual and scholarly dimension necessary to challenge China’s influence, particularly in the Muslim-majority countries.
Why were you traveling to Malaysia? Can you describe what happened when you arrived?
We have been engaging in Uyghur advocacy in Malaysia since 2022, and since then, I have been there several times, including for a meeting with Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
The CCP considers me one of the foremost experts on its influence in Muslim-majority countries. My book is now translated into Turkish, Arabic, Malay, and Bahasa Indonesia. It has been an eye-opener about Chinese infiltration into Muslim-majority countries. Following its publication, both my wife and I were subjected to coordinated death threats and digital harassment. When I traveled to Jakarta for the Indonesian launch of the book, the Chinese embassy mobilized local proxies to stage public protests, including the burning of my picture and copies of my book.
Our Malaysian partner planned this advocacy trip and invited me to join. We were well prepared with reports and planned to launch the Malay-language edition of my book alongside several new reports from the Center for Uyghur Studies. My arrival in Kuala Lumpur was on March 29, 2026, and my departure was scheduled for April 8, 2026.
I arrived in Kuala Lumpur on March 29 at 7:00 am local time. When I came to the immigration hall, a Malaysian immigration officer pulled me aside, took my passport, and brought me to his office. An officer introduced himself as a Royal Malaysia Police officer and said that I would be denied entry and be deported. Five hours into this conversation, they put me in a temporary detention center at the airport. [Note: US citizens are not required to apply for a visa for a business or tourism stay in Malaysia of less than 90 days.]
My US passport was seized, and I was held without justification for 21 hours in detention, given only one small meal and one small bottle of water, before being escorted by four police officers onto a deportation flight.
After approximately 70 hours of continuous travel and detention, I arrived safely back in the United States. Our partner in Kuala Lumpur confirmed to me that my denied entry was the result of pressure directly from Beijing.
This is not an isolated incident but a pattern of Chinese intimidation. Last year, I was similarly denied entry to Indonesia under pressure from the Chinese embassy in Jakarta, but that time, after intervention by the US government, I was able to secure entry. This time, despite the State Department and the US embassy in Kuala Lumpur escalating the matter to Malaysian immigration, Beijing prevailed. The escalation is alarming.
Beijing’s goal is to silence my research before it reaches Malay-speaking communities. My only “crime” is being a dissident from a community persecuted by the Chinese government and exposing China’s broader threats to humanity, freedom, and democracy. China has now successfully used a third country to detain and expel a US citizen. If this stands, it sets a dangerous precedent for every American advocate, journalist, and researcher operating abroad. This is a clear case of Chinese transnational repression, specifically targeting me as a US citizen.
Has anything like this happened before?
Yes. We held an advocacy trip to Indonesia between July 11, 2024, and July 20, 2024. Our partner in Indonesia organized the events and invited me. The trip involved multiple meetings, seminars, and roundtable discussions with key Indonesian stakeholders, including politicians, NGO leaders, and religious figures. In total, we visited and held activities in five cities, including Jakarta, Pontianak, Surabaya, Yogyakarta, and remotely in Medan.
There were several challenges we faced during this trip. The CCP propaganda campaign is now widespread across Indonesia, including among NGOs and social media platforms such as TikTok, X, and Facebook. The Chinese government’s extensive propaganda campaigns, including social media advertisements and influence on local leaders, have created a significant hurdle.
When we held our event in Pontianak, Indonesian immigration officials showed up, checked my visa, and told me I was not allowed to speak at events on a tourist visa and that I would need a C10 visa for that purpose. We then changed our approach: I gave all my presentations to our Indonesian partners, who then proceeded with the seminars. We could adapt because our Indonesian colleagues were trained and experienced on the Uyghur issue after two years of working together.
On a subsequent trip between April 26, 2025, and May 6, 2025 to Indonesia, I traveled on a speaker visa and was detained at the airport for three hours before being allowed to enter the country after the intervention of the US government.
In both cases, as in Malaysia, the pressure traced back to Beijing. The difference is that in Indonesia, I was eventually able to seek clarity and secure entry. In Malaysia, I was not.
Have you ever experienced any other forms of transnational repression, such as threats, harassment, or coercion of your family?
Transnational repression is not an abstract concept for me. It is a painful, daily reality that has fundamentally reshaped my family’s life. The Chinese government frequently uses the safety and freedom of our loved ones back home as leverage to silence our advocacy in the West. Since repression of Uyghurs has intensified deeply since 2017, I have lost all contact with my relatives in Hotan. In Uyghur culture, family is everything. Being severed from one’s roots is a form of psychological warfare.
In August 2023, I received a devastating message from an anonymous source. I was informed that my father, Abdulkarim Zikrullah Idris, had passed away seven months earlier, in January 2023, in our hometown of Hotan. Because the CCP has cut all lines of communication between the diaspora and our families in East Turkistan, I was not able to be with him, speak to him, or even know he was gone when it happened. The last time I heard my father’s voice was in April 2017. Shortly after that phone call, the mass detentions began, and contact was severed entirely. For six years, I lived with the agonizing uncertainty of not knowing if he was safe, if he was in a camp, or if he was even alive.
This is a form of psychological torture that hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs in the diaspora face every day. Because of the total lack of transparency in the region, the exact circumstances of his death remain unclear. We do not know if he had access to medical care, or if the stress of the ongoing persecution contributed to his passing. What we do know is that he died in a police-state environment where his children were unable to fulfill their final duties to him.
My family was not the only one targeted. In September 2018, just six days after my wife Rushan Abbas spoke publicly about my families’ disappearance while highlighting the Chinese government’s mass detention of Uyghurs, her sister Dr. Gulshan Abbas was forcibly disappeared from her home in Urumqi. The spokesperson of China’s Foreign Ministry officially confirmed on December 31, 2020, that she had been sentenced to 20 years in prison on baseless charges in connection with terrorism. Dr. Gulshan Abbas was a retired medical doctor who had never been involved in politics. Her imprisonment remains an act of transnational repression, intended to terrorize our family, silence us, and force us to stop advocating for our people.
The CCP’s tactics of transnational repression have taken other forms as well. After I gave testimony before the Uyghur Tribunal in London in 2021, which concluded that China was committing crimes against humanity against the Uyghur people, Chinese state television broadcast my photograph and denounced me for testifying. This was meant to intimidate me publicly and to warn others of the consequences of speaking the truth. Before the 2024 General Assembly of the World Uyghur Congress in Sarajevo, my wife and I received an online video message containing direct death threats. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) contacted me and confirmed they were aware of the threat.
We have become targets of dehumanization, smear campaigns, character assassination, and threats against our lives. Even outside China, we live under constant fear and intimidation. Through these tactics, the Chinese government seeks not only to punish individuals but to spread fear across entire families and communities.
For their exceptional resilience and courage in defence of freedom of expression, free and independent journalism and democracy, Netgazeti and La Hora de Cuba are awarded the Civil Rights Defender of the Year Award 2026,” says the Board of Civil Rights Defenders in its motivation for the prize on 29 April 2026
“Independent media are often among the first targets when governments become more authoritarian. Yet the Georgian and Cuban news platforms, Netgazeti and La Hora de Cuba, have refused to be silenced. Despite threats, imprisonment and repression, both news platforms continue their work with integrity and determination. Through courageous journalism, they expose abuses of power, document human rights violations and ensure that people have access to independent information that is essential for holding those in power to account.
On April 22, 2026 United Nations special rapporteurs raised serious concerns about Turkey’s use of counterterrorism laws to judicially harass and criminalize human rights defenders and lawyers, including what they described as the misuse of the terrorism financing law, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported.
In a letter sent to the Turkish government on February 23, 2026, but published only recently, the rapporteurs said authorities were pursuing charges including membership in a terrorist organization and terrorism financing against rights defenders and lawyers, singling out the Human Rights Association (İHD) as a particular target.
The rapporteurs pointed to the case of İHD member Hatice Onaran, who was convicted in 2024 of “violating the law on financing terrorism” after sending small amounts of money to poor and sick prisoners. They also cited the cases of four other members —Osman Süzen, Suna Bilgin, Tuğba Kahraman and Mehmet Acettin — who were charged with membership in a terrorist organization. Süzen was subsequently acquitted at a January 2026 hearing.
A fifth İHD member, İsmail Boyraz, was investigated on accusations of participating in an unlawful assembly after taking part in a teachers’ union protest. The rapporteurs also cited the case of lawyer Sabri Güngen, who was allegedly assaulted by police while meeting with a client.
The rapporteurs expressed concern over what they described as Turkey’s “apparent misuse” of terrorism financing laws in Onaran’s case, noting that providing small sums of money to support the basic needs of ill and financially disadvantaged prisoners, in line with prison regulations and under prison administration supervision does not constitute terrorism financing under international law. Onaran, who is undergoing cancer treatment, was released in February 2025 after his sentence was suspended for six months on health grounds.
They also warned that physical assault and intimidation reportedly faced by lawyers Bilgin, Süzen and Güngen while carrying out their professional duties may have been acts of retaliation for their human rights work.
The rapporteurs raised the same concern in a following statement on March 31, which warned that Turkey’s counterterrorism legislation is being used to criminalize legitimate rights advocacy and restrict fundamental freedoms.
The letter was signed by Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders; Gina Romero, the special rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; Tlaleng Mofokeng, the special rapporteur on physical and mental health; Margaret Satterthwaite, the special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers; and Ben Saul, the special rapporteur on protection of rights and freedoms while countering terrorism.
In a letter οf 27 April 2026, addressed to leaders of the European Parliament, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) within the framework of the Observatory, as part of the Human Rights and Democracy Network (HRDN), call for the establishment of a European Union (EU) directive aiming at protecting human rights defenders within the EU.
The Human Rights and Democracy Network welcomes the European Commission’s renewed commitment, as part of the EU Civil Society Strategy, to scale up its support to ensure an enabling environment for civil society and human rights defenders across the world. In this context, HRDN urges the European Commission to take a decisive step toward establishing a Directive on the Protection and Mobility of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs), creating a coherent and predictable framework for their protection within the European Union.
Across the world, human rights defenders, including journalists, lawyers, environmental activists, women’s rights leaders, and LGBTIQ+ advocates, face increasing risks as a direct consequence of their work. They expose abuses, challenge corruption, and defend communities. Their courage upholds human rights, democracy and the rule of law both within and outside Europe’s borders.
While the EU and its Member States have established valuable relocation and protection mechanisms, these remain fragmented, short-term, unavailable to those most at risk and inconsistent as reports and studies have shown HRDs at risk are currently left with only two main pathways: temporary relocation programmes, often led by civil society or a few Member States, or the asylum system, which is designed for those unable to return home. Between these two options lies a wide and growing gap. Many defenders require temporary protection and mobility to continue their work, but face bureaucratic barriers, inflexible visa systems with indirect discriminatory impacts, and a lack of harmonised procedures.
A Directive on the Protection and Mobility of Human Rights Defenders (providing equal measures to a Temporary Protection Directive, as recommended in the study requested by the DROI Subcommittee of the European Parliament and called for by civil society) would bridge this gap by creating an EU-wide framework for safe entry, residence, and participation. It would introduce fast and flexible visa procedures, temporary but renewable residence permits, and the right to work, study, and continue advocacy while in safety. Such a Directive would also ensure fair responsibility sharing among Member States and foster cooperation with civil society organisations that host and support defenders.
This initiative aligns closely with the objectives of the EU Civil Society Strategy and the European Democracy Action Plan, translating policy commitments into a tangible protection mechanism. It would also complement the Human Rights Defenders Mechanism (ProtectDefenders.eu) by ensuring that the EU provides not only emergency support but also structured mobility pathways that allow defenders to rebuild, reconnect, and continue their work in safety inside the EU.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) on 27 April, 2026 warned that a new bill before Uganda’s parliament could be used to shut down civil society and has compared it to a similar Russian foreign agents law. HRW warns that this bill threatens to limit freedom of speech and assembly.
Bill 13, the Protection of Sovereignty Bill, was introduced on April 15 for its first reading. The bill criminalizes activity that promotes “the interests of a foreigner against the interests of Uganda.” Its broad provisions include prohibiting carrying out activities “related to the implementation of Government policy,” and receiving money to organize meetings about foreign policy. Violators can be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison.
To avoid the consequences of the bill, you would need to register as a foreign agent through a yet undefined process. Doing so would permit the Internal Affairs Ministry to inspect the agent’s “premises” without a court order.
Senior Africa researcher at HRW, Oryem Nyeko, said that:
The Protection of Sovereignty Bill is the latest example of the government’s efforts to stifle dissent and inhibit political or social organizing and participation. The proposed bill copies a repressive tool used by other abusive governments to crush exercise of rights and stigmatize human rights defenders, independent media and other dissenting voices.
The new legislation comes following an election which saw the government crackdown on opposition parties. In the lead-up to the January elections in Uganda, an internet shutdown was imposed, which HRW claims violated fundamental rights and election integrity. Furthermore, on January 8th, the director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance and a vocal critic of President Yoweri Museveni’s administration, Sarah Bireete, was arrested and charged with unlawfully obtaining or disclosing personal data. Finally, Ugandan security forces targeted opposition rallies with excessive force, including the use of tear gas, pepper spray, and beatings, leading up to the election.
On 27 April 2026, Halya Coynash reported on the case of Crimean Tatar human rights defender Lutfiye Zudiyeva.
Russia’s Second cassation court of general jurisdiction cases has rejected Lutfiye Zudiyeva’s cassation appeal against her inclusion by the Russian justice ministry in its notorious register of so-called ‘foreign agents’. Russia is deploying all weapons to silence the courageous Crimean Tatar human rights defender and journalist, and it cannot be said that any other outcome was seriously expected. The lawlessness was, however, even more extreme than usual with Lutfiye’s lawyer arriving for the hearing only to be told that it had been held earlier than scheduled, behind closed doors, with the justice ministry’s decision upheld.
The ‘hearing’ took place on 19 March however it was only a month later, and on the lawyer’s second attempt and she and Lutfiye were able to receive a copy of the ruling. Lutfiye’s application to take part by video link had been rejected, with the court claiming that no object grounds had been given for why the human rights defender and mother of four should come from occupied Crimea to Moscow. The court also pointed out that her presence was not mandatory but failed to warn her that it would also speed up the hearing, thus preventing her lawyer from taking part. Quite the contrary, with the ruling claiming that neither Lutfiye Zudiyeva nor her lawyer had “appeared”. The one hearing, which was over before its scheduled commencement at 10.30 a.m., took place behind closed doors, before presiding ‘judge’ Yelena Regina and two colleagues, Yury Denisov and Yelena Karpacheva.
As reported, the Russian justice ministry announced that Lutfiye Zudiyeva had been added to its ever-increasing register of alleged ‘foreign agents’ on 16 May 2025. It claimed that the renowned human rights defender and Graty journalist had “circulated false information about decisions taken by the public authorities of the Russian Federation and the policies they carry out”; that she was “under foreign influence” and “involved in political activities.”
An appeal was lodged immediately, with this rejected on 11 August 2025 by ‘judge’ Iryna Kozlova from the Zamoskvoretsky district court in Moscow. On that occasion, Lutfiye’s application to participate by video link from Dzhankoi, in occupied Crimea, “got held up” in the Russian postal system, however her legal representative was able to take part, and present Lutfiye’s written objections. These were, predictably, ignored, as they were in the cassation court’s secretive hearing on 19 March 2026.
The claims that have now been upheld by two Russian ‘courts’ were that there was proof of Lutfiye Zudiyeva being ‘under foreign influence’ in her publications in the independent Ukrainian publication Graty, in her commentary to the media and international organizations, as well as her supposed ‘membership’ of Frontline Defenders. There would be nothing at all illegal about such membership, but it is a figment of some Russian ministry official’s imagination. Frontline Defenders have spoken out in Lutfiye’s defence, but so have many other human rights organizations, diplomats and journalists. [https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/profile/lutfiye-zudiyeva]
Another bizarre claim which none of the ‘judges’ found the courage to question was that Lutfiye Zudiyeva had received money from foreign sources. To justify this totally false claim, reference was made to money for day-to-day needs which Lutfiye’s husband had transferred to her account. He in turn is involved in selling agricultural goods and, according to the FSB, received money between February and August 2024, from three ‘foreign nationals’ (from Ukraine, Germany and Vietnam). In her written statement for the appeal, Lutfiye explained that in each of those cases, the person had had dual citizenship, with this something her husband could scarcely have known, as he had no right to demand a passport from buyers. She also disputed the Russian ministry’s claim that her human rights work and journalism were ‘political activities’.
On 27 July 2023, Zudiyeva and another journalist were illegally detained, together with 12 other Crimean Tatars for trying to attend a purportedly open court hearing into the appeal against the appalling sentences passed on Crimean Tatar Mejlis leader, journalist and human rights defender Nariman Dzhelyal and two cousins, Asan and Aziz Akhtemov. She was fined on a preposterous charge of having taken part in an unauthorized mass event, with the occupation ‘judge’, like the Russian-controlled ‘police’, ignoring the fact that she had been there as a journalist…
“I cannot calmly sit and watch as the multiple searches which take place all the time in Crimea result in children being deprived of their fathers; in elderly parents being left without their children, without care, and in women remaining without their husbands. I believe that it is my right to have the possibility of speaking publicly about this. And this is the least I can do as a member of society.”
Several organisations came out with annual reports, including
Predatory attacks on multilateralism, international law and civil society marked 2025
The alternative on offer is a racist, patriarchal, unequal and anti-rights world order
Protesters, activists and global bodies are working to resist, disrupt and transform
The world is on the brink of a perilous new era Amnesty International warned on 21 April 2026 with the launch of its annual report, The State of the World’s Human Rights. The organisation called on governments, including Australia, to reject the politics of appeasement and collectively resist attacks on multilateralism, international law and civil society, before this emerging order takes hold.
In its assessment of the human rights situation across 144 countries, the report documents widespread violations by governments and other actors throughout 2025, alongside persistent failures of accountability, with only limited areas of progress. Many of these patterns have continued into 2026, as the international rules-based order faces sustained and coordinated pressure.
“We are confronting the most challenging moment of our age. Humanity is under attack from transnational anti-rights movements and predatory governments determined to assert their dominance through unlawful wars and brazen economic blackmail,” said Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.
“World leaders have been far too submissive in the face of attacks on international law and the multilateral system. Their silence and inaction are inexcusable.”Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International
“The vast majority of states have been unwilling or unable to consistently denounce predatory acts by the USA, Russia, Israel or China, or to chisel out diplomatic solutions.
“World leaders have been far too submissive in the face of attacks on international law and the multilateral system. Their silence and inaction are inexcusable. It is morally bankrupt and will bring nothing but retreat, defeat and the erasure of decades of hard-fought human rights gains.
“To appease aggressors is to pour fuel on a fire that will burn us all and scorch the future for generations to come,” said Agnès Callamard…
“For the sake of humanity, the time to make history is now.”Agnès Callamard
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) presents its Annual Report 2025, documenting the work it has done in compliance with the mandate to promote and protect human rights in the Americas. The report—showing, over six chapters, the results attained by IACHR mechanisms—is an instrument for institutional transparency and a reference for States, civil society, and regional and international organizations.
In a year that was full of challenges including weaknesses in democratic institutions, violence in various national contexts, the effects of climate change, and issues concerning vulnerable individuals and groups, among others, the IACHR strengthened its mechanisms and each of those mechanisms has achieved concrete results.
Our country is facing a grave threat as those in power leverage bias and disinformation to push rights-restricting legislation through at the state and federal levels. Our communities, schools, libraries, elections, and individual freedoms are being placed at risk by escalating assaults on our rights. In response, Human Rights First launched Democracy Watch in 2025, to track and expose legislative trends that endanger our civil and human rights and undermine democratic processes and institutions. Since its launch, we have tracked a proliferation of authoritarian tactics targeting our states and hurting our communities. This year we saw a wide range of legislative strategies, including rollbacks on reproductive freedom, immigrant and refugee rights, free speech, LGBTQ+ equality, voting rights, and public education.
Presenting his 2025 Annual Activity Report to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe today, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O’Flaherty, warned that Europe, and the rest of the world, is no longer merely in an “era of change” but is experiencing a profound “change of era” that threatens the very foundations of human rights law and practice.
“We are living in a context where our stable cultural framework is being shattered by rapid social and technological advances that surpass our capacity to grasp them,” the Commissioner stated. Highlighting the impact of artificial intelligence, the triple planetary crisis, and worsening inequality, he noted a widespread diminishment of trust between citizens and the state, as well as between generations and an increasing pressure on institutions and civil society across the continent. “Unimaginably, we risk losing our invaluable acquis of human rights law. This is the duty of our generation: to act and ensure these rights survive this transition intact”.
reminds us that Mr Surendra Gadling is a lawyer specialising in the defence of human rights and marginalised communities, particularly Dalits and indigenous peoples in India. He has been held in detention for nearly eight years in connection with the Bhima Koregaon case. He is now the only defendant still in prison – the other fifteen people prosecuted in this case have been released on bail.
Gadling was arrested in 2018 and is one of a group of human rights defenders prosecuted for their alleged involvement in violence that occurred in Bhima Koregaon. Several organisations believe that these prosecutions are in fact targeting committed activists and denounce the charges as baseless. [see also: https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/surendra-gadling-arrested]
Mr Gadling is also being prosecuted in another case linked to a fire at a mining site in Surajgarh. According to several lawyers, inconsistencies have been identified in the complaint (including the absence of evidence linking him directly to the incident).
In both cases, the key evidence used against him is the purported discovery of incriminating documents found on his PC. Independent Cyber forensic analysts have observed that these documents were planted using a Remote Access Trojan unknown to Mr. Gadling. Several lawyers’ organisations have called for his immediate release and condemned the use of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), which is considered particularly repressive. The prolonged detention of Mr Surendra Gadling raises serious concerns regarding respect for the right to liberty and a fair trial. It also raises questions about the protection of lawyers and human rights defenders, particularly when they are involved in sensitive cases.
The Observatory calls on the Indian authorities to ensure that Surendra Gadling’s fundamental rights are respected, in particular his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time.
France has reversed its earlier decision and granted a national visa to Palestinian human rights activist Shawan Jabarin, following criticism from European lawmakers, a French MP said on Monday. Jabarin, director of the West Bank-based rights group Al-Haq, had previously been denied entry by French authorities despite being invited to attend a session of the European Parliament’s Human Rights Subcommittee in Strasbourg.
“I take note that France has finally reversed its decision by granting a national visa to Shawan Jabarin,” French Green MEP Mounir Satouri said on the US social media company X Satouri called for full transparency over the initial refusal, urging authorities to clarify the reasons behind the blockage and to lift all remaining obstacles to issuing a Schengen visa.
In a joint statement, the groups said the last-minute visa denial prevented Jabarin from attending meetings with the French Parliament, civil society organizations, and the Foreign Ministry, restricting his work as a human rights defender.
Al-Haq had earlier said the rejection undermined efforts to advocate for Palestinian rights and accountability, particularly amid ongoing Israeli attacks in Gaza, warning that restricting access for rights defenders contributes to impunity.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 