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:
Address the root causes of the protest: Governments should tackle the real reasons behind environmental protests, such as inaction on environmental protection, lack of transparency, or exclusion from decision-making.
Reject criminalization of defenders: Authorities and media must stop portraying environmental activists as criminals and instead recognize their legitimate role in defending public interests.
Protect civic space: Civil disobedience must not be used as a pretext to restrict fundamental freedoms or limit peaceful public expression.
Ensure human rights–based policing: Law enforcement responses must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate — never arbitrary, excessive, or punitive.
Uphold justice and civic freedom: Courts should avoid rulings or sanctions that discourage peaceful protest or shrink civic space.
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.
The death of a female Iranian political prisoner in hospital following a series of seizures has sparked outrage from Iran’s two Nobel laureates and right groups who have labeled her death a state-sponsored murder. Somayeh Rashididied after several days in hospital following her transfer from Qarchak Prison near Tehran, Iran’s judiciary-affiliated Mizan news agency reported on Thursday.
Rashidi, born in 1983, was detained in April for allegedly writing anti-government graffiti slogans in Tehran’s Javadieh district.
Nobel Peace laureates Narges Mohammadi condemned her death in custody, describing it as part of a pattern of abuse in detention. “This devastating loss of Somayeh Rashidi is not an accident but the result of a systematic policy of neglect and cruelty inside Iranian prisons,” Mohammadi said in a post on X.
Rights groups and activists including Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi had previously raised alarm about Rashidi’s deteriorating condition, highlighting her urgent need for medical attention.
Iran International reported earlier this month that Rashidi’s condition had severely declined, with doctors holding little hope for her recovery.
Human rights groups including the Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR) have publicly called for the closure of Qarchak, describing it as “one of the darkest symbols of systematic human rights violations in the Islamic Republic.” Rashidi death comes less than a week after another prisoner, Maryam Shahraki, died in Qarchak last Friday. According to Norway-based rights group Hengaw Organizattion, three women have already died in this facility this year due to lack of adequate medical care — Jamileh Azizi on September 19, Shahraki on September 13, and Farzaneh Bijanipour on Januar
Although physical attacks against journalists are the most visible violations of press freedom, economic pressure is also a major, more insidious problem. The economic indicator on the RSF World Press Freedom Index now stands at an unprecedented, critical low as its decline continued in 2025. As a result, the global state of press freedom is now classified as a “difficult situation” for the first time in the history of the Index. See the Index
At a time when press freedom is experiencing a worrying decline in many parts of the world, a major — yet often underestimated — factor is seriously weakening the media: economic pressure. Much of this is due to ownership concentration, pressure from advertisers and financial backers, and public aid that is restricted, absent or allocated in an opaque manner. The data measured by the RSF Index’s economic indicator clearly shows that today’s news media are caught between preserving their editorial independence and ensuring their economic survival.
“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.” Anne Bocandé, RSF Editorial Director
Of the five main indicators that determine the World Press Freedom Index, the indicator measuring the financial conditions of journalism and economic pressure on the industry dragged down the world’s overall score in 2025.
The economic indicator in the 2025 RSF World Press Freedom Index is at its lowest point in history, and the global situation is now considered “difficult.”
In the USSR, writers often became defenders of human rights. They were people of various ages and backgrounds, yet their works exposed injustice and reflected personal courage to speak the truth — for which many paid with exile and labor camps. Why did the authorities fear writers so much? And why should they be honored today?
One such figure was the Soviet-Ukrainian writer and poet Lina Kostenko, who, through her works and personal stance, inspired resistance, standing proudly for freedom and against the oppressive system, despite multiple attempts to push her out of cultural and literary life. Her novel Notes of a Ukrainian Madman, written in the 1970s, was long banned and circulated only through underground self-publishing (samizdat). Through this work, Kostenko protested the totalitarian regime and shed light on the lives of those who could not live in good conscience under Soviet rule. The novel symbolized the fight for the right to be oneself.
Lina Kostenko was part of the “Sixtiers” (Shistdesyatnyky) movement, a generation that opposed Soviet propaganda stereotypes, aimed to restore historical memory, protect national culture, and resist ideological control in Ukraine. As a writer and poet, Kostenko not only used her works to critique the totalitarian regime but also supported the core values of the movement: personal freedom, the right to cultural expression, and the condemnation of repression.
“We are warriors. Not idlers. Not slackers. And our cause is righteous and holy. For while others fight for whatever, We fight for independence. That’s why it’s so hard for us.” “A human seemingly cannot fly… But has wings. Has wings!”
Her contribution to the cultural revival of Ukraine and the preservation of free speech values is immeasurable. Today, Lina Kostenko still resides in Ukraine. In 1987, she was awarded the Shevchenko National Prize for her novel Marusia Churai.
One of Lina Kostenko’s close friends and fellow Sixtiers was the poet, translator, and dissident Vasyl Stus. They actively supported each other in their fight against censorship during the most difficult times of repression.
Stus openly criticized the Soviet regime for human rights violations, which led to his repeated persecution. In 1972, he was arrested and sentenced for “anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda.” Despite the harsh conditions of his imprisonment, he continued to write, and his works were distributed through samizdat, inspiring many to resist oppression.
After five years in a Mordovian labor camp and two years in exile in the Magadan region, Stus returned to Kyiv in September 1979. There, he resumed his human rights activities, supporting “prisoners of conscience” with the help of Western organizations. In 1978, he was made an honorary member of the English PEN Club. However, in early 1980, he was arrested again. Vasyl Stus died in a maximum-security labor camp in 1985. His life and works became symbols of the relentless struggle for freedom and human dignity under totalitarianism.
The stories of Lina Kostenko and Vasyl Stus remind us that words can be powerful weapons in the fight for truth and dignity. Their courage, dedication to the ideals of freedom, and love for Ukrainian culture prove that even under the harshest conditions, there is always room for bravery and resistance. Today, as issues of freedom of speech and cultural identity remain pressing, their legacy continues to inspire us to remember that truth is a value worth fighting for.
To illustrate how international days can influence actions by NGOs, here an example from Syria:
The International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances (30 August) the Platform of Families of Missing and Enforcedly Disappeared Persons in North and East Syria organized a solidarity stand in Qamishlo.
The event took place today under the slogan, “Our doors are still open, waiting for their return,” in front of the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Qamishlo, Jazira Canton, with participation from relatives of the missing, activists, and human rights defenders.
Participants carried banners with messages in Kurdish, Arabic, and English, including: “A mother is still waiting at the window,” “Absence is a weight heavier than iron,” “No peace and no future without knowing the fate of the missing,” “Knowing the fate is the beginning of holding perpetrators accountable,” and “Our voices will not be silenced; we will continue demanding our loved ones.”
Abbas Ali Mousa, coordinator of the Platform of Families of Missing Persons in North and East Syria, told ANHA agency that the number of families affiliated with the platform ranges between 600 and 700.
Mousa explained that the event was held in solidarity with victims of enforced disappearances and their families, reaffirming their legitimate right to know the fate of their loved ones and emphasizing the necessity of establishing truth and justice.
Ilham Ahmed, the mother of journalist Farhad Hamo, who has been missing by ISIS mercenaries for 11 years, said: “I know nothing about my son or his fate.”
Ahmed added: “Despite repeatedly appealing to human rights organizations and relevant bodies, we have received no response or clarification.” She called on human rights organizations and groups working with abductees to reveal the fate of her son and all missing persons.
The Trump administration’s omission of key sections and manipulation of certain countries’ rights abuses degrade and politicize the 2025 US State Department human rights report, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Human Rights First and many other NGOs concluded .
On August 12, 2025, the State Department released its “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices” covering the year 2024. The report omits several categories of rights violations that were standard in past editions, including women, LGBT people, persons with disabilities, corruption in government, and freedom of peaceful assembly. The administration has also grossly mischaracterized the human rights records of abusive governments with which it has or is currently seeking friendly relations.
By undermining the credibility of the report, the administration puts human rights defenders at risk, weakens protections for asylum seekers, and undercuts the global fight against authoritarianism.
This year’s human rights report may strictly keep with the minimum statutory requirements but does not acknowledge the reality of widespread human rights violations against whole groups of people in many locations. As a result, Congress now lacks a widely trusted, comprehensive tool from its own government to appropriately oversee US foreign policy and commit resources. Many of the sections and rights abuses that the report omits are extremely important to understanding the trends and developments of human rights globally, Human Rights Watch said.
On Israel, the State Department disregards the Israeli authorities’ mass forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza, their use of starvation as a weapon of war, and their deliberate deprivation of water, electricity, medical aid, and other goods necessary for civilians’ survival, actions that amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide. The State Department also fails to mention vast damage and destruction to Gaza’s essential infrastructure and the majority of homes, schools, universities, and hospitals.
The report is dishonest about abuses in some third countries to which the US is deporting people, stating that the US found “no credible reports of significant human rights abuses” in El Salvador, although they cite “reports” of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearance, and mistreatment by police. The administration has transferred to El Salvador’s prisons, despite evidence of torture and other abuses.
The State Department glosses over the Hungarian government’s escalating efforts to undermine democratic institutions and the rule of law, including severe curbs on civil society and independent media, and abuses against LGBT people and migrants. It also fails to acknowledge that Russian authorities have widely used politically motivated imprisonment as a tool in their crackdown on dissent, and its prosecutions of individuals for “extremism” for their alleged affiliation with the LGBT movement.
Josef Benedict and Rajavelu Karunanithi published a piece in the Diplomat of 18 July 2025 describing how from Hong Kong to India, governments are passing and weaponizing new laws to pursue and jail whoever speaks up for human rights.
Four years ago, on the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, plain clothes police arrested human rights lawyer and pro-democracy activist Chow Hang-tung outside her office in Hong Kong. Her alleged crime? Publishing two social media posts advertising a public vigil to remember the notorious crackdown in Tiananmen Square. At the time, Chow was the vice-chair of the now defunct Hong Kong Alliance in Support of the Patriotic Democratic Movement of China, the main organizer of annual Tiananmen vigils…
Sadly, such repression is not unique to Hong Kong. Across Asia, authoritarian and democratic governments alike are passing and weaponizing new laws – in clear violation of international law and standards – to pursue and jail whoever speaks up for human rights. Today, on Nelson Mandela International Day, we call for the release of Chow Hang-tang, who is part of CIVICUS’ Stand As My Witness campaign, as well as other human rights defenders unjustly locked up in Asia around the world.
The CIVICUS Monitor, which tracks civic space conditions across the world, now rates Hong Kong’s civic space as “closed,” the worst possible ranking. Hundreds remain behind bars as police systematically use the new laws to arrest and prosecute people on trumped-up charges. Often, the process itself becomes the punishment as activists spend years in detention before they are even tried…
Meanwhile, Hong Kong authorities are trying to take their repression international, by offering bounties for activists-in-exile charged under the National Security Law and by arresting the father of a prominent U.S.-based activist, Anna Kwok.
..Hong Kong’s National Security Laws have become something of a model for other Asian governments looking to stifle dissent.
Look no further than India, often called the world’s largest democracy, where Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government resorts to similar laws to consolidate power and silence his critics. Dozens of activists have been jailed under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), a draconian anti-terror law. Under the UAPA’s provisions, activists remain in pre-trial detention for long periods and are denied bail, including human rights defender Khurram Parvez, who was arrested in November 2021. His trial has yet to start, four years on. [see also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/81468931-79AA-24FF-58F7-10351638AFE3]
Meanwhile, Cambodia’s Han Manet regime has used “incitement” laws as their weapon of choice to silence activists, journalists, and members of the opposition.
With legal repression spreading across Asia, the international community must do more to push back and stand with these brave activists. Foreign governments must not only speak out when activists are convicted, but step in much earlier when these human rights defenders are arrested. Diplomats should visit wrongly arrested activists in detention, monitor their trials, and engage with their families. Foreign governments must also use international platforms like the United Nations Human Rights Council and bilateral meetings to highlight their cases and call for their release.
Activists-in-exile also need support and assistance, especially when they face transnational repression. The recent G-7 Leaders’ Statement on Transnational Repression was a good start, but strong rhetoric must now turn into serious action. Failure to undertake such actions will see a further regression of democracy and repression of civic freedoms in Asia and elsewhere.
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.
Sixteen activists completed the 2025 Human Rights Defender Advocacy Programme in Geneva to strengthen their advocacy skills. During the programme, they called for reforms to the UN human rights system, and helped secure the renewal of the expert mandate on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Held from 9 to 20 June 2025, the on-site part of HRDAP25 took place during the 59th session of the UN Human Rights Council. The programme blended online learning with face-to-face sessions in Geneva. Defenders explored UN human rights mechanisms such as the Human Rights Council, Special Procedures, Universal Periodic Review, and Treaty Bodies. They practiced advocacy techniques, developed strategic roadmaps, and engaged directly with mechanisms to push for real change at home.
It was intensive but very good. The platform is so user friendly, everyone can learn and take time to revisit, consult, see examples, and ask questions. The possibility to have online sessions and work in groups was very useful for me. Elena Petrovska, LGBTI Equal Rights Association for Western Balkans and Turkey, North Macedonia
Participants came from a wide range of regions and contexts, including Colombia, Guatemala, Nigeria, Indonesia, Tunisia, Lebanon, Nepal, India, Uganda, Cameroon, Syria, North Macedonia, Tibet and Sierra Leone. Their work focuses on LGBTIQ+ rights, environmental justice, transitional justice, gender equality, protection of migrants, business and human rights, and the protection of communities at risk.
Each day was filled with learning opportunities, advocacy and reflection. In April and May, the group enjoyed online training and coaching sessions which were then built upon with a packed in-person programme that gave participants the background preparation needed to engage with the various mechanisms and relevant stakeholders while in Geneva. They applied and practiced the knowledge and skills gained in a few different ways, which included: an NGO breakfast with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, where participants could ask very detailed and pertinent questions about the current situation; a brown bag lunch with experts from the Committee on Civil and Political Rights, where the group received first person tips on how to submit information and engage with Treaty Bodies; and meetings with UN Special Procedures (Business and human rights, Climate Change, Enforced Disappearances, Extreme Poverty) and their staff, were participants could start personal relationships with those experts and share their advocacy journey and plans.
Photo: ISHR
Defenders also participated in a powerful public side event about the reform of the UN human rights system. They shared lived experiences and challenges with over 30 States, calling for deeper access, stronger accountability, and genuine inclusion in the ongoing UN80 reform process. Laura Restrepo from Colombia reflected: ‘The UN must look inward and acknowledge its own colonial legacies — in who speaks, who decides, and whose knowledge counts. It must shift power toward grassroots and frontline communities.’
Throughout the programme, defenders stood up for key causes. Several participants joined the global campaign to #RenewIESOGI, advocating for the continuation of the UN mandate on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. Their voices contributed to a successful outcome: the Human Rights Council renewed the mandate for three more years, reaffirming its importance as a tool to combat discrimination and protect LGBTIQ+ communities.
Photo: ISHR
The sense of care and community ran deep. HRDAP helped participants’ work grounded in the values of solidarity and justice, and built their confidence to keep advocating at all levels. HRDAP25 not only provided skills and relevant exposure but also created a space for collaboration and resilience. Speaking during the public side event on UN reform, Pooja Patel, ISHR’s Deputy Executive Director, reminded States: ‘Human rights defenders are not only on the front lines of crises, they are on the front lines of solutions.’
Jasmin Lorch in an article of 25 June 2025 argues that European support to human rights NGOs, critical civil society and free media is not merely a “nice-to-have“. Instead, it directly serves European interests due to the important information function that these civil society actors perform.
USAID funding cuts have dealt a heavy blow to human rights defenders, critical Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and independent media outlets around the globe. While the damage is hard to quantify exactly, it is clearly huge. For instance, the Centre for Human Rights and Democracy at People in Need estimates that the human rights and media organizations it supports have seen their budgets shrink by 40 to 100% because of the cuts. Based on a USAID fact sheet, meanwhile taken offline, Reporters without Borders (RSF) informed that the dismantling of USAID had affected support to 6,200 journalists, 707 non-state media outlets and 279 civil society organizations (CSOs) working to support free media. The impacts on local civil society are especially pronounced in closed authoritarian contexts where CSOs are both restricted and donor-dependent. In Cambodia, ADHOC, one of the few remaining local human rights organizations, lost 74 percent of its budget and had to close 16 out of its 22 provincial offices.
As critical CSOs and independent media outlets struggle to find alternative sources of funding, they face another threat to their survival: Major European donors, including Sweden, have cut down on foreign funding as well, citing their own national needs, including the necessity to invest more in defence. Germany, the biggest bilateral donor since the dismantling of USAID, has recently pledged to better integrate its foreign, defence, and development policy and to more closely align development cooperation with its security and economic interests. Accordingly, there is a significant risk that European donors will (further) cut down on funding for critical CSOs and free media as well.
However, European donors should consider that continuing to support human rights defenders, critical NGOs and independent media outlets is in their own interest.
Notably, these civil society actors serve an important information function. By furnishing insights into human rights abuses, governance deficits and patterns of corruption, they provide European (as well as other) governments with a better understanding of political developments, power relations and regime dynamics in their partner countries, thereby enhancing the predictability of security and economic partnerships. Authoritarian governments. in particular, restrict the free flow of information, while, concurrently, engaging in propaganda and, at times, strategic disinformation. Consequently, European foreign, economic and security policy towards these governments routinely suffers from severe information deficits, including the existence of numerous “unknown unknowns”. To compensate for this weakness, country assessments and expert opinions used by foreign, development, and defence ministries in Europe to devise policy approaches towards non-democratic partner countries often include information provided by independent media outlets, human rights or anti-corruption NGOs. Similarly, European embassies in authoritarian countries frequently draw on the reports and documentations accomplished by local human rights NGOs.
In some cases, the information provided by critical NGOs, human rights defenders and independent media outlets – both local and transnational – is highly economically and security relevant, for instance when it serves to unearth patterns of transnational crime. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an investigative journalist network, which also has a media development branch and was heavily affected by the USAID funding cuts, for instance, contributed to the Panama Papers that disclosed the secretive use of offshore tax havens. A recent report named Policies and Patterns. State-Abetted Transnational Crime in Cambodia as a Global Security Threat draws on interviews with journalists and civil society representatives. While expressing disappointment with the ineffectiveness of large parts of the aid community and big counter-trafficking NGOs in addressing the problem, it emphasizes that
“the ‘local civil society’ community — grassroots volunteer response networks, human rights defenders, and independent media —have been and remain the lynchpin of an embattled response. These heavily repressed and poorly funded groups have been and remain the primary source of available evidence on the lead perpetrators, their networks, and their modes of operation” (quote on p.3).
Last but not least, establishing partnerships with human rights defenders and critical NGOs also allows European countries to expand their social and political alliances in their partner countries, a diversification that can be highly useful in times of political uncertainty and change. ..
Support to human rights NGOs, other critical CSOs and free media constitutes an important contribution to democracy and pluralism. However, it also benefits European economic and security interests by enhancing the knowledge base on which European governments can draw when constructing their international alliances. European governments already use the information provided by these civil society actors in various ways, so they should continue providing diplomatic support, solidarity, and resources to them. Moreover, partnerships with human rights, media, and other civil society representatives provide European governments with an important possibility to diversify their international partnerships.
Against this backdrop, European support to these civil society actors is not a “nice-to-have” that can easily be dispensed with when funding gets more scarce. It is an important element in ensuring the predictability and reliability of European foreign relations.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 