On 24–26 August 2025, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), together with the Centre for Independent Journalism, Malaysia (CIJ), and the Numun Fund, gathered human rights defenders and experts to discuss the need for Southeast Asian States to adopt and implement a human rights-based approach in efforts to tackle the growing spread of harmful content in digital spaces.
The workshop in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, focusing on leveraging ASEAN platforms, brought together 24 representatives from organizations across the ASEAN region, including Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, and Viet Nam, all States that are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
Participants underlined that the surge in hate speech, disinformation, and other harmful online content had elicited responses from ASEAN States which often relied on heavy-handed and repressive measures. These include application of criminal laws that are vague and prone to abuse, restrictive content takedown and licensing regimes; and even State-sponsored disinformation campaigns.
Participants heard that ASEAN regional mechanisms currently lack robust mandates and coordination capable of effectively addressing disinformation, harmful content, and other digital challenges. Participants considered means of ensuring platform accountability, in the context of advertisement-driven business models of technology companies with ineffective content moderation practices. The online platforms typically employ algorithms that amplify sensationalist or extreme content, fueling the viral spread of disinformation and other human rights abuses.
Workshop participants worked to develop joint next steps and produced a set of recommendations for ASEAN Member States, technology companies, and ASEAN human rights bodies, particularly the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). The recommendations included strengthening ASEAN human rights institutions and mechanisms in responding to and addressing human rights complaints submitted to them, enhancing their independence, and embedding human rights–centered advocacy into ASEAN work plans and instruments….
On 25 August, additional discussions were held with a representative from the Big Tech company Meta, focusing on the need to improve accountability and remedies through effective, accessible, and confidential grievance mechanisms. Participants also proposed multi-stakeholder co-regulation frameworks to ensure CSO participation through ongoing dialogue and collaboration on digital platform services, human oversight—not AI alone—in guiding content moderation standards, and the strengthening of independent third-party fact-checking across the region.
The series concluded with a panel discussion on 26 August 2025, co-hosted by the ICJ during the Digital Rights Asia-Pacific Assembly 2025. The panel, titled “The Role of ASEAN Human Rights Mechanisms in Institutionalizing Human Rights in the Digital Space: Towards Accountability and Collective Advocacy,” was also attended by AICHR representatives from Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. It focused on how AICHR can better safeguard human rights online and identified concrete pathways for institutionalizing monitoring and accountability mechanisms related to human rights in the digital space.
On 12 September, 2025 the seven rights groups described Khalid’s prolonged imprisonment as a “violation of his rights” and an instance of “selective persecution”, asserting that he was arrested on “politically motivated and spurious charges” on 13 September 2020.
Alongside Amnesty International, the signatories include: CIVICUS, FORUM-ASIA, Front Line Defenders. International Commission of Jurists, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT).
The statement expressed deep concern over the invocation of the anti-terror law UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) and the repeated denial of bail to Khalid.
“These repeated bail denials combined with persistent delays, and the continued absence of trial proceedings, amount to a violation of his right to a fair trial, including speedy trial, guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a state party, as well as under the Constitution of India,” the statement read.
The groups further highlighted the unequal application of bail standards, particularly in cases related to the 2020 Delhi riots and anti-CAA protests, saying:
“We are further concerned about the discriminatory application of bail standards in cases arising from the violence surrounding the CAA protests and more broadly in cases involving the UAPA. While similarly situated accused have been granted bail, Khalid continues to be denied relief. Such unequal treatment violates the principle of equality before the law and sets a deeply troubling precedent.”
The rights organizations also drew attention to the role of the Delhi Police and political leaders during the 2020 Delhi riots, where Khalid and other Muslim activists were implicated.
“Independent investigations, including by Amnesty International India, Human Rights Watch and Delhi Minorities Commission, have documented the role of the Delhi Police in human rights violations during the CAA protests and the ensuing violence,” the statement said. “Police officers were recorded engaging in beatings, torture and other ill-treatment, and arbitrary arrests, and in some cases standing by as mobs attacked protesters.”
The statement noted that Indian courts have repeatedly criticized the police investigations, describing them as: “Very poor,” “callous,” and “fraught with multiple flaws,” with documented instances of fabricated cases and manipulated records.
It further condemned the role of senior political leaders, who were seen delivering inflammatory hate speeches, branding protesters as “traitors” or “anti-nationals”, and openly inciting violence.
“Despite the existence of video and documentary evidence, no meaningful accountability measures have been taken against implicated political figures or police officials,” the statement added.
The rights groups emphasized that Khalid’s prolonged detention is not an isolated incident, but part of a larger pattern of repression against those exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and association.
“Other students and human rights activists, including Gulfisha Fatima, Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, Shifa-ur-Rehman and Meeran Haider, also remain in detention for their peaceful opposition to the CAA, while police officials and political leaders responsible for incitement or complicity in violence continue to enjoy impunity,” the groups noted. “This selective prosecution erodes public trust in the justice system, entrenches impunity for state actors, and criminalises free expression.”
The seven international organizations demand:
The immediate and unconditional release of Umar Khalid
The equal application of bail standards
An end to the discriminatory treatment of human rights defenders
Accountability for police officers and political leaders implicated in incitement and violence
On 10 June 2025 The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) condemned the arrest and detention of prominent Kaliningrad lawyer and human rights defender Maria Bontsler and called on the Russian authorities to release her immediately.
The ICJ is concerned that the charges against Maria are spurious and likely to be related to Bontsler’s legitimate activities. Proceedings against her have been undertaken in a shroud of secrecy and the ICJ calls on the authorities to immediately clarify their legal and factual basis for the charges against her.
Maria Bontsler was arrested on 28 May 2025 under Article 275.1 of the Russian Criminal Code, which provides for criminal liability for “confidential cooperation with a foreign State” aimed at “undermining the security of the Russian Federation”.
Available information indicates that a court hearing concerning Maria Bontsler’s detention or the filing of charges was held behind closed doors, at the Prosecutor’s request, on grounds of State secrecy. However, no official justification has been provided to demonstrate that the secrecy of the proceedings was necessary and proportionate as required under international human rights law. The ICJ is concerned that this lack of transparency undermines Bontsler’s right to a fair hearing.
“This prosecution reflects a broader campaign of retaliation against lawyers in Russia who engage in what the authorities see as politically sensitive cases. Such actions serve to intimidate and discourage other lawyers from vigorously defending their clients,” Temur Shakirov, Director (ad interim) of ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme said.
Maria Bontsler has a long record of defending politically persecuted individuals, including critics of Russia’s unlawful military intervention in Ukraine.
Irrespective of any charges, the ICJ stresses that it is inappropriate to keep Maria Bontsler in pre-trial detention.
In a broader context of interference with the legal profession, searches were also carried out at the homes of her colleagues, Roman Morozov and Ekaterina Selizarova, with electronic devices and legal documents seized. According to available reports, Morozov was questioned in relation to his alleged connections to the human rights organisation Memorial.
The ICJ stresses that under international law and standards, including the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, lawyers must be able to perform their professional activities without hindrance, including the collection and dissemination of information essential to protecting effectively their clients’ rights.
Maria Bontsler is a well-known human rights lawyer who represents individuals in politically charged cases and has been recognized by the Moscow Helsinki Group for her human rights defence work. Her clients include critics of the Russian Federation’s unlawful military intervention in Ukraine.
….Previously, Maria Bontsler was fined under administrative proceedings for courtroom statements made in defence of her clients, part of a systematic harassment faced by lawyers handling “political” cases in Russia
The 58th regular session of the UN Human Rights Council ran from February 24 to April 4, 2025, resulting in 32 Resolutions and 14 Universal Period Review adoptions.
The session included a high-level segment attended by over 100 dignitaries, thematic panels addressing the rights of specific vulnerable groups, interactive dialogues, and debates on country-specific reports. This session also marked key anniversaries of the Beijing Declaration and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The Human Rights Council plays a crucial role in addressing global violations and continues to serve as a platform for activists and victims of violations. In the face of multiple intersecting crises and conflicts, democracy erosion, and authoritarianism on the rise, Council decisions continue to wield considerable power to improve civil society conditions, particularly in fragile contexts where civic actors are particularly affected by widespread human rights violations and abuses, while offering unique opportunities for the negotiation of higher human rights standards.
I have on the past used other such reports by the ISHR and the UHRG (see below) but thought that this time I should highlight other NGOs:
CIVICUS contributed to the outcomes of the Council session through engagement on key Resolutions, delivery of statements, and organisation of events. We sounded the alarm on the global erosion of civic space and the growing repression of civil society across multiple regions.
Regional Developments: Africa
A strong Resolution on South Sudan was adopted, extending the mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan (CHRSS).
Regional Developments: Asia Pacific
A Resolution on Myanmar’s human rights situation was adopted by consensus amid escalating violence and widespread impunity.
Regional Developments: Americas
The Resolution on Nicaragua renewed the mandate of the Group of Human Rights Experts (GHREN) on Nicaragua.
Regional Developments: Europe
Key resolutions were adopted on Ukraine and Belarus, continuing international monitoring mechanisms.
Regional Developments: Middle East
Resolutions on Iran and Syria were adopted, with mixed results on addressing severe human rights concerns.
Several important thematic resolutions were adopted during the session.
Civil Society Challenges
Ahead of the 58th session, CIVICUS raised attention on the increasing restrictions imposed on civil society. CIVICUS engaged in key side events during HRC58, spotlighting democracy, child human rights defenders, and intersectional approaches to civic space.
A detailed post-session report is available via this link.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ):
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), together with partner organizations, participated actively in the 58th session. Civil society’s critical engagement is essential in calling on the Council and its member States to respond to the plight of victims of human rights violations. In this regard, the ICJ was pleased to ensure that our partner from the African Albinism Network delivered our joint statement on the tenth anniversary of the mandate of the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with Albinism. Maintaining effective access to the UN in Geneva for civil society is key to ensure that people can themselves participate or be represented in the discussions at the Council that concern them directly. With regard to this, the ICJ denounces all attempts to undermine civil society participation, including the intimidation of human rights defenders during side events, observed again at this HRC session.
At the outset, the ICJ welcomes the adoption of a number of important resolutions renewing, extending or creating mandates under the HRC purview, among which the following were adopted without a vote:
a resolution extending the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic for a period of one year;
a resolution establishing an open-ended intergovernmental working group for the elaboration of a legally-binding instrument on the promotion and protection of the human rights of older persons;
a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism for a period of three years;
a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for a period of three years;
a resolution extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar for a period of one year;
a resolution renewing the presence of the Office of the High Commissioner in Seoul, for a period of two years with the same resources and extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea(DPRK) for a period of one year.
While regretting the failure to adopt them by consensus, the ICJ also welcomes the adoption of other important resolutions by a majority of the votes:
a resolution extending the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine for a period of one year;
a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus for a period of one year and extending the mandate of the Group of Independent Experts on the Situation of Human Rights in Belarus for a period of one year;
a resolution renewing the mandate of the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua for a period of two years;
a resolution extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran for a period of one year and deciding that the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran should continue for one year with an updated mandate to address the recent and ongoing violations of human rights; and
a resolution extending the mandate of the independent human rights expert tasked with undertaking the monitoring of the human rights situation in Haiti, for a renewable period of one year.
This session discussed armed conflicts whose intensity had continued to increase, including in Gaza, Ukraine, the DRC and Myanmar.
……Unsurprisingly, the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory was one of the most-discussed throughout the 58th session. Many countries voiced strong support for the Palestinian people and their human rights, with many calling for a two-State solution based on Israel’s withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as Palestine’s capital. The ICJ commends the many States who intervened during the negotiations and adoption of the resolutions on the situation in the OPT to emphasize the need for accountability, and who voiced their support for the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice and their respective recent decisions on Israel/Palestine. The resolution adopted at this session titled “the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the obligation to ensure accountability and justice” invited the General Assembly to consider establishing an ongoing international, impartial and independent mechanism to assist in the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for the most serious crimes under international law committed by all parties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel since 2014.
Earlier in the year, on 7 February 2025, the Council had already held a special session to discuss the human rights situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where armed clashes between Congolese forces and the Rwanda-backed M23 movement had been ongoing, and had escalated since January 2025. The special session had resulted in the adoption of a resolution requesting the High Commissioner to urgently establish a fact-finding mission to report on events since January 2022. The resolution had also established an independent COI composed of three experts appointed by the HRC President to continue the work of the fact-finding mission. At the 58th session, the ICJ and many countries expressed grave concern about the human rights situation in the DRC, and during the Enhanced Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner and the Team of Experts at the end of the session many of the same themes and concerns heard during the special session were raised again.
Threats to Multilateralism
This 58th session took place in the context of increasing threats against multilateralism. In particular, this session started in the aftermath of the United States and Israel announcing that they would boycott the Council by not engaging with it. In addition, on 27 February – the day before the interactive dialogue with the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua, when the HRC was scheduled to discuss the serious human rights violations committed by the State apparatus, including executions, torture and arbitrary detentions – Nicaraguaannounced its decision to withdraw from the Council.
Accountability
The ICJ regrets the attempts by some countries at this session to undermine accountability mechanisms by presenting them as political tools purportedly interfering in the internal affairs of the States concerned and encroaching upon their sovereignty. The human rights organization recalls that such spurious arguments contradict the international human rights law obligations freely agreed upon and undertaken by States and disregard the fact that, as the 1993 Vienna Declaration states, “the promotion and protection of all human rights is a legitimate concern of the international community”.
With regards to the situation in Syria following the fall of the Assad regime, the need for accountability was high on the HRC’s agenda throughout the 58th session. ….In this regard, the ICJ particularly welcomes the adoption of the resolution on the situation in Syria, which encouraged the interim authorities to grant the COI necessary access throughout the country and to cooperate closely with the Commission. The ICJ also notes the authorities’ declared commitment to investigating the recent spate of violations and abuses, including through the newly established fact-finding committee to investigate the events in the west of the Syrian Arab Republic in March 2025. In this connection, the human rights organization called for investigations to be demonstrably independent, prompt, transparent and impartial…
As usual, a number of country situations were not on the agenda of the Council but would actually require much greater scrutiny. At the 58th session, the ICJ expressed particular concern on the situation in Tunisiaand Eswatiniamong others, where attacks on independent judges and lawyers are a key manifestation of deepening authoritarianism in these countries…
The impact of the liquidity crisis and the withdrawal of critical support was also discussed during informal negotiations on the resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. While in the end the resolution is short, there was much debate about specific phrasing concerning the resources provided to the mandate. The ICJ participated in the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur, stressing the need for coordination and cooperation between civil society and regional systems to address counterterrorism laws that violate human rights and fundamental freedoms of civil society actors, highlighting in particular the situations in Venezuela and Eswatini. The ICJ reiterated the importance of the Special Rapporteur being adequately resourced in order to fully address these challenges.
Although the preferred job location is Bangkok, Thailand (Hybrid), remote work is possible for candidates with the legal right to work in their country, provided the location aligns with the organization’s operational and budgetary considerations.
Start date: March 2025 – Closing date 16 Feb 2025
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is a worldwide organization of judges and lawyers united in affirming international law and rule of law principles that advance human rights. Its strategic goals for 2021-2025 are: (1) to develop, defend, and strengthen international institutions, instruments, and standards on rule of law and human rights; (2) to improve domestic implementation of, and compliance with, international law and standards; (3) to bolster the effectiveness and independence of judges and lawyers; and (4) to improve access to justice for all and accountability. Headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, ICJ has a presence in Africa, Latin America, Asia & the Pacific, Europe & Central Asia, and the Middle East.
To lead the implementation of the ICJ’s work on human rights in the digital space at the global and regional levels, we are seeking a full-time Legal Adviser. Key requirements for this role include expertise and working experience related to human rights in the digital space, excellent legal skills and sound political judgment, and proven ability to develop and carry out legal advocacy strategies.
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES
Reporting directly to the Senior Director, Legal and Policy Office, the Legal Adviser is expected to:
• Provide leadership and contribute to the design and implementation of ICJ work related to human rights in the digital space, including the work at the country, regional and global levels;
• Lead and implement work on a global project aimed at developing policy and legal action on protecting human rights in the digital civic space;
• Implement the programme work on human rights in digital space in a way that advances the strategic directions of the ICJ.
REQUIREMENTS
University degree in law with advanced studies in international human rights law.
Proven experience working in the area of international human rights law.
Expertise and working experience related to human rights in the digital space, including in the areas of freedom of expression, right to privacy, non-discrimination and equality, sexual and gender-based violence, and human rights and businesses enterprises.
Excellent legal skills and sound political judgment and proven ability to develop and carry out legal advocacy strategies.
Advanced expertise in general international human rights law
Practical legal and advocacy experience on the implementation of international human rights standards; litigation experience desirable.
English native speaker level; knowledge of Spanish, French, and/or Arabic an asset.
Demonstrated analytic and writing ability, including substantial report-writing experience;
Excellent written and oral communication skills;
Excellent interpersonal skills and ability to work as part of a multi-cultural team;
Demonstrated commitment to human rights and the rule of law;
Availability to start in March 2025 is required.
How to apply
Interested applicants should provide the materials outlined below to recruitment@icj.org by 16 February 2025, midnight Central European Time (CET). Early applications are encouraged as they will be reviewed on a rolling basis, the ICJ reserves the right to close this vacancy earlier if a sufficient number of quality applications has been received.
The first World Congress on Enforced Disappearances will convene from 15 – 16 January in Geneva, marking a pivotal step in the global fight to prevent and eradicate this egregious human rights violation.
This event will bring together governments, victims, civil society organisations, and international bodies to foster dialogue and chart a collective path forward to end enforced disappearances worldwide. Over the course of the two-day event, panel discussions will be held on topics such as international responsibility for the forcibly disappeared, strengthening search procedures, and protecting victims, rights defenders, lawyers and journalists.
Details of the programme are available online. The event will take place at the Geneva International Conference Centre (CICG). Onsite registration is open at the venue.
The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances comprises five independent experts from all regions of the world. The Chair-Rapporteur is Ms. Gabriella Citroni (Italy); and the Vice-Chair is Ms. Grażyna Baranowska (Poland); other members are Aua Balde (Guinea-Bissau); Ms. Ana Lorena Delgadillo Perez (Mexico); and Mr. Mohammed Al-Obaidi (Iraq).
On 28 November, 2024 the International Commission of Jurists announced Carlos Ayala as its new President
Ayala brings decades of experience defending the rule of law, advocating for constitutional justice, and championing the rights of marginalized groups
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) proudly welcomes Carlos Ayala as its new President, taking over from Robert Goldman after seven years in the role. A distinguished legal scholar and human rights advocate, Ayala brings decades of experience defending the rule of law, advocating for constitutional justice, and championing the rights of marginalized groups.
Ayala, born in Caracas in 1957, has dedicated his career to advancing human rights. From his early days as a law student at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, Ayala developed a profound sense of defending rights and social justice, which he carried through his graduate legal studies at Georgetown University and later in his legal practice. He is tenured professor and chair of Constitutional Law and a member of the board of the Ibero-American Institute of Constitutional Law. His commitment has spanned defending indigenous land rights in Venezuela to addressing transitional justice issues across Latin America. Notably, Ayala was instrumental in the landmark decision against blanket amnesty laws for human rights violators in Peru, a victory that set critical international legal precedents.
He has been President of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, as well as Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of the Americas, and President of the Andean Commission of Jurists, giving him a vision of the human rights landscape that takes in the whole hemisphere of Americas from Alaska to Tierra Del Fuego.
Ayala has worked extensively on issues relating to the independence of the judiciary and he became involved with the OHCHR in monitoring the appointment of judges of several high courts. He states that one of the cases that impacted him most has been that of Venezuelan Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni, who was arrested and detained after making a ruling that implemented a decision of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions which was not in the political interest of the government. She was immediately arrested and her trial lasted 10 years, was a flawed process throughout and ended in a flawed decision to convict.
As President, Ayala envisions the ICJ working as a unified community with other partners and allies committed to reinforcing the rule of law and international justice. Under his guidance, he will support the ICJ to advance human rights standards globally, counter setbacks, and provide critical support to governments, civil society, and multilateral institutions.
“We are facing new threats to reverse the advancement of human rights that we have achieved in the past 70 years – we need to defend against unilateralism and authoritarianism. The ICJ has been actively contributing to stop any setback in international standards, and we will continue this essential work.”
I am not a professional obituary writer, but I surely wished I were, as writing about my dear friend Leah Levin deserves the best possible skills. Fortunately, I received some excellent input from her caring family of which I am making good use. A celebration of Leah’s life will be held by the family on 13 June, 4 pm BST which can also be followed online.
Leah Levin, was a well-known figure in the international human rights movement of the 1970’s and onwards. She died of cardiac arrest on 25 May, 2024, at the formidable age of 98. For over half a century, she served and led a range of human rights organisations and collaborated globally with some of the world’s leading activists. For which she received an honorary doctorate from the University of Essex in 1992 and an OBE in 2001.
She was the author of UNESCO’s “Human Rights: Questions and Answers”, one of the world’s most widely disseminated books on human rights, (translated into more than 30 languages).
From 1982-1992, she was director of JUSTICE, a pioneering organisation that sought to right miscarriages of justice and which was a national section of the International Commission of Jurists . She served as a board member or trustee of the United Nations Association, the Anti-Slavery Society, International Alert, Redress, Readers International and The International Journal of Human Rights. But most of all, I remember her from the work she did to make sure that we would not forget one of our most impressive friends: Martin Ennals, who had led Amnesty from 1968 to 1980 and had been one of her closest friends until his death in 1981. [see his biography in the Encyclopedia of Human Rights, OUP, 2009, Vol 2, pp 135-138].
Frances D’Souza, said about Leah: “without any pretension she was nearly always right. She hit the nail on the head whether dealing with world affairs or people. She made a significant difference by her wise counsel and fact that she could really see what the issues were, read the situation and do something about it.”
Leah Levin had the special talent to draw other like-minded people to her and help coalesce a community of activists with whom she would collaborate throughout her entire life.
Her own life story is one of human rights struggle: Leah was born Sarah Leah Kacev on 1 April 1926 in Lithuania. She grew up as Leah Katzeff in Piketberg, South Africa, a small, rural town in Western Cape to where the family had to flee to escape poverty and anti-Semitism in the difficult years after the First World War and Russian revolution. Leah was the first of four children and the first person in her family to go to university. She graduated in 1945, when at the end of the second world war, the Katzeffs found out that their family along with their entire Jewish community in Mazeikiai, had been murdered by local Lithuanians organized by the Germans in the very first days of the Nazi advance in 1941.
In 1947 she married Archie Levin, fifteen years her senior. Like Leah, Archie was the child of European Jewish immigrants. Together they set up a new business, writing travel guides to Central and Southern Africa. In 1960, disgusted by the repression of anti-apartheid protest, the couple moved to the British colony of Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) with their two children Michal and Jeremy. A third son, David, was born in Salisbury (now Harare).
In Rhodesia, Leah completed a second degree in international relations at the University of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, while her husband became politically active. His activities angered those in power; shortly before Rhodesia unilaterally declared independence. Archie was tipped off that he was likely to be arrested. He rapidly left for the UK with his daughter Michal and later was joined by his son Jeremy; a few months later, Leah and her infant son David joined the rest of the family in the UK.
In London, Leah found a volunteer post as Secretary of the newly founded United Nations Association. The UNA human rights committee brought together people who became lifelong friends as well as colleagues: Martin Ennals, Sir Nigel Rodney, Amnesty’s first legal officer and later UN rapporteur on torture, and Kevin Boyle, who ran the Human Rights Centre of the University of Essex. After the death in 1977 of her husband Archie, Leah threw herself still more wholeheartedly into human rights work. In 1978, she took a job as Secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society, which connected her to the United Nations in Geneva. And in 1982 she moved to run JUSTICE for a decade. In 1992, she co-founded Redress, representing victims of torture to obtain justice and reparation for them.
Even when fully retired Leah continued to keep an active interest in children and grandchildren as well as her human rights “children”. I will bitterly miss her almost yearly phone calls to check on me to make sure I am doing the right thing.
The Human Rights Council should urgently address the deterioration of the human rights situation in Tunisia, four human rights organizations said on 27 June 2023 as the 53rd Council’s session is underway.
In a letter sent to UN Member States’ Representatives on 5 June 2023, the four undersigned organizations warned against the rapidly worsening situation in Tunisia, and urged States to seize the opportunity of the ongoing Human Rights Council’s session to address it. The organizations called on the Council and Member States to press the Tunisian authorities to comply with their obligations under international human rights law particularly those guaranteeing the rights to fair trial, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and non-discrimination.
The Human Rights Council should urge Tunisia to end the ongoing crackdown on peaceful dissent and freedom of expression, and drop charges against, and release, all individuals being detained and prosecuted solely on the basis of their peaceful political activities and the exercise of their human rights. The Council should also call on Tunisia to conduct prompt, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent and investigation into a wave of anti-Black violence – including assaults and summary evictions – against Black African foreign nationals, including migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, and bring to justice anyone reasonably suspected to be responsible, and provide victims with access to justice and effective remedies.
Over the past two years, Tunisia has witnessed a significant rollback on human rights. Judicial independence guarantees have been dismantled and individual judges and prosecutors have been subjected to arbitrary dismissal, politicized criminal prosecutions and increased interference by the executive. Lawyers are being prosecuted for the discharge of their professional duties and exercise of their right to freedom of expression.
‘The Tunisian authorities’ interference in the judiciary and attacks on lawyers have greatly undermined the right to fair trial and public trust in the integrity of the justice system. The authorities must ensure that the courts are not weaponized to crush dissent and free expression,’ said International Commission of Jurists’ MENA director Said Benarbia.
Under the guise of ‘fighting offences related to information and communication systems’, punishable by up to a 10 years’ imprisonment and a hefty fine according to Decree Law 54, at least 13 individuals, including journalists, political opponents, lawyers, human rights defenders and activists, have been subject to police or judicial investigations and are facing possible prosecutions.
‘With Tunisia facing political uncertainty and economic crisis, it’s more important than ever that Tunisians be free to debate their country’s future without fear of reprisal. The authorities should strive to allow the effective enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression of everyone; instead, they are attacking it,’ said Rawya Rageh, Amnesty International’s acting deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa.
Last week, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called on the Tunisian authorities to stop restricting media freedoms and criminalizing independent journalism. In a statement published on 23 June, Volker Türk expressed deep concern at the increasing restrictions on the right to freedom of expression and press freedom in Tunisia, noting that vague legislation is being used to criminalize independent journalism and stifle criticism of the authorities. ‘It is troubling to see Tunisia, a country that once held so much hope, regressing and losing the human rights gains of the last decade,’ said the High Commissioner.
Since February 2023, a wave of arrests targeted political opponents and perceived critics of Tunisia’s President, Kais Saied. In the absence of credible evidence of any offences, judges are investigating at least 48 people, such as dissidents, opposition figures, and lawyers, for allegedly conspiring against the State or threatening State security, among other charges. At least 17 of them are being investigated under Tunisia’s 2015 counter-terrorism law.
‘By jailing political leaders and banning opposition meetings, the authorities are dangerously trampling on the fundamental rights that underpin a vibrant democracy. The democratic backsliding and the human rights violations, which are unprecedented since the 2011 revolution, require urgent attention from the Human Rights Council and Member States,’ said Salsabil Chellali, Tunisia director at Human Rights Watch.
Santiago Cantón, secretary general of the International Commission of Jurists. (Geneva Solutions/Michelle Langrand)
On 11 May 2023 Geneva Solutions carried an interview with the incoming Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists:
The new head of the International Commission of Jurists warns of the challenges human rights face as democracies across the world falter and calls on human rights groups to rally behind a new purpose. After spending the last few years in the United States, Santiago Cantón, the Argentinian jurist who recently became the new secretary general of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), will call Geneva his home for the next five years.
The discreet organisation of well-respected judges and lawyers, located in the Paquis neighbourhood and now celebrating its 70th anniversary, is almost as old as the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Born from the ashes of World War II initially to investigate abuses committed in the Soviet part of post-war Germany, the group has made vital contributions over the decades to the human rights architecture. Most notably, they helped push for the creation of an international criminal court and several UN human rights instruments, including the Convention on Enforced Disappearances, first proposed by its then-president Niall MacDermot.
Cantón, 60, also brings with him some heavy baggage of experience in human rights. He was the executive secretary from 2001 to 2012 of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, one of the arms of the Organization of American States tasked with reviewing rights abuses. Before that, Cantón served as the commission’s first special rapporteur on freedom of expression from 1998 to 2001. More recently, Cantón was part of the UN Human Rights Council’s commission of inquiry on abuses committed in the occupied Palestinian territories during the 2018 protests.
As a young student, Cantón saw his country fall into the clutches of a military junta that would rule ruthlessly for ten years. While initially drawn to diplomacy and foreign relations, Cantón knew it wasn’t an option to place his skills at the service of a dictatorship. He opted instead to study international law and human rights.
One of his first experiences, and the one to inspire him the most, was advising former US president Jimmy Carter in his democracy programmes in Latin America, most notably supporting elections in Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic in 1990 at a time when the two countries were emerging from bloody conflicts and transitioning into democracies. He saw the region break away from the chains of military regimes and usher in a new era of democracy and rule of law. “1948, with the universal declaration of human rights, was the big bang of human rights,” he told Geneva Solutions. “Since then, the architecture of human rights created throughout the world has been extraordinary.”
But the tides have turned. “Human rights are in decline and have been since the beginning of the century,” he regretted.
For Cantón, part of it is due to a lack of leadership. “We don’t have the same leaders in the world, and the governments that support human rights today, do not have the leadership they need to have for political reasons.” He said long gone are the Raúl Alfonsín of Argentina, Fernando Henrique Cardoso of Brazil and Patricio Aylwin of Chile, leaders who stood up for democratic values following their countries’ exit from military rule.
“You do have leadership on the wrong side. And they’re winning,” he added. He cited the leaders of El Salvador and Mexico, as well as Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro and the US’s Donald Trump, as examples of how populist leaders have successfully appealed to disillusioned populations.
“Take El Salvador. Here we have someone that has 70 to 80 per cent of popularity. People (feel) that democracy did not deliver. They are tired and want to change everything completely,” he said. President Nayib Bukele’s recent sweeping crackdown that saw over 60,000 suspected gang members arrested has been praised by many Salvadorians fed up with the violence and insecurity that has gangrened the country for years. And despite the harsh criticism his methods have drawn from human rights campaigners, political figures across the region are flaunting it as a successful model that can be replicated in their own countries.
Cantón cautions against the temptation of wanting to scrap everything. “We cannot just change everything! There are things we need to keep, and human rights is one of those,” he said.
On Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, the usual trio singled out for their authoritarian regimes, Cantón prefers to avoid tired narratives. “it’s not a question of left and right, it’s a question of the strength of the rule of law, and the rule of law is declining,” he observed.
Beyond that, human rights that touch upon issues associated with deeply entrenched cultural values have also been met by a wall of resistance. Cantón hasn’t finished unpacking he has already faced a first crisis. A report published by the ICJ in early March on how to apply human rights standards to criminal law was falsely accused across the internet of condoning sex between adults and minors. For Cantón, the world is increasingly polarised, and he views social media as a significant contributing factor. “It’s hard to find the middle ground, and when things are so polarised, they keep getting pushed harder towards two crazy extremes.”
But governments are not the only ones that need to do some soul-searching. Civil society is also struggling to maintain morale, according to Cantón. “It’s very frustrating when you take one step forward, and you have to go back like ten steps,” he said. For the past years, human rights groups have been on the defence, trying to protect hard-won advances. “We need to mobilise the human rights community again, strongly behind something,” he said.
One of the initiatives the ICJ is working on is the creation of a standing independent mechanism to investigate rights violations. UN-backed probe mechanisms are usually set up on a case-by-case basis and have been accused of being selective and politically motivated. The group of lawyers suggests that such a permanent expert body, created through the Human Rights Council or the General Assembly, could help by making it easier to trigger investigations.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 