share information on human rights defenders, with special focus on human rights awards and laureates
Cressida Kuala lives in a small gold mining town in the Highlands Region of Porgera District in the Enga Province of Papua New Guinea. In 2011, Cressida founded the Porgera Red Wara (River) Women’s Association, and she started speaking out about issues such as environmental degradation, chemical waste, pollution, expropriation of land, and the impact on the local community.
Cressida participated in the Women Human Rights Defender Advocacy Week in October 2025.
On 5 November, 2025 Camilla Pollera, Human Rights and Climate Change Program Associate at the Center for International Environmental Law published a blog post about the upcoming COP30 and the role of human rights defenders:
There is no climate justice in a climate of fear. As governments prepare to meet in Belém, Brazil for, COP30, attention turns to a country where defending nature still comes at a high cost. Deep-rooted and intertwined impunity and violence against environmental human rights defenders (EHRDs) — including Indigenous defenders, Afro-descendent communities, women, and defenders from LGBTQIA+ —persist in Brazil.
COP30 decisions must recognize the efforts of those protecting the planet, in Brazil and beyond, and ensure that they can do so safely, freely, and without fear.
Around the world, EHRDs are on the frontlines of the climate crisis — protecting land, water, communities, and their rights, often at great personal risk. Faced with an escalating climate crisis and the inaction of governments, a growing number of people are stepping up to defend their rights, the rights of future generations and the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, exercising their fundamental freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, and association, guaranteed under international human rights law.
…The violence and repression faced by defenders are intensified by intersecting forms of marginalization, especially affecting women defending the environment, who often suffer gender-based violence that rarely appears in the data, including sexual violence, harassment, and rejection within their families and communities. They are targeted not only as defenders of rights and natural resources but also as women, in all their diversity, challenging discriminatory societal norms, a combination that makes their work particularly dangerous and invisible. …The persistent violence and lack of effective guarantees for human rights protection are a stark reminder of what is at stake as COP30 comes to Belém.
The Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the climate emergency and human rights made it clear: States must take proactive steps to ensure the effective protection of environmental defenders — including for those such as Indigenous and women EHRDs who are most at risk of retaliation. The Court recognized EHRDs are “allies of democracy”, whose work takes on even greater importance amid the urgency and complexity of the climate emergency. It reaffirmed the right to defend human rights as an autonomous right and declared that States have a special duty of protection toward those who exercise it, and recognized the double layer of risk faced by women environmental defenders, requiring an even higher duty of care. The Court also formulated very concrete recommendations on what this means at the national level.
The Escazú Agreement and the Aarhus Convention both enshrine explicit provisions on the protection of EHRDs, setting legal and institutional frameworks to operationalize these duties. Recent work under these instruments has provided concrete guidance for States and businesses to uphold their obligations, safeguard civic space, and ensure defenders are protected and not penalized. The recent Action Plan under Escazú and the ad hoc rapid response mechanism under Aarhus are just a few examples marking concrete advances in protecting those facing threats.
At COP30, Parties can no longer ignore their human rights obligations. They have a duty to ensure that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)—the central forum for global cooperation on climate action—and its outcomes align with legal standards. Rightsholders have been obstructed from participating and silenced the climate talks, a process that is deciding on their future. Restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and assembly, lack of transparency in the host country agreements, persistent visa barriers and financial burdens, continue to limit access. In recent COPs, civic space has continued to shrink, with obstruction often led by the very States hosting the negotiations.
Brazil has a chance to do things differently, by making civic space at COP30 and the protection of environmental defenders a true priority. This includes guaranteeing safe conditions for the meaningful participation before, during, and after COP30 and beyond. And it also means taking steps domestically, starting with the urgent ratification of the Escazú Agreement. Brazil has a key role to play in building upon its legacy of international environmental leadership and steering negotiations at the COP towards rights-based outcomes.
COP30 indeed offers a crucial moment to enhance the protection of defenders through critical decisions expected in Belém: the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) and the Gender Action Plan (GAP).
As highlighted by the recent report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, Mary Lawlor, a just transition should be grounded in the protection of those who defend rights and call out false climate solutions, from Indigenous Peoples and land defenders opposing harmful mining projects to workers’ advocates demanding fair and equitable transitions. All decisions, measures, and mechanisms designed to enable a just transition from the fossil fuel economy must protect a safe and enabling civic space, and ensure the meaningful participation of EHRDs.
..
There is no climate justice without human rights and without protecting those on the frontlines. EHRDs step in to protect what governments have neglected, and their courage exposes States’ failure to meet their climate and human rights obligations. Despite the risk, around the world, defenders continue to organize, resist, and demand climate justice, leading the way forward. In their resistance lies the chance of a just and sustainable future.
Since 1989, CIEL has used the power of law to protect the environment, promote human rights, and ensure a just and sustainable society.
With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, CIEL’s team of attorneys, policy experts, and support staff works to provide legal counsel and advocacy, policy research, and capacity building across our four program areas: Climate & Energy, Environmental Health, Fossil Economy, and People, Land & Resources.
On 5 November 2025 Amnesty international endorsed this kind of view under the title “What is COP and why is this year’s meeting in Brazil so important?”
https://www.oas.org/en/IACHR/jsForm/?File=/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2025/230.asp
On 13 October 2025, Nina Lakhani, climate justice reporter the Guardian, published this interview with Mary Lawlor, UN special rapporteur for human rights defenders, who presented her final annual thematic report during an interactive dialogue at the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly’s Third Committee. The Special Rapporteur’s report focused on the contributions of human rights defenders addressing climate change and working to realise a just transition from fossil fuels, and the risks they face in carrying out this work.
Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur for human rights defenders since 2020, has documented hundreds of cases where states have sought to smear and silence climate defenders engaged in peaceful protest, non-violent civil disobedience and litigation.
“Attacks against climate defenders have surged over the course of the mandate, and we now see outright repression against people who are organizing for climate action. It’s some of the states that have claimed to be the strongest supporters of human rights defenders including the UK, Germany, France and the US, that are most often repressing climate activists and where the right to protest is being denigrated and delegitimized.
“These big countries spew out the rhetoric about 1.5C, but they don’t mean it. They are playing the game to suit themselves. It’s business as usual,” Lawlor said in an interview with the Guardian.
Lawlor will present the penultimate report of her six-year mandate, “Tipping points: Human rights defenders, climate change and a just transition”, to the UN general assembly on 16 October.
It documents state repression including police violence and surveillance, civil litigation deployed to deliberately wear down and silence climate defenders known as Slapp (strategic lawsuits against public participation), as well as bogus criminal charges ranging from sedition, criminal defamation, terrorism and conspiracy to trespass, to public disorder and to disobedience.
One trend documented by Lawlor is the conflation of non-violent climate action with terrorism. In 2022, the French minister of interior at the time, and current minister of justice, accused the national environmental movement Les Soulèvements de la Terre of “ecoterrorism”. The government sought to close down the group, but the country’s highest administrative court eventually overturned the effort.
Lawlor is adamant that climate activists are human rights defenders. They use non-violent protest, disruptive civil disobedience and litigation to stop fossil fuel projects and pressure elected officials to take meaningful action precisely because they are trying to protect the right to food, clean water, health, life and a healthy environment.
But it’s not just fossil fuels. Human rights are now being targeted in the rush for critical minerals and new sources of non-fossil energy. The same repressive playbook is being used by governments and private companies involved in land grabs, pollution and Indigenous rights violations in pursuit of a green transition.
“Governments are repressing human rights defenders and the current trajectory is incompatible with the realization of human rights for all. It’s just a road to destruction … I think states are behaving in a criminal fashion,” Lawlor said.
“No system, no power, no government, no big company seeking profit should trump the rights of billions of people in the world. And that’s what’s happening. It’s the rich, the powerful that are creating such a disaster for humanity.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/13/climate-defenders-mary-lawlor-human-rights
On 16 October 2025 Amazon Watch reported that more than 130 civil society and human rights organizations from across Latin America and around the world have issued an urgent appeal for an immediate end to repression, militarization, and human rights violations by the Ecuadorian government. The statement follows weeks of violent crackdowns against Indigenous-led protests that began on September 21, when social movements mobilized to defend democracy, rights, and the environment amid controversial government reforms.
According to Ecuadorian human rights groups, the government’s response has been brutal and disproportionate: at least three people have been killed, including Indigenous leader Efraín Fuerez; over 282 people injured; 172 detained; and 15 temporarily disappeared. Reports also confirm attacks on journalists, raids without warrants, internet blackouts, and summary deportations, while military operations continue across several provinces.
The joint declaration denounces the criminalization of Indigenous and human rights defenders, who face fabricated charges of terrorism, sabotage, and illicit enrichment, along with the freezing of organizational bank accounts. The signatories condemn President Daniel Noboa’s use of racist and stigmatizing rhetoric to justify state violence and to discredit legitimate social protest.
“Defending life, land, human rights, and freedom of expression cannot be criminalized. Peace cannot be imposed by force; it is built on truth, justice, and dialogue,” the statement affirms.
The organizations also point to international alarm: on October 8, seven United Nations Special Rapporteurs expressed concern about the repression and institutional rollbacks that weaken environmental protections and Indigenous rights. Two days later, members of the European Parliament called for a public EU statement, a monitoring mission, and a review of the E.U.–Ecuador Trade Agreement under its human rights clauses.
In response to the escalating crisis, Amazon Watch has launched an international action urging President Noboa to cease all violence immediately, end the criminalization of Indigenous movements, and ensure full respect for human rights and the rule of law.
Download the statement in PDF format to view a complete list of signatories.
During October 2025, new guidelines on Environmental Protest and Civil Disobedience were released by Michel Forst, UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention.
The new guidelines aim to support states, civil society, environmental activists, and legal practitioners in understanding and implementing the rights guaranteed under the Aarhus Convention. The document underscores that individuals and groups have a recognised international right to engage in peaceful environmental demonstrations, even when challenging public or private actors whose practices may harm the environment.
The document outlines five guiding principles to help states ensure that peaceful environmental activism is respected, not repressed:
Furthermore, the guidelines recognize that some environmental defenders may resort to civil disobedience when legal channels fail, and the guidelines set out conditions under which such acts may be tolerated (e.g., proportionality, non-violence, necessity, public interest). The guidelines stress the need for states to prevent and remediate retaliatory actions against protestors, such as legal harassment, surveillance, excessive use of force, or criminalisation of protest. The text encourages states to review and reform national laws, police protocols, and judicial practices to ensure that protest rights are respected, especially for environmental defenders, and it calls for transparent mechanisms to monitor how protests are handled, report abuses, and hold responsible persons and institutions to account.
The guideline highlights that public authorities (including political figures) should refrain from using language labelling protesters as threats, “eco-terrorists,” or “foreign agents”, and media (especially public or state media) should maintain factual accuracy, avoid derogatory language, and refrain from mischaracterising environmental defenders.
Guidelines on the Right to Peaceful Environmental Protest and Civil Disobedience – October 2025
‘Water is to protected. Water is not for sale. Water is to be defended.’
Doris Ramírez is a fisherwoman and a fisherfolk’s union representative from Guatemala’s southern coast. She told ISHR how her late husband’s passing drove her to embrace activism and described her aspirations for the future for her coastal community.
In March 2025, Doris attended the 58th session of the UN Human Rights Council, delivering a statement calling on Guatemala to abide by its obligations to secure the protection of marine biodiversity, the traditional rights of fisherfolk and the protection of those who are protecting the environment.
https://ishr.ch/defender-stories/human-rights-defenders-story-doris-ramirez-from-guatemala
On 8 September 2025, a report “Defending forests shouldn’t cost lives: Forest 500 assesses corporate zero tolerance policies,” links world’s top banks to social & environmental harms from mining
… Global Canopy’s annual Forest 500 assessment looks at six human rights criteria closely associated with preventing deforestation. Three indicators are interconnected with deforestation as violations of these rights frequently happen around the point of forest loss. They are: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC); zero tolerance for threats and violence against forest, land and human rights defenders; and customary rights to land, resources and territory.
Among them, zero tolerance is least likely to be addressed by companies: only 9% of the 500 companies assessed have a public commitment in place for at least one forest risk commodity. By comparison, 37% of companies have committed to FPIC, and 24% have commitments to respect the customary rights of IPLCs to land, resources and territory.
… Only 47 Forest 500 companies have commitments for zero tolerance. Companies in the palm oil (18%) and cocoa (14%) supply chains are more likely to have commitments. Commitments are scarce in the beef (10%), soy (11%) and timber (6%) sectors, although these industries are linked to abuses in Latin America. According to BHRRC, 40% of attacks against human rights defenders over the last decade took place in Latin America, with Brazil recording the highest number of killings worldwide.
… Only six of the Forest 500 companies publish evidence of due diligence and progress reporting on eradicating violence and threats f
The report focuses on financing for companies mining critical minerals used in the global energy transition, including lithium, nickel, graphite and cobalt. Nearly 70% of these transition mineral mines overlap with Indigenous lands and roughly an equal amount is in regions of high biodiversity.
“Our findings shed light on the central role that financial institutions play in enabling this new wave of destruction as companies rush to expand mining operations as rapidly as possible,” Steph Dowlen, forests and finance campaigner for the Rainforest Action Network, told Mongabay by email. “While this extraction for raw minerals falls under a ‘green’, ‘clean’ or ‘renewable’ banner, it’s still extraction and the mining sector remains high-risk, dominated by companies with egregious track records on rights, the environment and corporate accountability.”
The report assessed environmental, social and governance policy scores of 30 major financial institutions and found an average score of only 22%. Vanguard and CITIC scored the lowest, each with just 3%. The assessment found that many financial institutions lacked policies to prevent financing issues, including pollution, Indigenous rights abuses or deforestation.
Of all institutions assessed, 80% lacked policies on human rights defenders and none had safeguards for Indigenous peoples living in voluntary isolation. Many institutions (60%) lacked grievance mechanisms, which allow communities that have been negatively impacted by mining activities to seek justice. Also, 60% of institutions had no policies on tax transparency, which is key to preventing companies from shifting profits abroad and ensuring that mining revenues remain in the resource-rich countries.
“Due to the significant overlap with transition minerals and Indigenous Territories, and high-biodiversity areas, there is an immediate need for governments, financial institutions and mining companies to stop and listen,” Dowlen said. “Indigenous Peoples and local communities have been raising the alarm for a long time but continue to face disproportionate harm as well as violence and intimidation for defending their rights and their lands.”
BlackRock and JPMorgan Chase declined to comment on the report. None of the other institutions mentioned in this piece responded to Mongabay’s emails.
Environmental activist Hipólito Quispe Huamán was shot and killed Saturday night in the Madre de Dios region of southeastern Peru, in what authorities suspect was a targeted attack linked to his work defending the Amazon rainforest, AFP reported on 29 July 2025.
Quispe Huamán was driving along the Interoceanic Highway when he was gunned down, according to local prosecutors. Karen Torres, a regional prosecutor, told reporters that investigators are considering his environmental advocacy as the likely motive.
“This is a murder with a firearm of yet another defender of the Madre de Dios region,” she was quoted as saying by AFP.
Quispe Huamán had served as an active member of the Tambopata National Reserve Management Committee and was a vocal opponent of deforestation and illegal land use in the Peruvian Amazon. His killing has sparked outrage from human rights and environmental organizations, which say the attack reflects a growing pattern of violence against Indigenous leaders and environmental defenders in the region.
“We condemn the murder of environmental defender Hipólito Quispe Huamán in Madre de Dios, another victim of the growing violence against those who protect our territories and ecosystems,” said the National Coordinator for Human Rights (CNDDHH) in a statement posted on social media. “Not one more death!”
Quispe Huamán’s brother, Ángel, called for accountability. “I demand justice for my brother’s death. This kind of thing cannot happen,” he told local media.
The Ministry of Justice has pledged to support the legal defense of Quispe Huamán’s family and ensure the perpetrators are brought to justice. However, critics say the government’s response mechanisms remain under-resourced. The Intersectoral Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, led by the Ministry of Justice, has faced ongoing criticism for lacking the budget and personnel needed to respond effectively to threats.
Attacks against environmental defenders have increased across Peru’s Amazonian regions, where extractive industries, drug trafficking, and illegal land grabs often operate with impunity. In July 2024, the Interethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Rainforest (AIDESEP) declared a state of emergency after an Indigenous leader was tortured and killed in central Peru, citing escalating threats from coca growers and criminal networks.
According to Global Witness, at least 54 land and environmental defenders have been murdered in Peru since 2012—more than half of them Indigenous. Many of these killings remain unsolved.
Quispe Huamán’s death has reignited calls for stronger protections for those who safeguard the rainforest and Indigenous territories. As investigations continue, activists and family members are demanding not only justice—but a systemic response to end the violence.
The Philippines recorded the highest number of alleged abductions involving human rights defenders (HRDs) across Asia from 2023 to 2024, according to a biennial report released on 19 July 2025 by the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia).
The country topped the list of 24 nations with 15 documented abduction cases, surpassing Bangladesh with nine, and both Afghanistan and Pakistan with seven each. The report accounted for at least 32 Filipino victims, though it did not specify how many remain missing.
These incidents were compiled through the Asian Human Rights Defenders Portal, a publicly accessible database maintained by Forum-Asia using verified reports from civil society, media, and UN sources. Only cases with clear identification of victims and a link to their human rights work are recorded.
One cited case involved indigenous activists Job David, Peter del Monte Jr., and Alia Encela, who were reportedly abducted by military forces in Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro in September 2023. The Philippine Army denied the allegations, asserting that the three were members of the New People’s Army captured during an operation and are currently detained. However, Forum-Asia noted that the case mirrored earlier incidents where so-called “Red-tagging” was used to justify human rights violations.
Red-tagging, the practice of labeling activists as communist rebels or terrorists, has long been criticized for exposing individuals to threats, violence, and in some cases, fatal attacks.
The report also revealed that abduction is only one of many repressive methods used to target HRDs. Judicial harassment emerged as the most widespread, with 868 cases across Asia. This includes arbitrary arrests, the use of oppressive laws, and denial of fair trials.
Threats, intimidation, and censorship were also rampant, totaling 376 incidents. The Philippines accounted for 41 of these, with 18 cases of vilification—all allegedly perpetrated or backed by state actors.
Environmental, indigenous, land, and community-based defenders were among the most targeted groups, with 60 harassment cases documented in the Philippines—second only to Indonesia. The country also ranked second in attacks on labor rights defenders, tallying 16 cases.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 