Several readers of this blog, who are very concerned with the situation in Iran, wonder whether the human rights world is paying enough attention. There is no agreed criterion for measuring and – for sure – what the UN and NGOs can do is anyway limited. Still, just to give an idea here a list of recent links:
Several media (such as the CSR Journal and Barrons) and NGO (Frontline) talk about the case of human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband and fellow lawyer Hadi Ali Chattha who were sentenced 10-year-jail by an Islamabad court on 24 January 2026 over anti-state social media posts. However, the pressure and arrest haven’t been able to silence her voice. She said to media agencies, “We will not back down. Truth seems overwhelmingly difficult in this country. But we knew that when we got into this work, we’re ready to face that,”. Mazari noted that the prison term won’t dent her resolve.
Imaan Mazari is a 32-year-old human rights lawyer from Pakistan who rose to fame for fighting some of the most sensitive cases and she has been defending ethnic minorities, journalists facing defamation charges and some of her clients have been branded blasphemers. With Mazari’s coming to prominence, so did the charges by the Pakistani government for cyber terrorism and hate speech. As per a court document, Mazari has been disseminating highly offensive content.
Mazari comes from a well-known family, she is the daughter of former minister for human rights, Shireen Mazari, and her late father was one of the top paediatricians of South Asia. Because of her strong determination of fighting back despite all odds, she is being compared to Pakistan’s one of the popular human rights lawyers, late Asma Jahangir. [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/14CC52FE-5F1B-4EF8-B1F5-607ED173AACC]
Mazari is a pro bono lawyer, she has handled some of the most sensitive cases in Pakistan, e.g. enforced disappearances of ethnic Balochs, she defended Mahrang Baloch. She has also taken up blasphemy cases.
Last year, the UN special rapporteur for human rights defenders said, “Cases against her appear to reflect an arbitrary use of the legal system to harass and intimidate”. She was first targeted in a press conference held sometime in early January, where a military spokesman Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, shared Mazari’s post on X posts and filed a case against her, stating her as, “hidden elements committing subtle crimes. They operate under the guise of democracy and human rights to promote terrorism,”.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino presents President Donald Trump with the FIFA Peace Prize during the FIFA World Cup 2026 Final Draw at John F. Kennedy IMAGES via Reuters Connect…Show more
This blog has a special interest in human rights awards, so it should not fail to mention the big surprise which occurred when FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association), the worldwide governing body of soccer, gave President Donald Trump its first-ever prize for global peace. An investigation by the Times of London has revealed that the White House not only knew well in advance the honor was coming but also made demands about its size and style of presentation.
“FIFA’s so-called peace prize is being awarded against a backdrop of violent detentions of immigrants, national guard deployments in US cities, and the obsequious cancellation of FIFA’s own anti-racism and anti-discrimination campaigns,” said Minky Worden, who oversees sport for Human Rights Watch. “There is still time to honor FIFA’s promises for a World Cup not tainted by human rights abuses, but the clock is ticking.”
Trump’s message to Jonas Gahr Støre appears to ratchet up a standoff between Washington and its closest allies over his threats to take over Greenland, a self-governing territory of NATO member Denmark. On Saturday, Trump announced a 10% import tax starting in February on goods from eight nations that have rallied around Denmark and Greenland, including Norway.
At the end of 2025 the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), one of the world’s oldest human rights movements and Human Rights Watch were declared “undesirable” by the Russian Federation. For FIDH the designation was made by the Prosecutor General of Russia on 13 November, and on 1 December, Russia’s Ministry of Justice included FIDH in its register of “undesirable organizations“, which currently contains 281 entities, including several FIDH members, such as the Center for Civil Liberties (CCL), the Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC), the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR), and Truth Hounds.
“This ignoble move not only further threatens and endangers our Russian members, partners, their staff, and ordinary Russian citizens supporting our human rights work. It also sends a clear message that Russia is no friend of the global human rights movement“, said Alexis Deswaef, FIDH President. “This designation of FIDH as an ‘undesirable organisation’ demonstrates the importance of our commitment to supporting those who defend human rights, whether in Russia or in exile. FIDH will continue to pursue this commitment more than ever.”
Under the “undesirable organisations” law, adopted in 2015 and further tightened in 2021 and 2024, the Prosecutor General’s Office has the power to declare as “undesirable” any foreign or international organisation that is deemed “a threat to the foundations of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation, the defense capability of the country or the security of the state“.
Concretely, “undesirable organisations” are banned from engaging in any activities inside Russia, including the publication or dissemination of any information, carrying out financial transactions, and providing financial or other assistance to local organisations and individuals. The “participation in the activities” of an “undesirable organisation” is subject to administrative and criminal liability, including up to four years of imprisonment. Any Russian citizen or organisation cooperating with an “undesirable organisation“, even if residing outside Russia, faces administrative penalties and, in the case of individuals, criminal liability. In practice, the vague wording of the law has led to the punishment of individuals simply for reposting information disseminated by an “undesirable organisation” on social media platforms, even if the original posts predated the organisation’s designation as “undesirable“.
“For over three decades, Human Rights Watch’s work on post-Soviet Russia has pressed the government to uphold human rights and freedoms,” said Philippe Bolopion, executive director at Human Rights Watch. “Our work hasn’t changed, but what’s changed, dramatically, is the government’s full-throttled embrace of dictatorial policies, its staggering rise in repression, and the scope of the war crimes its forces are committing in Ukraine.”
The Prosecutor General’s Office made the decision to ban Human Rights Watch on November 10, as follows from the Ministry of Justice’s register of “undesirable” organizations updated today. The official reasons for the designation are not known.
On 24 July, Russia’s Ministry of Justice added the Norwegian-Russian organisation SmåRådina (SmåRådina: for Democracy in Russia) to the register of “undesirable” organisations. The Russian authorities have not publicly explained the reasons for the decision.
As mass repression of protests and dissent dramatically intensifies in Iran amidst an almost complete communications shutdown, the Free Narges Coalition and more than 30 undersigned organisations (including FIDH and OMCT in the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Humans Rights Defenders) called on 15 January 2026 for urgent and concrete actions to circumvent internet censorship, as well as raising alarm regarding the grave threats to existing and newly-arrested detainees, particularly those jailed for their human rights work, journalism, expression, activism, or peaceful assembly.
Iran is facing one of the most severe periods of repression in its recent history. Protests that began in Tehran’s Grand Bazar on December 28 against the collapse of the national currency grew in size and scope until authorities completely turned off Iran’s internet access to the outside world and began a more severe crackdown on January 8. Shocking images of dead protesters, doctors’ reports of overflowing hospitals and the lethal use of military-grade weapons and live ammunition, and the absence of access for journalists and independent media, have led to desperation of families missing loved ones, as well as grave concerns around the safety of thousands of those injured or detained. Human rights organisations and international media have been able to verify the killing of over 2,500 protesters, including children under the age of 18, and thousands injured, some severely while almost twenty thousand confirmed arrested. With the majority of the killings occurring since 8 January, amid a full-blown digital blackout that has made further verification impossible, current reports estimate the number of killings to be much higher, likely amounting to more than 6,000.
Meanwhile, in official statements, Tehran’s Prosecutor General has described protesters as vandals and threatened they will face moharebe (waging war against God), a charge that is punishable by death under Islamic Penal law. State media have also reported mass arrests of individuals they label as “rioters.”
According to NetBlocks, Iran has now experienced more than 140 hours of near-total internet shutdown since January 8. Such communications blackouts severely restrict access to independent reporting and sharing of essential and life-saving information, and create conditions in which grave human rights violations can be committed with impunity. Prior to the shutdown, human rights defenders and known dissidents both inside and outside of Iran had reported receiving threats, as authorities have attempted to suppress expressions of support for the protests online.
In this context, both recent and long-standing detainees–including human rights defenders, journalists, writers, and artists–face an acute and often overlooked risk. Past patterns in Iran demonstrate that periods of widespread unrest are accompanied by heightened abuses inside detention facilities, where these groups are particularly vulnerable to extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, torture, and other forms of ill-treatment. Those held in solitary confinement and denied contact with the outside world are at especially high risk.
Among those recently detained are prominent figures from Iran’s civil society, including Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Narges Mohammadi, Sepideh Gholian, Alieh Motalebzadeh, Javad Alikordi, Hasti Amiri, Pooran Nazemi, and other human rights defenders and journalists. They were violently arrested following the memorial ceremony for lawyer Khosrow Alikordi on 12 December in Mashhad, and have been held in solitary confinement, their whereabouts and condition unknown, for more than one month. Narges Mohammadi has been denied access to legal counsel and contact with her family, apart from a brief phone call on 14 December when she reported severe ill-treatment, including beatings to her head and neck with batons, as well as threats of further violence. On January 6, before the total internet shutdown, journalist and human rights defender Alieh Motalebzadeh, who has been diagnosed with cancer, was able to call her family. Her daughter reported in a video message that she did not sound well, stating that the detainees are under severe pressure. She was released on bail following deterioration of her health on 12 January. The health condition of Pouran Nazemi is reported to be dire while she remains detained. Narges Mohammadi has been hospitalized for three days after her violent arrest and arbitrary detention since 12 December. Due to the ongoing communications blackout, the families and lawyers have not been able to be in contact with them, including to inquire if their 30 day arbitrary detention order has been extended or not.
We, the undersigned organisations, express our deep concern over the escalation of the killing of protesters, as well as the serious risk of arbitrary legal charges, punishable by the death penalty, against those detained. We stress that the lives and safety of those more vulnerable under detention in Iran must not be forgotten. Human rights defenders, journalists, writers, artists, and those prosecuted due their exercise of freedom of assembly and expression are at the forefront of the peaceful struggle for fundamental human rights. They must be protected and immediately and unconditionally released, and we call for immediate actions from the international community to halt the escalating violations of human rights and humanity.
As reports of mass arrests, killings, and widespread violence continue to escalate, we stand in full solidarity with the people of Iran in their legitimate struggle for fundamental freedoms and democratic rights. We urge the international community to take urgent and concrete actions to prevent further loss of life and to ensure that Iran uphold its international human rights obligations, including through:
Immediate and unconditional release of all those jailed in Iran for their peaceful activism or expression, including Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Narges Mohammadi, as well as human rights and women’s rights defenders, civil society activists, journalists, lawyers, writers, artists, representatives of religious and ethnic minorities, environmental and labour defenders, students, and all others detained or at risk for exercising their fundamental rights.
Immediate restoration of full and unrestricted access to internet and telecommunications services, and an end to nationwide information blackouts that censor news reporting, facilitate repression, block the transmission of essential and life-saving communications including for medical personnel, and impede documentation of human rights violations.
Independent, impartial, and transparent investigations into killings, torture, lethal use of force by security agents, enforced disappearances, and other serious human rights violations committed in the context of the ongoing protests, with a view to ensuring accountability in line with international law.
As every hour of inaction increases the risk of irreversible loss of human life and gross violations of human rights. The international community must act urgently to protect the detainees, ensure their safety and rights, and prevent further violations under international law.
50 civil society organizations, urge the UN Human Rights Council to urgently convene a special session to address an unprecedented escalation in mass unlawful killings of protesters, amidst an ongoing internet shutdown imposed since 8 January to conceal grave human rights violations and crimes under international law by Iranian authorities. see:
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/
Sarah Bireete was arrested on December 30, 2025, after police and military personnel surrounded her home in Kampala. Shortly before her arrest, she posted on X, “My house is under siege by police and army”. As reported by East and Horn of Africa Election Observation Network (E-HORN) on 2 January 2026
The Police Reforms Working Group (PRWG) Kenya has called for the immediate release of Uganda’s human rights lawyer and civil society leader, Dr Sarah Bireete, warning that her detention ahead of the January elections threatens civic space and undermines democratic processes.
The Uganda Police confirmed her arrest in a brief social media post, stating she would be produced in court “in due course”. Police spokesperson Rachel Kawaala described the detention as part of “ongoing operations” but offered no further details.
“Dr Bireete is widely recognised for her unwavering passion for the protection of civil liberties, her lifelong quest for justice, and her steadfast commitment to democracy, a clarion call that has consistently advanced accountable governance across the region,” the Group said.
Bireete currently serves as Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), Chairperson of the East Africa Civil Society Forum (EACSOF), and Chairperson of the Horn of Africa Election Observers Network (E-HORN).
PRWG Kenya described these roles as reflective of her integrity, credibility and long-standing contributions to human rights, electoral integrity and democratic governance.
The group urged Ugandan authorities to respect civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic processes.
“Respect for civil liberties, rule of law and democratic processes is fundamental to ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections,” PRWG Kenya said.
The statement also highlighted that Uganda’s constitution, under Article 23, guarantees that anyone arrested must be promptly informed of the reasons for their detention, a step that has not been followed in Dr Bireete’s case.
Bireete’s arrest follows her recent advocacy for Starlink, a satellite internet service operated by SpaceX, as a safeguard against potential internet shutdowns during the elections.
In a post dated December 23, 2025, she wrote, “Dear Ugandans, are you thinking of ways to navigate internet shutdown during elections? Starlink got you covered.”
As the country approaches general elections on 15 January 2026, UN experts* today warned that the pervasive climate of fear in Uganda, marked by allegations of enforced disappearance, the use of disproportionate force against political opposition supporters, and the intensified suppression of civil society and independent media, is not conducive to peaceful elections.
but on 28 June 2026, Dr. Sarah Bireete was abducted for approximately three hours and subsequently released without explanation. This abduction was preceded by two separate military raids on her home, first on 28 December 2025, and then again on 25 June 2026. Front Line Defenders believes these acts are directly linked to her legitimate and peaceful human rights work, and is gravely concerned about the repeated targeting of the women human rights defender.
Are you a human rights defender working on democratic backsliding and/or racial justice, keen to use the UN to push for change at home? If so, apply for the 2026 edition of ISHR’s flagship training, the Human Rights Defender Advocacy Programme (HRDAP)!
After a successful edition in 2025, ISHR is pleased to launch the new call for applications for the 2026 Human Rights Defender Advocacy Programme (HRDAP26), which will take place both remotely and in Geneva and will be focused on thematic and context area! Below are some important dates to consider before applying:
Mandatory distance learning course: 13 April – 8 June 2026 (part time)
In-person course in Geneva: 10- 20 June 2026 (full time)
Deadline to apply: 15 January 2026, midnight CET (Geneva Time)
Programme description with all related information can be downloaded here.
For the last 10 years, this flagship training has equipped human rights defenders with the knowledge and skills to integrate the UN human rights system into their existing work at the national level in a strategic manner.
Following an external review of the programme in 2024, as well as to maximise impact and enhance follow-up, for 2026 the HRDAP selection criteria are evolving: they are based on 2 themes focused on context area and thematic advocacy, according to ISHR’ strategic priorities and opportunities at the UN: democratic backsliding and racial justice. The HRDAP themes will change annually (see the criteria below and the programme description for more details).[see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/11/27/ishrs-training-for-human-rights-defenders-2025/]
12 participants will be selected for the 2026 edition of HRDAP.
What are HRDAP objectives?
By participating in the programme, defenders will:
gain knowledge and tools, which they can use to ensure their voice is central in international human rights decision-making
explore and compare the benefits of engagement with the Human Rights Council, the Special Procedures, the OHCHR, the Universal Periodic Review and the Treaty Bodies, and examine how they can use them to bolster their work at the national level
develop networks, strategies and advocacy techniques to increase the potential of their national and regional advocacy work.
How is HRDAP organised?
HRDAP topics
Defenders will complete a 10-week hybrid learning programme through a participatory approach, which will include:
accessing the HRDAP Platform, where they can complete e-learning courses on each key UN human rights mechanism and on advocacy strategies, and access interactive learning materials and case studies on the ISHR Academy
taking part in live Q&A sessions with human rights experts
receiving continuous advocacy support and personalised coaching in order to develop concrete advocacy objectives to make strategic use of the international human rights system
building networks around the world, and learning from peers from a range of regions working on a range of human rights issues
applying their knowledge to case-studies scenarios and enhancing their advocacy toolbox according to their specific needs
receiving support and advocacy accompaniment to conduct activities during the 62nd and 63rd Human Rights Council sessions and other relevant opportunities.
Participants will have the unique opportunity to apply their knowledge and skills while being in Geneva as well as to meet and share with their peers and experts. The blended format of the course allows defenders to continue their vital work on the ground, while diving into the inner workings of each key UN human rights mechanism and gaining first-hand experience from advocates and UN staff on how civil society can strategically engage in the international human rights space.
What are the criteria and themes for selection?
This programme is directed at experienced human rights defenders working in non-governmental organisations, with existing advocacy experience at the national level and some prior knowledge of the international human rights system. In 2026, we will select human rights defenders working on democratic backsliding and racial justice.
Defenders working in contexts of democratic backsliding
This theme is for human rights defenders working in democratic countries where authoritarian practices are gaining ground.
We particularly welcome applications from defenders who are:
pushing back against repressive laws, attacks on free expression, or restrictions on the freedom of peaceful assembly and association
documenting abuses linked to police and military violence, arbitrary arrests, surveillance, or harassment
fighting for justice, transparency, and the rule of law, and refusing to let democratic institutions be dismantled without accountability.
Defenders working on racial justice
This thematic is for defenders working to dismantle systemic racism and build societies rooted in equality and dignity. We will select applications from defenders focusing on anti-racism, exclusion and police violence, including anti-Black racism as experienced through legacies of colonialism and the Transatlantic Trade in Enslaved Africans, Indigenous (including Afro-Indigenous) communities working on historical injustice and reparations, as well as defenders of migrants and asylum seekers. We also welcome applications from mothers working for accountability for their children, victims of police violence.
Nathalia Bonilla is an environmental human rights defender from Ecuador who works in the protection of the rights of Nature. She told ISHR about her country’s sharp policy turn in favour of extractive activities and spoke about the ‘utopia’ she and her peers would like to see in its place. ‘A revolution where you can’t dance is not my revolution,’ Nathalia said, in arguing for an ‘environmentalism for the people’.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 