On 4 August 2023 UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, expressed deep regret at the closure of his office in Uganda, following the Government’s decision not to renew the Host Country Agreement. The office in Kampala will officially cease its operations on Saturday. Sub-offices in Gulu and Moroto closed on 30 June and 31 July. See also: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/15/uganda-threatens-close-un-human-rights-office
“I regret that our office in Uganda had to close after 18 years, during which we were able to work closely with civil society, people from various walks of life in Uganda, as well as engaging with State institutions for the promotion and protection of the human rights of all Ugandans,” said Türk.
“Much progress has been made in the country over the years, but serious human rights challenges remain in the path to full enjoyment of human rights for all,” the High Commissioner said.
Türk expressed particular concern about the human rights situation in Uganda ahead of the 2026 elections, given the increasingly hostile environment in which human rights defenders, civil society actors and journalists are operating.
He noted that most of the 54 NGOs that were arbitrarily suspended in August 2021 remain closed. The High Commissioner also expressed concerns that the amended Computer Misuse law may further erode free expression.
Türk warned against retrogression from Uganda’s commitments under the international human rights treaties it has ratified, including in the passage of the deeply discriminatory and harmful anti-homosexuality law, that is already having a negative impact on Ugandans.
Türk urged the Government to ensure the national human rights body can function effectively and independently, as the the main body tasked with human rights oversight in Uganda.
“The Uganda Human Rights Commission, our long-standing partner in the protection and promotion of human rights in the country, is chronically under-funded and under-staffed, and reports of political interference in its mandate undermine its legitimacy, independence and impartiality,” he said.
“I urge the Ugandan government to provide the Commission with adequate human, technical and financial resources so that it may more effectively execute its important mandate.”
“On our part, the UN Human Rights Office remains committed to working on human rights in Uganda, in line with my global mandate,” he added.
A large group of civil society organizations, condemn the three-year prison sentence handed down to human rights researcher at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) and academic Patrick George Zaki for his writings highlighting the hardship and discrimination faced by Coptic Christians in Egypt, such as himself.
On July 18, 2023, following a trial rife with due process violations, an Egyptian emergency state security court handed down a three-year prison sentence to Patrick on trumped up charges of spreading false news. Patrick, who was a graduate student at the University of Bologna at the time, was arrested by Egyptian authorities on February 7, 2020, while at the Cairo Airport during a visit home to see his family. In custody, he was held incommunicado for a 24-hour period; he was beaten, stripped, electrocuted, verbally abused, and threatened. He was initially accused of joining a terrorist organization and spreading false news. In September 2021, lawyers learned that he had been referred to emergency state security court on false news charges for a 2019 article that he authored for independent digital media outlet Daraj on his experience as a Coptic Christian religious minority, titled, “Displacement, Killing & Harassment: A Week in the Diaries of Egypt’s Copts.” On December 7, 2021, following 22 months behind bars, he was ordered released from detention pending trial, and placed on travel ban. His trial continued until the July 2023 verdict, following which he was taken back into custody today.
Verdicts handed down by an emergency court are not subject to legal appeal, only to ratification by the President. The President also has the authority to commute the sentence or to quash the verdict. Furthermore, under Circular No. 10 of 2017 governing emergency state security courts, “If the accused is brought to trial while not in custody and sentenced to a prison penalty, he must be released immediately without executing the penalty pending the decision of the ratifying authority.” Per this provision, Patrick must legally be free while the President considers ratification; for Egyptian authorities to have taken him into custody constitutes a clear violation of this circular.
The targeting, arrest, prosecution, and sentencing of Patrick Zaki for writing about his experiences as a Coptic Christian is an egregious measure by Egyptian authorities that is indicative of a larger failure by the state to protect religious minorities. Instead, the authorities target Copts for merely expressing themselves and bringing attention to the discrimination they regularly endure. This sentence occurs in violation of Egypt’s domestic laws and international legal commitments, and sends a clear message that the Egyptian government is not serious about implementing its national human rights strategy or carrying out a meaningful national dialogue. At a time during which Egyptian authorities should be addressing the dire economic crisis, this step raises severe questions on the trajectory of the country.
The undersigned civil society organizations, call on Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi not to ratify the verdict handed down to Patrick Zaki and instead to quash it in its entirety. We call on Egyptian authorities to immediately release Patrick Zaki from custody, to drop all charges and close all cases brought against him in their entirety, and to lift the travel ban brought against him. We urge all of Egypt’s international, multilateral, and government partners to press the Egyptian government to immediately release Patrick and cease persecuting him for his legally protected speech and vital human rights work.
On 11 July 2023 EFE reported that Vietnam had released Vietnamese-Australian activist Chau Van Kham, sentenced in 2019 to 12 years in prison for extremism over his ties to the Viet Tan pro-democratic party.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he “very much welcomes the release of Chau,” in remarks Monday from Berlin, through Australian public broadcaster ABC.
Chau’s lawyer Dan Nguyen said in a statement through Amnesty International Australia that the activist, who returned Monday night to Australia, is with his wife and two sons. He also thanked the government’s, organizations and individuals’ efforts that fought for his release.
This was due to Chau, 73, being linked to pro-democratic group Viet Tan, considered an extremist entity in the country but a human rights organization in Australia.
Deputy Australian Prime Minister Richard Marles said Chau was released on “humanitarian” reasons and “in the spirit of friendship which exists between Australia and Vietnam,” according to ABC.
Chau is one of “more than 150 political activists in Vietnam who have been detained for peaceful acts in favor of freedom of expression,” Human Rights Watch Asia Human Rights Director Elaine Pearson said in a statement.
Pearson spoke of journalist Dang Dihn Bach and activists Mai Phan Loi, Dang Dinh Bach, and Hoang Thi Minh Hong among them and urged Australia to continue advocating for their release.
The exact number of political prisoners in Vietnam is unknown, as numbers provided by different human rights organizations have discrepancies.
While Human Rights Watch says the total exceeds 150, Amnesty International said there were 128 political prisoners in the country last year. Dissident organization Defend the Defenders raised the number to more than 250.
The Human Rights Council should urgently address the deterioration of the human rights situation in Tunisia, four human rights organizations said on 27 June 2023 as the 53rd Council’s session is underway.
In a letter sent to UN Member States’ Representatives on 5 June 2023, the four undersigned organizations warned against the rapidly worsening situation in Tunisia, and urged States to seize the opportunity of the ongoing Human Rights Council’s session to address it. The organizations called on the Council and Member States to press the Tunisian authorities to comply with their obligations under international human rights law particularly those guaranteeing the rights to fair trial, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and non-discrimination.
The Human Rights Council should urge Tunisia to end the ongoing crackdown on peaceful dissent and freedom of expression, and drop charges against, and release, all individuals being detained and prosecuted solely on the basis of their peaceful political activities and the exercise of their human rights. The Council should also call on Tunisia to conduct prompt, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent and investigation into a wave of anti-Black violence – including assaults and summary evictions – against Black African foreign nationals, including migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, and bring to justice anyone reasonably suspected to be responsible, and provide victims with access to justice and effective remedies.
Over the past two years, Tunisia has witnessed a significant rollback on human rights. Judicial independence guarantees have been dismantled and individual judges and prosecutors have been subjected to arbitrary dismissal, politicized criminal prosecutions and increased interference by the executive. Lawyers are being prosecuted for the discharge of their professional duties and exercise of their right to freedom of expression.
‘The Tunisian authorities’ interference in the judiciary and attacks on lawyers have greatly undermined the right to fair trial and public trust in the integrity of the justice system. The authorities must ensure that the courts are not weaponized to crush dissent and free expression,’ said International Commission of Jurists’ MENA director Said Benarbia.
Under the guise of ‘fighting offences related to information and communication systems’, punishable by up to a 10 years’ imprisonment and a hefty fine according to Decree Law 54, at least 13 individuals, including journalists, political opponents, lawyers, human rights defenders and activists, have been subject to police or judicial investigations and are facing possible prosecutions.
‘With Tunisia facing political uncertainty and economic crisis, it’s more important than ever that Tunisians be free to debate their country’s future without fear of reprisal. The authorities should strive to allow the effective enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression of everyone; instead, they are attacking it,’ said Rawya Rageh, Amnesty International’s acting deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa.
Last week, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called on the Tunisian authorities to stop restricting media freedoms and criminalizing independent journalism. In a statement published on 23 June, Volker Türk expressed deep concern at the increasing restrictions on the right to freedom of expression and press freedom in Tunisia, noting that vague legislation is being used to criminalize independent journalism and stifle criticism of the authorities. ‘It is troubling to see Tunisia, a country that once held so much hope, regressing and losing the human rights gains of the last decade,’ said the High Commissioner.
Since February 2023, a wave of arrests targeted political opponents and perceived critics of Tunisia’s President, Kais Saied. In the absence of credible evidence of any offences, judges are investigating at least 48 people, such as dissidents, opposition figures, and lawyers, for allegedly conspiring against the State or threatening State security, among other charges. At least 17 of them are being investigated under Tunisia’s 2015 counter-terrorism law.
‘By jailing political leaders and banning opposition meetings, the authorities are dangerously trampling on the fundamental rights that underpin a vibrant democracy. The democratic backsliding and the human rights violations, which are unprecedented since the 2011 revolution, require urgent attention from the Human Rights Council and Member States,’ said Salsabil Chellali, Tunisia director at Human Rights Watch.
De Lima, who has now been in detention for more than six years, was acquitted for allegedly trading illegal drugs while she was secretary of justice, after being acquitted in the first case against her in 2021. Both cases were evidently fabricated and there is no reason to think that the third case against her is any more credible.
Then-President Rodrigo Duterte directed de Lima’s persecution in response to her attempts to investigate killings that took place in the early stages of Duterte’s “war on drugs” in 2016. But Duterte’s enmity toward her started in the late 2000s when, as chair of the Commission on Human Rights, de Lima began an investigation into killings attributed to a “death squad” operating in Davao City, where Duterte was the mayor. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is investigating those killings as well as numerous “drug war” killings that took place while Duterte was president. In 2019, as part of his efforts to avoid international justice, Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the ICC’s Rome Statute, which obligates states party to the treaty to cooperate with the court.
While de Lima’s latest acquittal brings hope that her unjust detention may be ending sooner rather than later, she never should have been prosecuted or held in pretrial detention without bail. Duterte’s improper influence over the Department of Justice was evident by the recanting of the testimony of three key witnesses in this case, saying they had been coerced.
This is an opportunity for the Department of Justice to regain some of its credibility by dropping the outstanding case against de Lima. But there also needs to be accountability. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who last week conceded abuses were committed in the “war on drugs,” should urgently launch an inquiry into how the levers of the justice system were manipulated against de Lima and implement reforms to ensure such politicization of the justice system never happens again.
This is echoed by anOpen Letter to the Government of the Philippines on 24 May 2023 by
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
Balay Alternative Legal Advocates for Development in Mindanaw (Balaod Mindanaw)
Karapatan Alliance Philippines (KARAPATAN)
Philippine Collective for Modern Heroism (Dakila)
Purple Action for Indigenous Women’s Rights (LILAK)
They welcome the acquittal of Leila de Lima, former Senator and chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines, on one of her two remaining politically motivated charges on 12 May 2023 by a Muntinlupa court….
De Lima’s arrest is in violation of her constitutional rights as a sitting senator and in contravention of international human rights law. The arrest is purely based on politically-motivated charges, following her senate investigation into the thousands of extrajudicial killings under Duterte’s ‘war on drugs.’….De Lima should never have been detained in the first place.
The arbitrary detention and mistreatment of former Senator de Lima reflect the Duterte administration’s judicial harassment of human rights defenders as well as the Philippines’ shrinking civic space. Nearly a year after President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. took office in June 2022, de Lima’s case remains stagnant. The slow progression of the case demonstrates both the previous and current Philippine administrations’ unwillingness to seek justice and accountability…
FORUM-ASIA alongside its reputable Philippine member organisations urge your Excellencies 1) to immediately and unconditionally drop the remaining politically motivated charges against de Lima; 2) to request the Muntinlupa court to grant her bail petition for release; 3) and to provide compensation and other reparations for the human rights violations she was made to endure.
Philippine authorities should release and allow de Lima to be reunited with her loved ones after six long years.
We demand the immediate release of de Lima and all other political prisoners who have been persecuted for their work and beliefs in human rights and social justice.
Earlier on Monday, 9 January 2023 the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had rejoiced in the acquittal of members of Karapatan, – the Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights – and their allies GABRIELA – National Alliance of Women – and the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines (RMP) in the face of the perjury charges brought against them by the Philippine authorities.
The Quezon City Metropolitan Trial Court Branch 139 issued its judgment on the retaliatory and trumped-up perjury case against ten human rights defenders, Karapatan Chairperson, Elisa Tita Lubi; Karapatan Secretary General, Cristina “Tinay” Palabay; Karapatan Deputy Secretary General, Roneo Clamor; Karapatan Treasurer, Gabriela Grista Dalena; Karapatan National Council members, Edita Burgos, Wilfredo Ruazol, and Jose Mari Callueng; GABRIELA Chairperson, Gertrudes Ranjo Libang; GABRIELA Secretary General, Joan May Salvador, and member of the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, Emma Cupin, acquitting them of all charges.
In a case of judicial harassment, which started in July 2019, the then-National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. submitted a perjury complaint against the three organizations related to the registration of the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines. Although the case was initially dismissed for lack of probable cause and sufficient evidence, in February 2020 the Quezon City Prosecutor, Vimar Barcellano, granted a motion for reconsideration of the perjury case.
The judicial harassment resulted in global condemnation from civilsociety, Members of the EuropeanParliament and the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders calling on the Philippine authorities to put an end to the judicial harassment faced by the ten human rights defenders and the wider human rights movement in the country.
While we celebrate the acquittal, we remain as committed as ever to stand in solidarity with members and the wider human rights community in the Philippines in their struggles to advance human rights and social justice for all.
On 12 April 2023 Human Rights Watch reported that United Arab Emirates are continuing to incarcerate at least 51 Emirati prisoners who completed their sentences between one month and nearly four years ago.
The prisoners are all part of the grossly unfair “UAE94” mass trial of 69 critics of the government, whose convictions violated their rights to free expression, association, and assembly. UAE authorities are using baseless counterterrorism justifications for continuing to hold them past their completed sentences.
“Prisoners in the UAE94 case have already suffered tremendously after years in prison following a grossly unfair trail,” said Joey Shea, United Arab Emirates researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Emirati authorities should free them immediately and finally put an end to this decade-long ordeal. Prominent UAE partners, including the United States and COP28 organizers, should press UAE authorities for their immediate release.”
The prisoners were among 94 people detained beginning in March 2012 in a wave of arbitrary arrests amid an unprecedented crackdown on dissent. The case had a chilling effect on freedom of expression, assembly, and association.
In July 2013, Abu Dhabi’s Federal Supreme Court convicted 69 of the defendants, sentencing 5 to 7 years in prison, 56 to 10 years, and 8 in absentia to 15 years, with 25 acquitted. The verdict could not be appealed, in violation of international law, because it was issued by the UAE’s highest court. As of March 2023, 51 had completed their sentences but remain imprisoned with no clear legal basis, according to Emirati activists and court documents. Some prisoners completed their sentences as early as July 2019.
At least four of the 51 received a Public Prosecution letter saying that they were on Munasaha during what was supposed to be their last three months in detention, activists and family members told Human Rights Watch. After three months, these detainees were taken in front of a judge, who determined they still held “terrorist thoughts” and ruled that they needed further “rehabilitation.”
Under article 48 of the counterterrorism law, the public prosecutor may place someone convicted of a terrorist offense in a counselling or Munasaha program in the prison where they were serving their sentence, under counselling center supervision.
The counterterrorism law sets no time limit for continued incarceration and instead requires the state security public prosecution to report to the court every three months. The court may order a person’s release if it finds that “his or her condition so allows.” It is not clear if the defendant has any right to attend the hearing or see or challenge the evidence used to justify their detention.
The decade of unjust imprisonment has had devastating consequences for the prisoners’ families. A family member said that the young child of one of the prisoners still does not understand why her father was in prison. “She asks me, we love our country and our leaders, why are they are doing this to my father?” the family member said.
Many prisoners are being held in the notorious al-Razeen prison, and many are alleged to be in solitary confinement. A family member said, “All the prisoners are suffering there, they don’t have their rights and it is very hard to visit them.” Another family member said: “Throughout the years, the conditions are getting worse.”
Visits are irregular and difficult to procure, the family members said. Families often drive for hours to the prison in the middle of the desert, only to be denied a visit with no explanation. Family members also said that phone conversations are often cut off mid-call with no explanation. Some prisoners have not been able to speak with their family members by phone for years.
Other family members said there have been months-long periods in which a prisoner, as one family member said, “totally disappeared” with “no calls, no nothing,” leading the family to believe that “maybe he is dead.” Prisoners are also often denied books and pictures.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in article 15 prohibits retroactive criminal punishment. The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its general comment on article 9 of the ICCPR, said, “if, under the most exceptional circumstances, a present, direct and imperative threat is invoked to justify the detention of persons considered to present such a threat, the burden of proof lies on States parties to show that the individual poses such a threat and that it cannot be addressed by alternative measures, and that burden increases with the length of the detention.”
“By arbitrarily extending the unjust sentences of peaceful critics using bogus counterterrorism justifications without due process, the UAE again shows its total disregard for the rule of law,” Shea said.
On 27 March 2023 7:00 Human Rights Watch said that the Vietnamese authorities should immediately release land rights activist Truong Van Dung and drop all charges against him. Police in Hanoi arrested Truong Van Dung in May 2022 on charges of “conducting propaganda against the state.” A Hanoi court on March 28, 2023 sentenced him to six years in prison.
Vietnamese authorities have convicted at least 163 people since 2018 for exercising their rights to freedom of expression or association under vague or over broad laws that criminalize protesting or criticizing the government. At least 18 others have been charged and are awaiting trial. The authorities have brought many of these cases using the propaganda charge, criminalized under articles 88 and 117 of Vietnam’s penal code.
“Truong Van Dung is the latest in a long line of human rights defenders silenced by the Vietnamese government for protesting against human rights violations and advocating for reforms,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Democratic governments forging closer ties with Vietnam need to speak out publicly and forcefully in his support and call on Vietnam to release all political prisoners and take genuine steps toward reform.”
Truong Van Dung, 65, first became active in land rights advocacy in the 2000s, campaigning against forced confiscation of his own house. In the early 2010s, he joined other activists and began to advocate for basic rights, including freedom of expression, association, and assembly. Between 2011 and 2018, he also participated in numerous anti-China and pro-environment protests. He joined a protest opposing Vietnam’s problematic 2018 law on cybersecurity and publicly boycotted Vietnam’s national “elections,” a process controlled by the Vietnam Communist Party which is neither free nor fair.
In December 2013, Truong Van Dung and other activists founded a humanitarian group, Hoi Bau bi Tuong Than (Association of Gourd and Squash Mutual Assistance), to provide financial and spiritual support for political prisoners, land rights petitioners, and their families.
After his arrest in May 2022, Truong Van Dung was held incommunicado for more than nine months. He was allowed to meet with his lawyer for the first time in March. His family has not been allowed to see him. Vietnam’s courts, controlled by the ruling Communist Party of Vietnam, are not independent and hearings and trials do not meet international standards. “How can Truong Van Dung get a fair trial when Vietnam’s legal system isn’t independent and the laws under which he is charged violate basic international human rights standards – and what he has been accused of shouldn’t even be crimes,” Robertson said.
Tirana Hassan, a lawyer and veteran human rights investigator who has documented human rights abuses throughout crises and conflicts globally, has been named the next executive director of Human Rights Watch, the organization announced. Hassan was previously the Human Rights Watch chief programs officer and had been serving as acting executive director since September 2022, following the departure of its long-time leader, Kenneth Roth.
“As new executive director of Human Rights Watch, Tirana Hassan brings impeccable credentials as a human rights practitioner and an ambitious vision for human rights solutions to the challenges the world is facing,” said Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, CEO and president of the International Peace Institute and the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. “A hugely experienced activist, Tirana will be a formidable leader and very much a force to be reckoned with!”
With decades of experience in the human rights and humanitarian fields, Hassan, who began her career as a social worker and spent many years working with women and children in conflict and crisis situations, first joined Human Rights Watch in 2010, covering emergencies across Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. She went on to become Amnesty International’s director of crisis response before returning to Human Rights Watch as its chief programs officer in 2020, leading the organization’s research, advocacy, legal, and communications departments.
“Tirana has the rare combination of wide-ranging investigative experience, strategic creativity, and a deep commitment to human rights principle that Human Rights Watch needs to tackle the complex human rights challenges the world is facing,” said Kenneth Roth, former executive director at Human Rights Watch, who stepped down in August 2022. “I am thrilled that she will lead Human Rights Watch into the future.”
When she headed Amnesty International’s crisis team, Hassan oversaw the development of innovative uses of technology to advance human rights investigations in Myanmar, Syria, and other crisis areas. She brings a proven track record of developing ambitious programs to address critical human rights issues and will lead the Human Rights Watch’s work with activists, survivors, and civil society to head off the rising threats to human rights around the world.
One of Hassan’s priorities will be to call out government selective applications of human rights obligations. The swift and bold response to the crisis in Ukraine including a UN Human Rights Council commission of inquiry and multiple condemnations by the UN General Assembly – has shown what is possible when governments work together, while the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin shows that no one is beyond the reach of justice. However, the same governments have often at best responded in a lukewarm fashion or at worst turned a blind eye to the plight of other victims. Hassan will focus on using all possible levers to push governments to realize their legal obligations to victims everywhere, including in Afghanistan, Israel and Palestine, Ethiopia, and Iran.
Hassan was born in Singapore to a Pakistani father whose family left India during partition and a Malaysian-born Sri Lankan and Chinese mother. Her family resettled in Australia in the 1970s after her father’s academic research on Singapore’s housing policies triggered the ire of the government, which was cracking down on dissent. She has said family stories of racism, prejudice, and repression helped shape her world view and contributed to her decision to work on behalf of rights for dispossessed people.
After receiving a bachelor’s degree in social work from the University of South Australia, Hassan worked as a social worker in Los Angeles, London, and Adelaide, counseling homeless young people before obtaining a law degree from the University of Adelaide. During her last year of law school, she co-founded the Woomera Lawyers Group, a refugee advocacy organization that provided legal services to asylum seekers detained in Australia’s notorious desert detention center. She represented refugees and asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran who were detained in the remote facility and later went on to work in the humanitarian sector. Hassan also holds a master’s degree in international human rights law from Oxford University.
“I’m honored and humbled to lead this exceptional organization at a moment when the defense of human rights feels more urgent than ever,” Hassan said. “I look forward to building on Human Rights Watch’s formidable foundation to uplift the human rights defenders we work with and the communities we serve to put pressure on those in power to realize a rights-respecting future for us all.”
Kenneth Roth wrote in the Guardian of 10 January 2023 “I once ran Human Rights Watch. Harvard blocked my fellowship over Israel. I was told that my fellowship at the Kennedy School was vetoed over my and Human Rights Watch’s criticism of Israel”.
. ..If any academic institution can afford to abide by principle, to refuse to compromise academic freedom under real or presumed donor pressure, it is Harvard, the world’s richest university. Yet the Kennedy School’s dean, Douglas Elmendorf, vetoed a human rights fellowship that had been offered to me because of my criticism of Israel. As best we can tell, donor reaction was his concern.
.. in anticipation of my stay at the school, I reached out to the dean to introduce myself. We had a pleasant half-hour conversation. The only hint of a problem came at the end. He asked me whether I had any enemies.
It was an odd question. I explained that of course I had enemies. Many of them. That is a hazard of the trade as a human rights defender.
I explained that the Chinese and Russian governments had personally sanctioned me – a badge of honor, in my view. I mentioned that a range of governments, including Rwanda’s and Saudi Arabia’s, hate me. But I had a hunch what he was driving at, so I also noted that the Israeli government undoubtedly detests me, too.
That turned out to be the kiss of death. Two weeks later, the Carr Center called me up to say sheepishly that Elmendorf had vetoed my fellowship. He told Professor Kathryn Sikkink, a highly respected human rights scholar affiliated with the Kennedy School, that the reason was my, and Human Rights Watch’s, criticism of Israel.
That is a shocking revelation. How can an institution that purports to address foreign policy – that even hosts a human rights policy center – avoid criticism of Israel. Elmendorf has not publicly defended his decision, so we can only surmise what happened. He is not known to have taken public positions on Israel’s human rights record, so it is hard to imagine that his personal views were the problem.
But as the Nation showed in its exposé about my case, several major donors to the Kennedy School are big supporters of Israel. Did Elmendorf consult with these donors or assume that they would object to my appointment? We don’t know. But that is the only plausible explanation that I have heard for his decision. The Kennedy School spokesperson has not denied it.
Some defenders of the Israeli government have claimed that Elmendorf’s rejection of my fellowship was because Human Rights Watch, or I, devote too much attention to Israel. The accusation of “bias” is rich coming from people who themselves never criticize Israel and, typically using neutral sounding organizational names, attack anyone who criticizes Israel.
Moreover, Israel is one of 100 countries whose human rights record Human Rights Watch regularly addresses. Israel is a tiny percentage of its work. And within the Israeli-Palestinian context, Human Rights Watch addresses not only Israeli repression but also abuses by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and Hezbollah.
In any event, it is doubtful that these critics would be satisfied if Human Rights Watch published slightly fewer reports on Israel, or if I issued less frequent tweets. They don’t want less criticism of Israel. They want no criticism of Israel.
The other argument that defenders of Israel have been advancing is that Human Rights Watch, and I, “demonize” Israel, or that we try to “evoke repulsion and disgust”. Usually this is a prelude to charging that we are “antisemitic”.
The issue at Harvard is far more than my own academic fellowship. I recognized that, as an established figure in the human rights movement, I am in a privileged position. Being denied this fellowship will not significantly impede my future. But I worry about younger academics who are less known. If I can be canceled because of my criticism of Israel, will they risk taking the issue on?
The ultimate question here is about donor-driven censorship. Why should any academic institution allow the perception that donor preferences, whether expressed or assumed, can restrict academic inquiry and publication? Regardless of what happened in my case, wealthy Harvard should take the lead here.
To clarify its commitment to academic freedom, Harvard should announce that it will accept no contributions from donors who try to use their financial influence to censor academic work, and that no administrator will be permitted to censor academics because of presumed donor concerns. That would transform this deeply disappointing episode into something positive.
Tanya Lokshina, Associate Director, Europe and Central Asia Division, reported on 21 December 2022 on how the Moscow Helsinki Group MHG), Russia’s oldest Human Rights Group, faces ‘Liquidation’
Last week, Russia’s Justice Ministry filed a petition with the Moscow City Court seeking “liquidation” of the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG), a leading Russian human rights organization.
On 12 May Tanya Lokshina received one of MHG’s annual awards for contributions to human rights and the Russian human rights movement. She writes: “By then, in the aftermath of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the authorities had shut down Human Rights Watch’s Moscow office, along with the offices of 14 other foreign nongovernmental organizations. I had already left the country with the rest of our team, and my 9-year-old son received the beautifully framed award on my behalf. I first saw it several weeks later, when he joined me in Tbilisi, Georgia, where I had relocated to continue my work. I generally don’t display awards and diplomas, but receiving one from MHG was so special that it now hangs on my wall.”
MHG was founded in 1976 by Soviet dissidents to expose governmental repression. It lasted nine months before the government jailed or forced practically all its members into exile. After the USSR’s collapse, the group revived in the 1990’s under the leadership of Lyudmilla Alexeeva, a legendary human rights defender, and has been working tirelessly to expose abuses, build up a country-wide human rights movement in Russia, and advocate for the rule of law. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/12/10/russian-human-rights-defender-ludmila-mikhailovna-alexeeva-is-no-longer/]
The liquidation lawsuit is based on the Justice Ministry’s ad hoc inspection of MHG. The liquidation petition cites several supposed violations of Russia’s stifling legislation on nongovernmental organizations, including the group being registered in Moscow but operating elsewhere in Russia, and the group’s charter lacking information on the location of its executive body. These are obviously bureaucratic pretexts that could not justify such a drastic move.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 