Srinagar: A coalition of international human rights organizations has called for the immediate release of Kashmiri journalist Irfan Meraj, three years after his arrest by India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA).
According to Kashmir Media Service, nearly three dozen human rights groups, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Committee to Protect Journalists, said Meraj’s continued detention is based on charges they believe are politically motivated and linked to his work documenting human rights issues in occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
The organizations said that the case reflects growing pressure on journalists and researchers working on sensitive issues in the territory. The advocacy groups highlighted the detention of Kashmiri human rights defender Khurram Parvez, coordinator of the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), who has been held since 2021. Investigators previously described Mehaj as an associate of Parvez, a fact that rights organizations say forms part of the basis for the charges against him.
The coalition urged the Indian government to end what they described as reprisals against journalists and human rights defenders in occupied Jammu and Kashmir and to reconsider laws that allow extended detention without trial. They also criticized the Modi-led Indian government for failing to respond to several inquiries previously raised by UN human rights experts regarding alleged violations in the region.
The groups called on the international community to monitor the situation closely and encourage greater protection for journalists and civil society organizations, stating that continued attention from international institutions may be necessary to ensure that press freedom and basic civil liberties are upheld in the territory.
Meraj was arrested in March 2023 during an investigation conducted by India’s National Investigation Agency for uploading posts on brutalities of Indian forces in the territory.
Delivering a statement under General Debate item 5, a group of human rights organisations has raised concerns about ongoing discussions at the Human Rights Council to reduce the frequency with which Special Procedures report to the General Assembly.
These reports play a critical role in informing all UN Member States about pressing human rights issues and their links to peace, security, and sustainable development. They also help maintain visibility and political support for the UN’s human rights work in New York.
The statement emphasised that efforts to improve efficiency cannot be separated from the broader liquidity and budgetary crises affecting the UN, urging States to ensure that mandates are adequately resourced, to defend the independence of mandate holders, to protect civil society participation, and to ensure that those most at risk can continue to engage with this Council safely and meaningfully.
The written version of the statement can be found here
After delivering the statement, ISHR, Amnesty International and partner organisations outlined their concerns and recommendations in a letter sent to states.
One-size-fits-all approach: Several initiatives proposed during this 61st session appear to adopt a standardised approach with the aim of addressing a variety of objectives, including the Third Committee’s workload, cost-saving and rationalisation, rather than pursuing a strategic and mandate-specific assessment of impact and opportunities.
Lack of consultation: Proposals have also been advanced without meaningful consultation with the directly affected communities and concerned mandate holders, with sufficient time ahead of the Human Rights Council session, around the implications of reduced reporting to the General Assembly, and possible alternatives.
Resources and extraordinary character: Initiatives to shift to biannual or triennial reporting to the General Assembly, without recognising the temporary and exceptional nature of such measures, risk entrenching this practice over the long term. This could also lead to a reduction in Regular Budget resources, in line with decreased General Assembly reporting.
My ordeal started at about 2am one morning in February 2018, when I was arrested by the Greek police. People were fleeing conflicts at home and coming to Europe seeking safety in unseaworthy boats and I was helping the Emergency Response Center International to conduct search and rescue activities.
I was detained without understanding what exactly was happening; we were provided neither a lawyer nor an interpreter. After two nights, we were released “pending further investigation.” We continued to do search and rescue. After all, we had done nothing wrong. In fact, we continued to cooperate with the very authorities that had arrested us.
Then, in August 2018, six months after our initial arrest, my colleague and I were detained again. This time, we were charged with serious crimes, including forgery, the illegal use of radio frequencies, espionage, money laundering, being members of a criminal organization, and facilitating illegal entry….Finally, on 15 January this year, I was acquitted. The prosecutor at trial stated there was no evidence of criminality, and the panel of judges unanimously agreed that my 23 co-defendants and I were motivated by, and engaged in, legal humanitarianism.
Whilst I am delighted not to be returning to prison, it has taken far too long for this absurd prosecution to collapse. In the interim, the damage has already been done. EU states’ authorities have obstructed civilian rescue efforts, and over 32,000 lives have been lost at Europe’s borders since 2014. Meanwhile, dozens of humanitarians across Europe face similar prosecutions, obstruction, intimidation and harassment. Sadly, my case was not the exception but part of a wider pattern of states criminalizing humanitarian work.
The current effort to reform EU anti-smuggling legislation, the so-called “Facilitators Package” offers an opportunity to address some of the issues that have led to our baseless prosecution. However, the proposed revisions to the legislation might inadvertently increase the risk of criminalizing rescue workers – meaning future prosecutions will still be possible and may not end in acquittals like mine. They will also impact migrants, people of migrant origin and racialized people who all too often suffer from these policies.
As Amnesty International has highlighted, the proposal’s broad and vague provisions risk perpetuating the criminalization of refugees, migrants and human rights defenders. Any reform should clarify explicitly and in a binding manner that acts of humanitarian assistance or solidarity should be exempted from prosecution or punishment. Migrants who may have been smuggled themselves, or people assisting their family members should also be protected from criminal liability.
Through this reform, the EU has an opportunity to align with the EU Charter, UN Conventions and Smuggling Protocols, and treaties on maritime search and rescue, and to explicitly protect the right to life, the right to seek asylum, and the duty to render assistance.
As it stands, the proposal tries to expand the avenues to pursue humanitarian workers by introducing the crime of “public instigation” of irregular migration. This vague new provision could be misconstrued to harm refugees and migrants, advocates and activists protesting unjust migration laws or professionals providing legal information or assistance.
Prosecutors should focus on exploitation and violence, including by authorities summarily force people across land or sea borders.
Last year, the European Court of Human Rights found “serious evidence” of systematic pushbacks in Greece. Evidence of similar practices has been mounting across European borders. Without border monitoring, this already opaque crime becomes ever more obscure. Finally, trafficking, another cross-border crime, is arguably exacerbated by EU policy. A UN report published in 2018 found that asylum seekers in Libya face “unlawful killings, torture, arbitrary detention, gang rape, slavery, forced labour and extortion,” with apparent complicity by State actors. Nevertheless, the EU has for years financed the so-called Libyan Coast Guard.
Whether in the Facilitators Package or in its wider border policies, the EU must respect the rule of law and human rights.
The way to stop people taking dangerous journeys is providing safe and legal pathways for protection, commensurate in scale with the need for protection, and channels for regular migration for those seeking a better life. By denying safe routes, the EU pushes people into the arms and boats of smugglers and traffickers.
All the while, EU laws and narratives on stopping smugglers continue being used to criminalize migrants and people doing what they can to save lives or offer assistance. Unless the reform of the Facilitators package takes serious steps to uphold the duty to rescue and defend humanitarians, people will continue to risk jail for doing what is normal, human behaviour: helping others at risk.
Watch Seán as he discusses his case, his reflections and hopes for the future.
Listen to Séan’s full story in the first season of Amnesty’s podcast ‘On the Side of Humanity’.
On 13 the Havana Times follows up on Amnesty International’s international campaign for Indigenous Leader Brooklyn Rivera of Nicaragua.
Brooklyn Rivera, former deputy of the indigenous YATAMA political party. File photo: Confidencial
The Mechanism for the Recognition of Political Prisoners is demanding that the regime of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo provide “proof of life” in the case of Brooklyn Rivera, the Miskito indigenous leader. Rivera was abducted by police on September 29, 2023, and has been in a state of “forced disappearance” ever since.
Sources linked to the Nicaraguan Army told CONFIDENCIAL that the indigenous leader, who until his arrest served as National Assembly representative for the indigenous YATAMA party, is in “dangerously poor health.” According to these sources, Rivera is currently “in police custody at a state-run hospital in Managua.”
On Thursday, March 12, 2026, the Mechanism reported that since his detention, his family members “haven’t heard anything from him. They have not been able to see him or obtain information on his whereabouts.” To date, his family has gone “895 days without knowing where he is,” and, according to that organization, concern is “even greater due to his delicate state of health.”
The 73-year-old indigenous leader was arrested at his home in Bilwi (Puerto Cabezas), on Nicaragua’s North Caribbean Coast. Since then, there has been no official information regarding his whereabouts, and his family has been unable to see him or communicate with him. “Rivera reportedly suffers from high blood pressure and, following his arrest, was reportedly transported by ambulance due to his medical condition,” the Mechanism noted.
The lack of official information has left his condition unclear. Since his arrest, his family has been subjected to threats, harassment, and persecution by the National Police and prison authorities.
For decades, Rivera was one of the most prominent voices in the defense of the territorial, political, and cultural rights of the Miskito people and other indigenous communities in the region. In July 2025, Tininiska Rivera, daughter of the Miskito indigenous leader, denounced the repression against indigenous leaders to the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. “As a daughter, I have been forced into exile after receiving threats and living under a constant atmosphere of persecution,” she reported.
The human rights organization Amnesty International included Rivera in an international campaign calling for the release of three prisoners of conscience worldwide, including lawyer Sonia Dahamani of Tunisia and photojournalist Sai Azael Thaike of Myanmar.
Front Line, Amnesty International, Forum Asia and several newspapers reported on this shocking event: On the evening of 12 March 2026, human rights defender Andrie Yunus became the victim of a targeted acid attack by two unidentified perpetrators in Central Jakarta. The human rights defender sustained severe chemical burns, including on his hands, face, chest, and eyes. The attack occurred immediately after Andrie Yunus participated in a podcast on ‘Remilitarism and Judicial Review in Indonesia’, a central topic of his human rights work. The human rights defender fell from his motorcycle, experiencing severe pain. He was immediately brought to the nearest hospital for emergency treatment. Medical examination confirmed burns on approximately 24% of his body.
Andrie Yunus is a human rights defender and the Deputy Coordinator for External Affairs of KontraS, the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (Komisi untuk Orang Hilang dan Korban Tindak Kekerasan). Founded in 1998, it is one of Indonesia’s leading human rights organisations. KontraS monitors human rights situation in Indonesia and documents cases of enforced disappearances and state violence. Andrie Yunus was among the human rights defenders and activists who participated in the Fairmont Protest in March 2025. Since then, he has repeatedly been targeted with intimidation and harassment in connection with his human rights work. At the Fairmont Protest, Andrie Yunus was part of the efforts to oppose the revision of Indonesia’s Military Law (RUU TNI), which allows active-duty military officers to hold positions in 14 state institutions without needing to resign. The ratification of this law in March 2025 led to a significant expansion of the military into civilian and political affairs.
According to KontraS, none of Andrie Yunus’s belongings were stolen during or after the attack, indicating that robbery was not the motive. The organisation affirms that the attack was premeditated as the perpetrators selected the specific time and location immediately after Andrie Yunus’s public engagement on militarism in Indonesia. This attack has been the most severe incident in the series of intimidation attempts and violations against KontraS and its staff members. Since March 2025, KontraS’s office in Jakarta has been surveiled by unidentified persons and on multiple occasions in March and April 2025, army vehicles were observed stopping outside the office and photographing the premises.
Front Line Defenders strongly condemns the acid attack against human rights defender Andrie Yunus and asserts that it was a reprisal for his legitimate and peaceful work in the promotion and protection of human rights in Indonesia. Front Line Defenders is gravely concerned that this attack forms part of a broader and escalating pattern of intimidation targeting KontraS and other human rights defenders in the country.
Moreover: Unidentified assailants ambushed Veronika Lumban Tobing in Jakarta, beating her and warning her to halt activism on corruption and indigenous land rights. This violence directly ties to her exposés on elite-driven encroachments in North Sumatra, mirroring patterns where Human Rights advocates face retaliation for public interest work.
On 29 April 2025 (last year) Amnesty International Indonesia raised concerns over the persistent violence and intimidation targeting human rights defenders in the country, recording at least 123 cases involving physical assaults, digital attacks, threats, and other retaliatory actions against 288 individuals throughout 2024.
Usman Hamid, Executive Director of Amnesty International Indonesia, attributed the frequency of such incidents to a lack of strong legal safeguards. “This makes human rights defenders vulnerable to threats and intimidation,” Usman said.
He added that the absence of robust legal frameworks also results in weak law enforcement, with only a few perpetrators of violence against human rights defenders in 2024 being brought to justice. Among the cases highlighted was the shooting of lawyer and human rights advocate Yan Christian Warinussy in Manokwari, West Papua, on July 17, 2024, after attending a corruption trial. [see https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/07/25/prominent-rights-lawyer-shot-west-papua-indonesia] “As of the end of the year, there has been no progress known in the police investigation,” Usman stated.
It was not until February 2025 that police arrested a suspect, ZT, in connection with the shooting. The arrest took place at a residence in Manokwari Regency and was carried out by the Manokwari City Police Special Team. ZT’s testimony led investigators to identify four additional suspects, including the alleged mastermind, OU, who is still at large. According to Manokwari City Police Chief Commissioner Rivadin B. Simangunsong, the attack on Yan was linked to a separate legal case: the murder of Yahya Sayori, for which Yan had been providing legal assistance. “It is motivated by another issue currently being processed in court, namely the murder case of the late Yahya Sayori, who was accompanied by lawyer Yan Christian Warinussy,” said Rivadin.
Then on 6 March 2026 came the good news that an Indonesian court acquitted four other activists after judges find no link to protest violence, prompting renewed scrutiny of policing and restrictions on civic space.
Responding to the acquittal of four activists – Delpedro Marhaen, Muzaffar Salim, Syahdan Husein and dan Khariq Anhar – accused by the authorities of inciting people to commit violent acts during the August 2025 protests, Usman Hamid, Amnesty International Indonesia’s Executive Director, said: “This brings new hope amid an creasingly shrinking civic space in Indonesia. The acquittal sends a clear message to law enforcement authorities that they should stop criminalising human rights defenders and anyone who peacefully exercises their right to protest. This is a significant victory for justice and human rights in Indonesia.
So maybe there will be progress also on the case of Yan Christian Warinussy ?
On 2 March 2026, woman human rights defender and feminist Yanar Mohammed was killed in an armed attack in front of her residence in northern Baghdad.
Yanar Mohammed was a prominent Iraqi woman human rights defender and feminist, and the co-founder and director of the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI). Since 2003, she had worked to protect women facing gender-based violence, including domestic abuse, trafficking, and so-called ‘honour killings.’ Under her leadership, OWFI established a network of safe houses across several Iraqi cities, providing protection and support to hundreds of women. Yanar Mohammed led these efforts despite all the ongoing impediments and risks. She was a strong advocate for secularism and women’s equality. Throughout her activism, Yanar Mohammed faced death threats and, at times, was forced to restrict her movement. {see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/01/07/women-human-rights-defenders-in-iraq-have-to-live-dangerously/]
According to an offical statement from OWFI, on 2 March 2026 at 9:00, two unidentified gunmen on motorcycles opened fire on Yanar Mohammed as she stood outside her home. She was quickly transported to the hospital, however, despite the effort of medical personnel, she succumbed to her injuries.
Reportedly, Yanar Mohammed had returned to Baghdad from Canada just a few days prior to her assassination, raising concerns about the potential surveillance and monitoring of her movements.
Two media outlets reported on states’ abuses of Interpol red notices to target political dissidents and human rights defenders on Monday. Amnesty International urged Interpol to address this “grave institutional failure” and improve its transparency.
Disclose, a French investigative media outlet, reported that Interpol has disclosed to the public less than 10 percent of the 86,000 active red notices. As of September 2024, Russia (4,817), Peru (4,457), and Tajikistan (3,493) are the countries with the most active red notices. The report also revealed that Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files (CCF) removed at least 322 notices in 2024 alone after deeming them unjustified. In March 2024 an HRW report also highlights cases of governments misusing Interpol, see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/19/transnational-repression-human-rights-watch-and-other-reports/
At the same time, the BBC revealed that Interpol quietly dropped some initial measures that prevented Russia from abusing the red notices in 2025. The BBC also reported the phenomenon of countries using Interpol’s messaging systems to trace people abroad instead of issuing a notice that can be challenged by the target.
The BBC’s report also outlined how the abuse of the red notice system impacted the life of an exiled Russian dissident, Igor Pestrikov. He fled the country with his family after he refused to supply metal products to government-designated buyers in 2022. During the two years when a red diffusion against him was active, he was unable to rent an apartment, and his bank accounts were frozen. CCF removed his case after he challenged that Russia’s case against him was politically motivated.
Interpol is an intergovernmental organization that coordinates law enforcement of over 196 member countries. When a member state issues a red notice, law enforcement in other member states will assist in locating and arresting the wanted persons. However, Article 3 of Interpol’s constitution prohibits it from participating in any political interventions.
Reacting to the reports, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns of Amnesty International, Erika Guevara Rosas, questioned Interpol’s credibility since it failed repeatedly to challenge whether the states use red notices legitimately. She urged Interpol to improve its transparency and “stop serving states’ political interest.” Conversely, Interpol told the BBC that some accusations misunderstood how Interpol and its CCF system work, or are based on factual errors.
Relatedly, in November 2025, UN experts also flagged El Salvador’s misuse of the red notices to target two exiled Salvadoran human rights defenders, denouncing the country’s use of red notices as a means “to pursue its political agenda to harass and persecute human rights defenders beyond its borders.” According to international lawyer Kate McInnes, this marks the first time that UN Special Rapporteurs have issued a communication to Interpol. The communication warned that the red notices against the human rights offenders constituted transnational repression, violating Interpol’s constitution to uphold the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and to maintain political neutrality.
On 5 January 2026 the International Commission of Jurists and many other NGOs issued a joint statement calling on the authorities to immediately terminate the abusive criminal proceedings and drop charges ahead of the 26 Istanbul Heavy Penal Court’s expected final hearing scheduled for 5 to 9 January 2026.
The continued prosecution of the president and 10 executive board members of the Istanbul Bar Association, and the prosecutor’s request for their conviction on terrorism charges are a damning reflection of the troubled state of the rule of law and democratic norms in Turkey.
The prosecutor seeks the criminal conviction of all eleven members of the Bar’s elected leadership – President Prof. İbrahim Özden Kaboğlu, Ahmet Ergin, Bengisu Kadı Çavdar, Ekim Bilen Selimoğlu, Ezgi Şahin Yalvarici, Fırat Epözdemir, Hürrem Sönmez, Mehmedali Barış Beşli, Metin İriz, Rukiye Leyla Süren, and Yelde Koçak Urfa – on the charge of “spreading terrorist propaganda” under Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, solely for issuing a public statement on 21 December 2024 concerning the killing of two journalists in northern Syria and the arrest of journalists and lawyers at a related peaceful protest in Istanbul the day before.
The trial prosecutor’s final opinion confirms and deepens the concerns raised by 56 international organisations in the joint statement of January 2025, condemning the initiation of criminal and civil proceedings against the Bar’s leadership, and in the April 2025 joint statement, which deplored the removal of the elected board and the escalating attacks on lawyers across Turkey. A group of the organisations also submitted a joint amicus curiae brief in which they concluded that the proceedings violate Turkey’s obligations under international human rights law and constitute an unjustified interference with the independence of the legal profession.
A clear misuse of criminal law
In his final opinion, the prosecutor alleges that by referring to the two individuals killed in Syria as journalists and by citing international humanitarian law applicable to the protection of civilians and media workers in conflict zones, the Bar leadership “treated as a war crime” an operation carried out by security forces, thereby intentionally legitimising and disseminating the ultimate separatist aims of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The prosecutor further asserts that describing those killed as journalists “encouraged” membership of the PKK and “made its methods appear legitimate”, amounting to “press and media–based terrorist propaganda” under Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terrorism Law. These allegations, which claim that a lawful, rights-based statement consciously advanced the objectives of an armed organisation, are wholly unfounded and legally unsustainable.
As emphasised in both joint statements in January and April 2025 and the amicus curiae brief in September 2025, the Istanbul Bar Association has a statutory and ethical duty to speak out on violations of human rights and the rule of law. The prosecutor’s position effectively criminalises the Bar Association’s discharge of this duty protected under both domestic law and international human rights law and standards. The prosecutor’s construal of a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression as a terrorism offence amounts to a misuse of criminal law and judicial harassment.
Violations of international standards and the Bar’s statutory mandate
International and regional human rights standards, including the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer, and consistent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, affirm that lawyers and their associations must be able to engage in public debate on matters of justice and human rights without fear of reprisals.
Criminalising their exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and association contravenes the provisions of these instruments safeguarding the rights and role of lawyers and their professional organisations, as well as Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 19 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Articles 26, 27 and 33 of the Constitution of Türkiye.
The criminal proceedings strike at the heart of the independence of the legal profession and amount to a misuse of counter-terrorism laws to silence criticism, suppress human rights monitoring, and undermine self-governance of bar associations.
Signatories (in alphabetical order):
Amnesty International
Center of Elaboration and Research on Democracy (CRED)
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (Le Conseil des barreaux européens, CCBE)
Defense Commission of the Barcelona Bar Association (Spain)
Deutscher Anwaltverein (German Bar Association, Germany)
Eşit Haklar İçin İzleme Derneği (Association for Monitoring Equal Rights, Türkiye)
European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH)
The European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA)
Fédération des Barreaux d’Europe (European Bars Federation, FBE)
Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer
Hak İnsiyatifi Derneği (Rights Initiative Association, Türkiye)
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (Truth Justice Memory Center, Türkiye)
Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers (UK)
Human Rights Institute of the Brussels Bar (Belgium)
Human Rights Watch
İnsan Hakları Derneği (Human Rights Association, Türkiye)
The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
Kaos GL Derneği (Kaos GL Association, Türkiye)
The Law Society of England and Wales (LSEW, UK)
Lawyers for Lawyers (Netherlands)
Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC, Canada)
Lyon Bar Association (France)
National Union of Peoples Lawyers (NUPL, Philippines)
PEN Norway (Norway)
Turkey Litigation Support Project (TLSP, UK)
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı (Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, Türkiye)
Vereinigung Demokratischer Jurist:innen VDJ (Association of Democratic Jurists, Germany)
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
then on 9 January 2026 Amnesty stated “The decision to acquit the Istanbul Bar Association leadership of these unfounded charges is welcome news. This case was a clear misuse of criminal law and should never have been brought in the first place.” https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/
On 14 November 2025, Al Jazeera (Mariamne Everett) and other media reported that international NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have decried a sharp decline in civil liberties and a pervading “injustice” in Tunisia since President Kais Saied came to power in 2019, as authorities escalate their crackdown on the opposition, activists and foreign nongovernmental organisations.
“Tunisian authorities have increasingly escalated their crackdown on human rights defenders and independent non-governmental organizations (NGOs) through arbitrary arrests, detention, asset freezes, bank restrictions and court-ordered suspensions, all under the pretext of fighting ‘suspicious’ foreign funding and shielding ‘national interests’,” Amnesty International said in a statement on Friday.
Tunisia’s crackdown on civil society has reached an unprecedented level, according to Amnesty, as six NGO workers and human rights defenders from the Tunisian Council for Refugees are “being criminally prosecuted on charges solely related to their legitimate work supporting refugees and asylum seekers”. The trial’s opening session, initially scheduled for October 16, has been adjourned to November 24.
Within the past four months, Tunisia has temporarily suspended the activities of at least 14 Tunisian and international NGOs, said Amnesty, including the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women and the World Organisation against Torture.
Human Rights Watch said in a statement on Friday that Tunis’s Court of Appeal will hear on November 17 the appeal of more than 30 people “unjustly sentenced to heavy prison terms in a politically motivated ‘Conspiracy Case’” mass trial in April.
“Four of those detained are on hunger strike, including one who, according to his lawyers, was subjected to physical violence in prison on November 11.”
The defendants were charged with plotting to destabilise the country under various articles of Tunisia’s Penal Code and the 2015 Counterterrorism Law. Human Rights Watch, which reviewed the judicial documents, said the charges are unfounded and lack credible evidence. The NGO has called on the court to immediately overturn the convictions and ensure the release of all those detained.
The 37 people detained include opponents of Saied, lawyers, activists and researchers. Their prison terms range from four to 66 years for “conspiracy against state security” and terrorism offences. Jawhar Ben Mbarek – cofounder of Tunisia’s main opposition alliance, the National Salvation Front – began a hunger strike on October 29 to protest his arbitrary detention. Ben Mbarek was sentenced to 18 years behind bars on charges of “conspiracy against state security” and “belonging to a terrorist group”.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 