UN independent experts on 26 May 2025 expressed grave concern over the continued detention of Anar Mammadli, a prominent Azerbaijani human rights defender who was arbitrarily detained on 29 April last year. “Defending human rights should never be considered a crime,” the experts said.
Anar Mammadli, Chair of the Election Monitoring and Democracy Studies Centre (EMDS), was arrested on 29 April 2024 amid what experts describe as a growing clampdown on critical voices and independent election observers in Azerbaijan. His arrest came shortly after EMDS reported irregularities during the February 2024 presidential elections, and after he participated in events at the UN Human Rights Council.
On 28 June 2024, the experts wrote to the Azerbaijani authorities to raise serious concerns about Mammadli’s alleged arbitrary detention, warrantless searches, restricted access to legal counsel, deteriorating health conditions in detention and a smear campaign reportedly targeting him in retaliation for his legitimate human rights work.
“There are serious concerns that Mammadli’s detention and prosecution may be in retaliation for his human rights work and his engagement with UN mechanisms,” they said.
The Azerbaijani Government responded by denying the allegations, stating that Anar Mammadli was under investigation for smuggling and money laundering. According to their response, he has been provided with all necessary legal rights and medical care during his detention.
The experts are still concerned about the legal proceedings, especially given Mammadli’s previous imprisonment in 2013, which the European Court of Human Rights deemed unlawful and politically motivated. Despite the Court’s 2018 judgment requiring Azerbaijan to quash the conviction and restore Mammadli’s civil and political rights, these remedies have allegedly not been implemented.
The experts will continue to monitor the case, particularly with regard to any potential connection to reprisals for engagement with UN human rights mechanisms.
The value of human rights awards was once again demonstrated by the reaction of the Nicaraguan Government which withdrew from the UN cultural body. The Nicaraguan authorities justified their decision by denouncing the award as the “diabolical expression of a traitorous anti-patriotic sentiment” of La Prensa, which they accuse of promoting “military and political interventions by the United States in Nicaragua.” The Nicaraguan government denounced UNESCO’s decision, saying it gives prominence to “the traitors, slaves and lackeys of colonialism and imperialism,” adding the organization “totally abandons any sense of objectivity.
UNESCO director-general Audrey Azoulay said on Sunday that she “regrets” the country’s decision, adding that it would “deprive the people of Nicaragua of the benefits of cooperation, particularly in the fields of education and culture.” The organization is “fully within its mandate” of defending freedom of expression and freedom of the press, Azoulay said.
In the past weeks and months, Russian and Ukrainian human rights activists have been focusing on negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Back in January, human rights activists and the People First campaign raised several issues to parties involved in ongoing negotiations in the hopes that the negotiations would prioritise those affected by the conflict, particularly prisoners of war, detained Ukrainian citizens, Ukrainian children which have been taken to Russia, and Russian political prisoners.
The invasion of Ukraine was only possible thanks to a system of political repression Russia has inflicted on its own people for decades.
In February, on the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a group of UN special rapporteurs and experts called for parties involved in negotiations to put legal and humanitarian issues at the forefront of discussions. They stressed that the Russian government must be held accountable for its aggression and war crimes in Ukraine committed, and its repressive policies towards its own citizens.
The invasion of Ukraine was only possible thanks to a system of political repression Russia has inflicted on its own people for decades. According to experts, over 3,000 individuals have been persecuted by Russian authorities for political reasons. Despite recent efforts by human rights activists to advocate for person-centred negotiations, it seems more and more doubtful that the focus will be on human rights
—
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has challenged the established system of international relations, which has now proven to be woefully fragile. Most countries see Putin’s decision to unleash outright war on Ukraine as unacceptable. While many democratic countries have continued to provide Ukraine with assistance, this has at times proven insufficient in the face of Russian violence.
Since January, the rejection by the US of legal norms in place since the two world wars has unleashed a new crisis in international politics.
US tactics to repeal basic human rights seem eerily familiar for Russian activists, who have been fighting similar state tactics for the past 25 years.
The new American administration’s policy is increasingly similar to Putin’s own tactics. Both favour the “right of the strong”, whereby great powers can decide the fate of others and dictate conditions. The US has shown itself to be less interested in international law, making it increasingly easy for norms to be overlooked.
US tactics to repeal basic human rights seem eerily familiar for Russian activists, who have been fighting similar state tactics for the past 25 years. Russians knew a world without regard for international human rights or legal norms long before 2025, or the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
For 25 years, Putin’s government has created a country which prioritises the interests of the state and denies basic human rights.
What is happening in the US is recognisable to many Russians.
By wanting to end the war in Ukraine and find a quick solution, the US president is effectively equating the aggressor with the victim of aggression.
Negotiations thus far suggest Trump is more likely to ensure Russian interests that are detrimental both to the safety of the Ukrainian people, who have been subjected to aggression and occupation, and to justice and a sustainable peace.
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine was the result of years of human rights violations within Russia and the lack of a response from the international community to these violations.
An unfair peace — a “deal” that contradicts the norms of international law — sets a dangerous precedent. It normalises the war against Ukraine, thereby giving Russia the green light to repeat its aggression and to enact even harsher repressive policies inside Russia.
Such a “deal” is a signal to the whole world, a move towards dangerous instability, reminiscent of the brink of the outbreak of the world wars. Departing from the principles of human rights and international law in peacekeeping practices encourages impunity and will inevitably lead to new wars of aggression. Democracy in many countries will also be at risk, as the new rules of the game will open up opportunities for autocrats and dictators to violate human rights in their countries without regard for international institutions and their international obligations.
No peace without rights
We call on the leaders of all democratic countries, all politicians for whom human rights are not merely empty words, and civil society to take a stand and bring human rights back into international politics.
This is the only way to create reliable conditions for long-term peace in Europe and prevent the emergence of new-large scale military conflicts globally. Otherwise, the world will find itself in a situation where the fate of countries and the people living in them will be decided through wars unleashed by imperialist predators.
We call on all parties taking part in peace negotiations in Ukraine to prioritise the human aspect: the fate of prisoners of war and the protection needed for civilians, including in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine.
We insist that negotiations be based on the fundamental norms of international legal agreements, including the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act, as they define aggression, protect the principle of territorial integrity and sovereignty, and link military and political security with human rights. Without this, it will be impossible to achieve a just and sustainable peace.
The appeal was drafted and signed by members of the the Council of Russian Human Rights Defenders: Galina Arapova, Sergey Davidis, Yury Dzhibladze, Leonid Drabkin, Sergey Krivenko, Sergey Lukashevsky, Karinna Moskalenko, Oleg Orlov, Lev Ponomarev, Alexander Cherkasov, and Yelena Shakhova.
The names of the other Council members who signed the appeal are not given for security reasons.
In a new report, ISHR analyses China’s tactics to restrict access for independent civil society actors in UN human rights bodies. The report provides an analysis of China’s membership of the UN Committee on NGOs, the growing presence of Chinese Government-Organised NGOs (GONGOs), and patterns of intimidation and reprisals by the Chinese government.
In the report, published on 28 April 2025 the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) uncovers the tactics deployed by the Chinese government to restrict access to UN human rights bodies to independent civil society actors and human rights defenders, and intimidate and retaliate against those who do so.
These tactics include using its membership of the UN Committee on NGOs to systematically defer NGO applications, increasing the presence of GONGOs to limit space for independent NGOs and advance pro-government narratives, systematically committing acts of intimidation and reprisals against those seeking to cooperate with the UN, weaponising procedural tactics to silence NGO speakers and threatening diplomats not to meet with them, and opposing reform initiatives and efforts at norm-setting on safe and unhindered civil society participation at the Human Rights Council.
These tactics strongly contrast China’s stated commitment to being a reliable multilateral leader. They stem from the Chinese Party-State’s primary foreign policy objective of shielding itself from human rights criticism and enhancing its international image by restricting and deterring critical civil society voices, crowding out civil society space with GONGOs, and stalling and diverting reform initiatives.
While China is the focus of this report, the issues addressed are systemic. Based on this report’s findings, ISHR puts forward a set of targeted recommendations to UN bodies and Member States, aimed at protecting civil society space from interference and restrictions. The recommendations are designed to strengthen UN processes and prevent any State from manipulating international mechanisms to suppress independent voices. These include:
Reforming the Committee on NGOs to increase transparency, limit abuse of deferrals, and ensure fair access to UN bodies for independent NGOs;
Strengthening protection mechanisms against reprisals, including rapid response to incidents inside UN premises, public accountability for perpetrators, and consistent long-term follow-up on unresolved cases;
Curbing the influence of GONGOs by distinguishing clearly between independent and State-organised NGOs, and better documenting their presence and impact; and,
Strengthening measures at the Human Rights Council and other UN bodies to make civil society participation safer, more inclusive, and less vulnerable to obstruction
The report has been featured prominently in a global investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) launched on 28 April 2025.
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.
Dr. Sabiha Baloch is a woman human rights defender and member of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), a network focused on advocating for the human rights and interests of the Baloch people in Pakistan. Dr. Sabiha Baloch has faced reprisals due to her work, including attacks against her family. Notably, her work as a woman human rights defender has led to the abduction of her brother and relative, who were subsequently released after several months in detention. Dr. Sabiha Baloch has been an integral part of peaceful campaigns against extra judicial killings, enforced disappearances and arbitrary arrests in Balochistan. She was part of the Baloch Long March and the Baloch National Gathering in 2024, which faced severe State reprisals, including violence and arrests. Since March 2025, following the arrest of several leading human rights defenders and members of the BYC, Dr. Sabiha Baloch has continued to document and highlight violations, and demand the release of detained colleagues and protesters.
On 5 April 2025, Pakistani authorities arrested the father of Baloch woman human rights defender Beebow Baloch. He is currently detained at the Hudda District Prison in Balochistan under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Public Order Act (MPO). The woman human rights defender Beebow Baloch has also been held at the same prison under the MPO since her arrest on 22 March 2025.
On 7 April 2025, Pakistani authorities arrested woman human rights defender Gulzadi Baloch in Quetta, Balochistan, with disturbing reports of excessive violence being used during the arrest. For several hours following her arrest, there was no information about her fate or whereabouts, causing serious concerns for her physical and mental safety. She is presently held at the Hudda district prison under the regressive Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) Act, which severely restricts access to bail.
The NGO Frontline demands that Baloch human rights defenders in Pakistan are protected from reprisals, and end their ongoing persecution and punishment in the State, including for exercising their right to free expression and peaceful dissent, under the guise of national security.
Led by Norway, the resolution crucially covers new grounds and further develops States’ obligations to protect human rights defenders in the digital age. It also considers the needs expressed by human rights defenders during the consultative process leading to its negotiation and approval.
For the first time and in a major win for the human rights defenders movement, the resolution includesa reference to the Declaration +25 and is very much in line with its content.
‘The Declaration +25 is a ground-breaking initiative,’ said Phil Lynch, Executive Director at ISHR. ‘Civil society organisations worldwide have united to produce this authoritative articulation of the international legal framework for the protection of human rights defenders. We are very pleased that the Human Rights Council recognised it,’ Lynch added.
For example, the resolution calls on States to forgo the use of biometric mass surveillance and to refrain from or cease the use or transfer of new and emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence applications and spyware to actors that are not liable to operating these in full compliance with international human rights law.
Initially, the resolution included a reference to transnational repression but this was removed in the final version.
‘While we welcome the reference to types of transnational repression referred to in the resolution, we stress that transnational repression is not only about actions taken by a State, but also its proxies, to deter, silence or punish people and groups who engage in dissent, critique or human rights advocacy from abroad, in relation to that State,’ said ISHR’s Lynch and civil society partners in their end of session statement.
Indeed, transnational repression includes acts targeted directly against human rights defenders, journalists or activists, as well as acts targeting them indirectly by threatening their families, representatives or associates. Particularly vulnerable are nationals or former nationals, members of diaspora communities and those living in exile. ISHR will continue to push for States to publicly recognise and acknowledge this form of harassment.
Another lost opportunity is the lack of explicit recognition of the positive role of child human rights defenders in promoting human rights and fostering change in societies, including their active role in the digital space. The resolution also doesn’t tackle the specific challenges and risks they face because of their age and their civic engagement, as highlighted by the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders in her 2024 report.
The resolution fell short of reaffirming States commitments from UNGA A/RES/78/216, to enhance protection measures for child defenders and to provide a safe, enabling and empowering environment for children and young people online and offline.
The negotiation of the resolution was a hard and long process: 12 informal sessions were needed to agree on a text. In a regrettable move, some States presented amendments to the tabled text trying to undermine and weaken it. The text was finally adopted without a vote.
OHCHR is now mandated to convene three regional workshops and a report to assess risks created by digital technologies to human rights defenders and best practices to respond to these concerns.
On 2 April 2025 AFP reported that language used by President Donald Trump and his government to slash US-funded foreign aid is being adopted by other governments to attack NGOs and independent media.
Civil society groups in parts of Eastern Europe and beyond — long targeted by discredit-and-defund campaigns because of the light they shone on corruption and lack of transparency — are now also dealing with Trumpian rhetoric, human rights groups said.
Trump administration statements “are being weaponised in real-time by autocrats and dictators across Eastern and Southeastern Europe to justify and deepen their crackdown on independent media, NGOs, and human rights defenders,” Dave Elseroad, of the Human Rights House Foundation, told AFP.
From Hungary to Serbia, to Georgia and Bosnia, non-governmental organisations and independent media outlets working to bolster democratic norms are hearing officials borrow White House phrases to justify officials’ stances against them.
It includes Trump’s claim that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) was “run by radical lunatics”, and his billionaire advisor Elon Musk’s calling the agency a “criminal organisation” that needed to be put “through the woodchipper”.
Such terms are “seriously encouraging language used in Budapest or in Belgrade or in Bratislava or Banja Luka,” said Miklos Ligeti, head of legal affairs at Transparency International’s Hungary chapter.
In some countries, the verbal ammunition comes on top of a sudden funding gap wrought by the dismantling of USAID, which is hitting the NGO sector hard. USAID had been providing funding to a vast array of independent organisations in countries like Hungary where such groups have been “financially suffocated domestically,” Ligeti told AFP.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has hailed the crackdown on USAID by his ally Trump as a “cleansing wind”. Orban has vowed to “eliminate the entire shadow army” he says is made up of his political enemies, judges, the media and NGOs.
The UN rights office in Geneva slammed “escalating attempts worldwide to weaken and harm domestic and international human rights systems, including defunding and delegitimising civil society”. It said that “it is all the more worrying to see these trends also emerging in established democracies”.
In some countries there is a direct line between utterances in Washington and action to undermine civil society. In Georgia, for example, the ruling Georgian Dream party last month called for the country to adopt its own version of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) — which observers warn could be turned against NGOs receiving foreign funding.
And in Serbia, which has been rocked by months of protests over government corruption, authorities referred to statements made by Trump and other top US officials to justify raiding a number of NGOs. The Serbian government saw the Trump administration’s labelling of USAID as a “criminal organisation” as “a fantastic opportunity to basically punish civil society”, said Rasa Nedeljkov, programme director at the Center for Research, Transparency and Accountability (CRTA).
CRTA’s offices were raided in February by heavily armed police. The operation took 28 hours because prosecutors had CRTA staff manually copy documents related to USAID-funded projects to hand to them, rather than accepting digital versions.
Serbian authorities have explicitly referred to statements by Trump and other US officials to justify raids on a number of NGOs.
Pavol Szalai, head of the EU-Balkans desk at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), said leaders in a string of countries were using “the suspension of USAID by Trump to attack media which had received USAID funds”. He said such groups were being doubly punished: they “lost their funding from one day to the next” while also increasingly being “targeted by intimidation”…
He warned that, “as these media retreat.. they will be replaced by propaganda”.
Watan News on 30 March 2025 came with a rather remarkable story about the UAE’s covert efforts to damage Qatar and Saudi Arabia’s reputations through paid campaigns using African NGOs Human rights sources in Geneva. Whether this is all true or not I cannot say, but it is worth reporting on.
Watan writes that “human rights circles in Geneva’ have revealed the United Arab Emirates’ involvement in leading coordinated incitement campaigns against its adversaries, using African organizations in exchange for financial bribes to attack Abu Dhabi’s opponents and whitewash its own dire human rights record. According to the source, Abu Dhabi’s campaign aims to bring in so-called “victims,” such as migrant workers, to testify before the UN Human Rights Council in an effort to damage Qatar’s international reputation.
Reliable reports indicate that the UAE has continuously funded this campaign over the past three years. Several human rights organizations and active institutions in Geneva have reportedly received large sums of money to support anti-Qatar activities. The funds are reportedly channeled through the UAE Embassy in Geneva and a key intermediary, Issa Al-Arabi, a Bahraini national who acts as a liaison for the UAE in supporting various rights groups at the UN.
According to the source, the campaign is being executed by the Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (African Meeting for the Defense of Human Rights) under the leadership of Nishkarsh Singh, along with the Tomoko Development and Cultural Union (TACUDU) led by Fazal-ur-Rehman, and the International Network for Human Rights (INHR).
Another UN source said that the UAE’s campaign is coordinated by key figures within the diplomatic and human rights community in Geneva and Washington, primarily operating within the INHR network.
This organization plays a major role in organizing human rights events at the UN, with a team of participating legal and diplomatic experts.
Notable individuals involved include:
Biro Diawara – A veteran human rights activist in Geneva for over 20 years, representing African civil society including journalists, parliamentarians, religious leaders, and human rights defenders. He has strong ties to African delegations in New York, Geneva, and the continent, with a focus on Sudan, West Africa, and his native Guinea.
Clément N. Voule – Former UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association. After completing his term in the summer of 2024, he joined the Geneva Human Rights Institute in September. A Togolese international lawyer, he specializes in human rights and security sector reform and holds multiple roles within Geneva’s human rights community.
Jane Galvão – Director of Resource Mobilization at INHR and Global Health Advisor. With over 20 years of experience managing health programs, she has worked on infectious diseases and women’s and children’s health, managing over $750 million in funding for organizations like UNITAID and WHO.
Eric N. Richardson – Founding President of INHR. A former U.S. diplomat and attorney, he led the U.S. team at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva from 2013 to 2016. With experience in countries like China, North Korea, Libya, Tunisia, New Zealand, and Israel, he now focuses on mediation efforts with Amnesty International and teaches law at the University of Michigan and UC Berkeley.
John Shyamana – Expert in Social and Economic Rights, New York. With over 30 years of experience, he specializes in child policy, labor rights, and social welfare, having worked with the U.S. Congress and state legislatures on legislative and advocacy efforts.
Kumar – Senior Human Rights Advisor, Washington D.C. Former Advocacy Director for Amnesty International USA. With more than two decades of experience, he has championed human rights and humanitarian causes worldwide, particularly in Asia, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.
Jeff Landsman – Managing Director and Treasurer at INHR. A certified financial planner and seasoned international buyer, he oversees the institute’s financial operations and strategic planning.
Asel Alimbayeva – Program Officer and Director, INHR Geneva. Fluent in English, French, Russian, and Kazakh. She has worked at the UN Office in Geneva and Kazakhstan’s Permanent Mission, leading social media and HR operations at the institute.
Pedro Cherinos Terrones – Legal Advisor, Lima. A Peruvian lawyer specializing in international trade, business law, human rights, and compliance with international law.
Sean Wessing – AI and Innovation Specialist, Bologna. Holds dual Master’s degrees from SAIS–Johns Hopkins and Bologna Business School. Leads fundraising and AI governance projects at INHR.
Zaf Haseem – Videographer and Reconciliation Specialist, Asia. A conflict mediator who has worked in Sri Lanka, Burma, Indonesia, and the Central African Republic, using film as a training tool for peacebuilding.
UAE’s Smear Campaign Targeting Qatar and Saudi Arabia
Diplomatic sources indicate that the UAE is recruiting African civil society organizations to conduct media and human rights attacks against Qatar. These efforts are expected to intensify during the UN Human Rights Council sessions in June and September 2025, with a major campaign planned for the September session. Additionally, the UAE is reportedly preparing similar activities within the African Union Commission, targeting both Qatar and Saudi Arabia as part of its escalating geopolitical rivalry in Africa.
These developments underscore rising regional tensions in Africa, where the UAE is leveraging human rights tools and diplomatic influence to advance its political agenda.
They also raise serious concerns about the independence of some Geneva-based human rights organizations, which are increasingly being used as instruments of political influence rather than neutral advocacy.
“I’m the only girl of six siblings. And suddenly I lost five brothers between 2012 and 2014,” said Yasmine Al-Mashaan, a Syrian human rights defender and victim. “Before they were taken, they were around to love and protect me. I think it’s my duty to give them a little bit of their love and to fight for truth and justice for them and for everyone,” said Al-Mashaan, a former pharmaceutical assistant.
She spoke during an enhanced interactive dialogue on transitional justice at the 58th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, where UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk presented a report on lessons learned and good practices related to transitional justice in the context of sustaining peace and sustainable development.
“In 2018, I co-founded, along with other families of forcibly disappeared persons, the Caesar Families Association, which brings together families who identified their loved ones among the victims in the photos smuggled out of Syria in 2013, known as the Caesar Photos,” Al-Mashaan said.
Her brother Oqba, one of her two disappeared brothers, was among the photos.
Türk emphasized that transitional justice tackles the demons of the past to build a better future.
“It grapples with difficult questions about truth and memory. It looks for justice, in all its complex and myriad forms,” he said. “And it helps to repair the institutional and social fabric of fractured societies. Above all, transitional justice is about victims, dignity and healing.”
According to the Office’s report, in the aftermath of a conflict or large-scale and serious human rights violations and abuses, States have an obligation to provide truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-repetition. The report showcases some 36 victim-centred, inclusive, and gender-responsive transitional justice efforts led by victim associations and grass-roots organizations from dozens of countries, from Colombia to Syria, and Chad to Timor Leste.
However, Türk said, the path to peace is never easy.
“Transitional justice is often held up and slowed down by political instrumentalization, discriminatory or selective design and focus, insufficient buy-in of affected populations, and weak State institutions,” he said.
Women and youth as a driving force
Türk said that civil society, including grass-roots organizations often led by women and youth, play a crucial role in overcoming these challenges.
Sofija Todorovic, Programme Director of Youth Initiative for Human Rights in Serbia, who also participated in the dialogue, believes the role of youth organizations in transitional justice is indispensable.
“These organizations ensure that the voices and perspectives of young people are integrated into the policies and strategies shaping their future,” she said. “In many cases, their mission extends to educating youth about the history that has been deliberately concealed from them.”
Todorovic’s determination was fuelled by the realization that her country had hidden the truth from her.
“My State and the institutions within my State didn’t give me the right to truth and to make informed conclusion about the past, but rather they forced only one side of the story of the past,” she said. “And I think that that it’s unfair.”
She emphasized the need to address intergenerational trauma in transitional justice efforts.
“Only people who have space to heal can be able to build functional democracy,” she said. “We need a political climate that will resolve the trauma, not exploit it.”
Both Todorovic and Al-Mashaan’s organizations exemplify the power of women’s leadership, resilience, and strategic action in advancing transitional justice despite significant obstacles.
Justice and peace
Leyner Palacios Asprilla, a Colombian human rights defender and former Truth Commission member currently leading the Unit for Victims of the Chocó Region, participated in the dialogue via video message. The situation in his region remains so critical that he couldn’t leave the victims he works with alone.
For Palacios Asprilla, UN Human Rights in Colombia has been instrumental in navigating the challenges of consolidating peace, protecting victims, and defending human rights.
“Today, the world cannot forget our country because we have not yet crossed the finish line or overcome the obstacles to reach a point of tranquillity,” he said. “Colombia is an example to the world in its commitment to consolidating peace. But the world must not forget that this task is not yet complete.”
Türk said that in this fragmented world, transitional justice is an essential and creative problem-solving approach. It must be grasped, nurtured and used to build durable peace.
Many countries, including Nepal, Syria, and Bangladesh, have enormous opportunity to move towards justice and peace, he said.
Key takeaways
In preparing the report, UN Human Rights organized consultations with 70 women and 70 men from more than 77 countries, including representatives of national entities implementing transitional justice measures, victims’ associations and civil society organizations, regional and international human rights protection systems, and transitional justice experts and practitioners.
The report identifies seven key lessons in advancing transitional justice:
Documenting human rights violations is essential for accountability and future justice.
Marginalized victims must be included, ensuring their experiences are recognized.
Victims’ associations play a crucial role in advocacy and justice efforts.
Immediate legal, medical, and psychological support helps victims navigate trauma.
International human rights mechanisms provide accountability when national justice fails.
Universal jurisdiction and international courts offer alternatives when domestic options are blocked.
Grassroots memory and memorialization preserve historical truth and prevent future atrocities.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 