On 25 August 2026 it was reported that a Chinese court has sentenced artist Gao Zhen to three years in prison for “infringing upon the reputation of heroes” through his satirical art
U.S.-based Gao, who was part of an artistic duo known internationally as the Gao Brothers, was arrested while visiting family in China in August 2024. He has been in official custody since then.
The charges against Gao relate to artistic works that China’s authorities claim insulted revolutionary figures, including a 2009 statue called Mao’s Guilt, which shows the former leader and founder of modern China as kneeling in repentance. Others include as series called Miss Mao, which shows a caricatured version of Mao with breasts and an engorged nose.
Shane Yi, a researcher at Chinese Human Rights Defenders, who has been advocating for the case, described the sentence as “a very clear case of a violation of a person’s freedom of expression.” Yi noted that the artworks in question were created before the law Gao was sentenced with had been passed and said the artist plans to appeal the sentence.
“The lengthy pre-trial detention and, ultimately, decision to convict Gao Zhen and sentence him to the maximum three-year prison term under this offense illustrate the authorities’ determination to deter others from engaging in independent artistic expression,” said Amnesty’s China Director Sarah Brooks.
Zhao said she hopes to be reunited with her husband and be able to return to the U.S., where the family had immigrated to.
“I felt two years was my limit, and I was really disappointed and sad. I haven’t been able to catch my breath,” she said. She had prepared clothes for her husband hoping that he would be released. Chinese courts often count the time of a sentencing from the date a prisoner is taken.
In a Blog for Human Rights First published on 20 August, 2026 Brian Dooley decries the arrest of Naji Fateel in Bahrain.
Around 5am on Tuesday morning this week, Naji Fateel was woken up by police banging hard on his bedroom door. They grabbed and arrested the Bahraini Human Rights Defender, and took him into custody.
Speaking today from jail, he described how startled he was at what happened, because in 2024, after spending a decade in prison for his human rights work, he was given a “Royal Pardon” and told was no longer wanted by the police. “They rushed into the house, terrifying the children, terrifying my mother, first thing in the morning. They dragged me out and put me on a bus,” he said.
Fateel is a prominent peaceful activist, known internationally for his human rights work. He was arrested in 2013 and sentenced to 15 years in prison. In 2016, while already imprisoned, he was given another fifteen-year sentence following his alleged role in prison unrest at the notorious Jau Prison the year before. That sentence was later reduced to ten years on appeal. Human Rights First was among those, including various UN mechanisms, regularlycalling for his release over the years. I raised his case repeatedly, including in testimony I gave to the U.S. Congress in 2022.
Although he should never have been jailed in the first place, Bahrain’s ruling family – its unelected government – issued him a pardon in 2024, assuring him he had no more prison time to serve. But now he is back in jail.
The pretext for seizing him appears to be a fine imposed by the bizarre 2016 judgement over prison protests. In addition to the prison time, the sentence ordered Fateel and 56 other defendants to pay over $1million between them towards repairing alleged damage to the prison during the unrest, mostly to its air conditioning system.
Fateel says that when police put him on the bus they cited this collective punishment as the reason he was taken from his home and arrested in a dawn raid.
“They said, ‘You have a fine.’ I said ‘There was no need for you to do this – if you had called me and told me to come to your office, I would have come.’”
Fateel also said he had been specifically told, in a call with the police two days before the early morning raid, that there was no need for him to report to the police offices for anything.
He said the police who stormed his home showed no arrest warrant, and that the way they targeted him “was a method of intimidation.” He said today too that he and four others arrested that same morning have been told they will be brought before the Public Prosecution Office to be charged with crimes.
Not for the first time, Bahrain’s security forces seem to be exhibiting a dangerous mix of brutality and incompetence. Fateel should be released immediately, as should the other human rights activists still jailed in Bahrain for their peaceful criticism of the government
On 27 March 2026, Pablo López Alavez was released following a ruling by the High Court of Justice of the State of Oaxaca on appeal. The decision revised the legal classification of the offences and imposed a sentence of 15 years and 3 months imprisonment for the offence of simple homicide. Taking into account the time the human rights defender had spent in detention since his arbitrary arrest on 15 August 2010, the court considered the sentence to have been served and ordered his immediate release. Although the sentence remains in force, his release represents a significant step forward after more than 15 years of detention. Due to concerns for Pablo’s safety and that of his family, as well as for security reasons, this information is only being made public now.
Pablo has been released after a fight for justice and freedom of over 15 years, led by his wife, the woman human rights defender Yolanda Pérez Cruz, and organisations from the state of Oaxaca, as well as Mexican and international civil society organizations. Activists, collectives and human rights organisations celebrate the release of our colleague Pablo López Alavez, a Zapotec forest defender originally from the community of San Isidro Aloapam, Oaxaca. This long journey would not have been possible without the support and solidarity shown from all corners of the world. We thank all the organisations, individuals and collectives who never gave up on their efforts and commitment to securing his release over the course of more than 15 years. We thank the international bodies for their sensitivity in highlighting the political use of the criminal justice and the prison system to criminalise and impose prolonged punishment on human rights defenders in Mexico.
His family were forcibly displaced from their community due to the constant and serious threats they have faced as a result of their struggle for justice and the defence of human rights: so they are currently under protective measures granted by the Oaxaca State Human Rights Ombudsman’s Office (DDHPO). We emphasise that Pablo’s detention and his family’s forced displacement have had profound impacts on their well-being, including chronic illnesses, cultural and community displacement, as well as the necessity of having to learn Spanish against their will and adapt to an urban, mestizo environment.
The fight for justice continues. We, the undersigned organisations, call on the Federal Judiciary to conduct a thorough review of the case, as the ruling that convicted him lacks a solid basis. In order to put an end to the criminalisation that the defender has faced for more than 15 years, an acquittal must be issued in favour of the forest defender and comprehensive measures must be adopted to provide redress for the harm caused. This implies ensuring that the authorities responsible for the serious violations committed against him are properly investigated, prosecuted and punished, as well as implementing all necessary measures to protect his physical integrity and psychological well-being, as well as that of his family and the organisations that have supported them. Finally, our organisations emphasise the obligation of the Mexican authorities to establish robust guarantees of non-repetition.
The conviction was issued without taking into account the serious inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution. Nor did it give due consideration to the evidence presented by the defence, which demonstrated that the human rights defender was elsewhere when the events of which he was accused took place.
Nine years after the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issuedOpinion 23/2017, which concluded that Pablo’s deprivation of liberty is arbitrary and motivated by his legitimate work in environmental defence; and that, similarly, in December 2020, a group of United Nations Special Rapporteurs issued the joint communication UA MEX 14/2020 calling for his release and the adoption of comprehensive reparatory measures; both of these opinions by international United Nations experts remain unfulfilled.
We therefore demand that the State of Mexico, in compliance with its international obligations, put an end to the serious and systematic violations of the rights of the forest defender Pablo López Alavez, and we call on the authorities to:
Comply immediately with the recommendations set out in Opinion 23/2017 and UN Urgent Action UA MEX 14/2020, including comprehensive redress and guarantees of non-repetition;
Overturn the conviction issued on 27 March 2026 and acquit Pablo López Alavez, given the lack of a proper assessment of the evidence, which resulted in his wrongful imprisonment and prevented him from continuing to defend the territory;
Ensure comprehensive and effective protection measures for him and his family, who remain under constant harassment and threat;
Refrain from the misuse of criminal law against defenders of the territory and indigenous peoples, and ensure that no unfounded criminal proceedings are initiated or pursued on the grounds of the legitimate exercise of their defence of human rights.
On 10 July 2026, UN experts expressed deep concern over the detention of Algerian journalist and human rights defender Hassan Bouras, who faces serious risks after several weeks on hunger strike in detention.
“We are deeply concerned by the ongoing arbitrary detention of Mr. Bouras, as well as the serious risks to his life, health and physical integrity,” the experts said.
On 12 April 2026, plainclothes security agents apprehended Bouras outside his home in El Bayadh, reportedly without a warrant or explanation. The following day, the El Bayadh court ordered his pre-trial detention on several charges, including membership of a terrorist organisation and disseminating publications deemed harmful to the national interest.
“We are troubled that his arrest and detention appear to be linked to the peaceful exercise of his rights to freedom of expression, to promote, protect and defend human rights as well as to participation in public affairs through his work as a journalist and human rights defender,” the experts said.
The arrest follows a pattern of judicial harassment linked to Bouras’ journalistic and human rights activities.
On 2 May, Bouras was placed in solitary confinement for beginning a hunger strike to protest his detention and the violation of his human rights. During the hunger strike, which lasted 26 days, he collapsed twice and developed serious health complications without receiving adequate medical care – a matter of acute concern given his pre-existing cardiac and respiratory conditions. His deteriorating condition raised acute concerns for his health and well-being.
On 22 June, his case was referred to the local criminal court and is now pending trial. This comes amidst increasing concerns regarding restrictions on civil and political rights and freedom of the press in the country, as well as the ability of journalists and human rights defenders to carry out their work free from intimidation.
The experts stressed that deprivation of liberty for the legitimate exercise of freedom of expression is incompatible with international human rights law. They recalled that all persons deprived of liberty must be treated with humanity and respect for their inherent dignity and body integrity.
“We urge Algerian authorities to act without delay to protect Mr. Bouras’ life, health and freedom of expression. He must be granted immediate access to legal counsel and adequate medical care,” the experts said.
“We call for Mr. Bouras’ immediate release and for an end to the broader pattern of harassment and prosecution of journalists and human rights defenders in Algeria.”
On 22 June 2026, Amnesty International wrote about the inspiring Ivorian reggae artist/ human rights defender Guillaume Konan, known as Kajeem,
Guillaume Konan, known as Kajeem, is a singer and songwriter who grew up in Abobo, a neighbourhood of Abidjan, the economic capital of Côte d’Ivoire. Now 57, he began his career in the 1990s in rap music before moving on to reggae.Kajeem is committed to defending rights and freedoms, and speaks out against restrictions on civic space in his country, particularly the right to freedom of expression. He has been working with Amnesty International for over a dozen years as a human rights ambassador.
Following the song “Osons le courage” (Let’s be brave) in 2023, which called on youth to resist injustice, he released in June 2026 the song “En toute liberté” (In total freedom) with artists Didier Awadi from Senegal and Soum Bill from Côte d’Ivoire, and the support of Amnesty International.
“I made my first visit to prisoners when I was 12, as a Catholic boy scout. It was a very formative experience for the young boy I was. I couldn’t understand how people could be put in those terrible conditions, no matter what they had done. So, when I started playing music as a teenager, I gravitated toward genres that stand up for the underdog. Freedom of expression was one of the first rights I sought to assert. Nowadays, the laws in Côte d’Ivoire regarding the internet are so vague that they have become pretexts for imprisoning whomever the authorities please. There is no worse oppression than the one carried out under the guise of the law. Being able to speak out against injustice is a fundamental right, and until the day I die, I will fight for it…. I write songs that denounce a system, not individuals.Ivorian singer Kajeem
I’ve faced various forms of pressure. Today, radio hosts are pressured not to play certain songs, and sponsors are pressured to stop supporting certain artists. The first song of mine which provoked threats was “Sergent 2 togos” (Sergeant 2 togos) released in 2006, which exposed police extortion at roadside checkpoints. I often joke that in other countries, when you’re threatened, you go to the police for protection. But I was being threatened by the police! I had to leave the country for six months.
When I released the song “Tu tournes film” (You’re shooting a movie) in 2023, I faced the same issues, but in a much more intense way. The song “Tu tournes film,” meaning “You’re just blowing hot air”, is about broken promises. An election pledge is a social contract made with the voters, but if you remind those guys of their promises, they get upset!
I woke up one morning to over 1,600 hate messages, including death threats. But I’ve never been very scared by that kind of thing, I think it’s counterproductive because a song has a life of its own, even if its author is dead! People shouldn’t see me as an enemy. I write songs that denounce a system, not individuals.
People may feel that human rights are a luxury they cannot afford because they have basic needs to meet. But how many people earn a lot of money while living under total oppression? We cannot prioritize our needs by saying, “Let’s eat first and worry about that later.” Human rights do not apply only to a certain category of countries or individuals, they are universal.
For me, the future is bright, as every day we see youth getting engaged despite all the distractions offered to them. I think of myself as a sad optimist, unlike the cheerful pessimists who seem happy but no longer believe in anything and just want to enjoy the moment. When you become aware of the realities, it makes you a little sad, but it motivates you because it shows you the work that needs to be done, and every morning, you head back into the fray.
Watch the video clip “En toute liberté” (In total freedom) with artists Kajeem, Didier Awadi and Soum Bill
In 1988 I was in Abidjan for the historic Human Rights Now! world tour concert organized by Amnesty. After that I kept running into the Amnesty team in the field, whether I was working with the Red Cross, visiting detainees, or organizing events at the university to raise awareness of human rights. We were working on the same issues, so I felt less alone. To me, Amnesty is truly like family. Our song “En toute liberté” is for all those fighting for human rights, so they have a rallying cry.”
To mark the release of the song “En toute liberté” and as part of the campaign Resist run by Amnesty International, Kajeem and Amnesty International Côte d’Ivoire are organizing a digital campaign, as well as discussions on the right to freedom of expression at universities across Côte d’Ivoire.
and now – 3 years later – there is another film, shown on 02 June 2026, also in Geneva:
Ten years after the murder of Honduran human rights defender Berta Cáceres, ISHR and PBI Switzerland invite you to a special film screening and discussion featuring an edited version of the film “Water for Life “, followed by a discussion with Roxanna Altholz, Camilo Bermúdez (COPINH) and director Will Parrinello. Free admission upon registration.
As part of a European advocacy tour organised by Peace Brigades International, Roxanna Altholz and Camilo Bermúdez will be stopping off in Switzerland to discuss the fight for truth and justice in the Berta Cáceres case.
The screening will be followed by a discussion with:
Roxanna Altholz, a human rights lawyer, associate director of the Human Rights Clinic at Berkeley Law and co-author of the independent report on the murder of Berta Cáceres
Camilo Bermúdez, a human rights defender and legal adviser to COPINH, a Honduran organisation founded by Berta Cáceres and supported by PBI in Honduras
Will Parrinello, director and producer of the film Water for Life.
The discussion will be moderated by Txell Bonet, a Catalan journalist.
2 June 2026 7:30 PM – 9:30 PM. Address: Fonction cinéma Maison des Arts du Grütli Rue du Général-Dufour 16 1204 Genève Event language(s) French/Spanish RSVP Needed: yes
Today was the funeral of one my best friends and, more importantly, one of the most significant architects of the international human rights system as it developed in the last 50 years. Theo (Theodoor Cornelis) van Boven, was born in Voorburg on 26 mei 1934 and died peacefully in Maastricht on 9 mei 2026.
I have had the honor to work with him for many years [our lives intertwined over a long period of time and on different locations] and wrote about him several times. Most recently “Courageous Leaders and NGO Initiatives” in Ramcharan and others (ed), The Protection Roles of Human Rights NGOs, Essays in honour of Adrien-Claude Zoller, Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2023 (ISBN 978-90-04-51677-9), pp 614-636.
So, here a large part of the section on this great man: This section is about a man who was crucial in getting the United Nations and NGO partners to deal with human rights protection. Much has been written about his work and the enormous contribution Theo van Boven made to the UN human rights machinery as we now know it. .. Nowadays the United Nations has an elaborate machinery to deal with human rights violations. The system is far from perfect and still too often subject to political pressures and selectivity but there are now a great many thematic and country mandates, emergency sessions and there is an International Criminal Court against impunity. Wind back 40 years and none of this existed. The violations were there for all to see but not for the United Nations, which preferred to consider this part of the ‘internal affairs of sovereign states’. The man who would make it his life’s mission to change this, Theo van Boven, got in 1977 the position from where to do it: Director of Human Rights in the UN.
His teenage years were eaten up by the second world war. His memories of that period, his strict protestant background and his law studies in Leiden led him to enter an area that was not so obvious at the time: international human rights. He studied in the USA, wrote there a thesis on freedom of religion and soon afterwards, around 1960, he found himself as a young diplomat shaping the human rights policy of the Netherlands. A decade later the protest against the Vietnam war, the violations by the Greek colonels, the coup d’état in Chile and President Carter’s new policy on human rights pushed human rights suddenly higher on the political agenda. Theo had become an expert member of the UN Sub-commission on Human Rights and was one of the engineers of the first UN effort to investigate large-scale human rights violations, namely Chile. I myself met him when he was still a young professor lecturing on human rights in Amsterdam. Then – in the summer of 1977, the same month I started at the ICJ – he was appointed Director of the small human rights secretariat of the UN in Geneva. Here he started his work to bring dictators to accountability and to give the UN a capacity to deal with gross and systematic violations of human rights. Something that is now taken for granted but it would cost Theo his job.
Unlike his predecessors, Theo van Boven did not put all his faith in quiet diplomacy and he regularly talked about the need for the UN to address gross and systematic violations, about the mobilisation of shame and stated that the UN should care about victims. He also started to receive the victims – and the NGOs who represent them – in his office. This led to an incident that would be comic if it was not for the consequences. J. Matarollo was an Argentinean exile lobbying against the generals in his homeland who were killing left-wing opponents by the thousands. Theo agreed to hear him and told his secretary (inherited from his predecessor) to call Matarollo to give him an appointment in the early of hours of the next day. She faithfully called the Argentinean embassy assuming that he was a diplomat as these were the kind of people that normally met with the Director. The next day there was no Matarollo but an angry Note Verbale from Argentinean Ambassador Martinez accusing Theo of meeting with terrorists.
In the UN he did not conform to the image of the traditional diplomat, e.g. by pinning an anti-apartheid button on his suit, but even more so by publicly stating that NGO reports about dead bodies floating down a river in Guatemala were true, or by denouncing disappearances in Chile and Argentina. When in 1980 the government in the USA changed and Ronald Reagan and his team decided to play down violations by right-wing regimes, especially in Latin America, Theo did not flinch and openly criticised their support to these dictatorships. “Naming and shaming” by a UN official was unusual and not easily accepted by the diplomatic community. The Latin American regimes – led by Argentina and silently encouraged by the US – started a campaign to oust Van Boven as Director of Human Rights.
To complicate matters for van Boven, the new UN Secretary-General must have felt little sympathy for this particular Director, as J. Perez de Cuellar had earlier, in 1980, been appointed as Special Representative by the previous Secretary General to go to Uruguay and look into the human rights situation. His report was such a whitewash that it was heavily criticized in the Commission on Human Rights. How correct this reaction had been was shown when the famous pianist Estrella – whom de Cuellar claimed to have visited in the Libertad prison – came to Geneva and told the I.C.J and others that there had been no such visit.
In the meantime in 1980 Theo had put great energy – together with some key NGOs in creating a Working Group on Enforced Disappearances. As a mechanism focusing only on Argentina was politically not feasible, the new idea was to create a thematic mandate on the phenomenon of disappearances in the knowledge that Argentina was going to be the main target. At the decisive session the tension was enormous as the outcome of the vote was very uncertain. The Jordanian Chairman of that session had to deal with endless procedural issues, many of them proposed by Uruguay (egged on by Argentina which was only an observer). Finally, late at night the Chair felt that the resolution creating the mandate could be passed without a vote and moved to do so, but the Uruguayan Ambassador again started to put up his name plate as a sign that he wanted the floor. The Chairman quite unusually interrupting, looked directly at the Uruguayan Ambassador and said: “I URGE my brother from Uruguay NOT to do this..” The name plate slowly turned downwards again and the Chair immediately declared the resolution adopted. The NGOs and tens of Mothers and Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo in the public galleries started a spontaneous applause and quite a tear was shed. ..
In early 1982 the issue of Theo van Boven’s tenure as Director came to the fore. His contract had to be renewed which normally was a routine matter, but not this time. The issue came to an explosion when Theo’s opening speech to the Human Rights Commission was sent on a Friday evening to the UN Secretariat in NY for information and at the same time given to the UN Office of Information in Geneva for distribution at the time of delivery the next Monday morning. The UN Office of Information decided to make the statement available to the media that very Friday evening (with the usual proviso: “check against delivery”). The Representative of Guatemala in Geneva obtained a copy of the statement and vehemently objected to the statement. The SG’s office demanded that Theo should refrain from mentioning countries by name – which Theo refused not only out of principle but also because the press would notice the difference on Monday and assume that there had been pressure to remove the names.
As a family friend bringing the kids back from a ski outing, I happened to overhear Theo on the phone to New York agreeing to a ‘compromise’: he would mention at the beginning of his speech that certain passages were done in his ‘personal capacity’. A few days later Theo was suddenly informed that his contract would anyway not be prolonged. His announcement at a dramatic session of the Human Rights Commission grew quickly into an international diplomatic incident.
As I was on the verge of leaving the ICJ, I had some time on my hands. So I got the idea – warmly supported by Niall McDermot – to publish a book with a selection of Theo’s major speeches from the last five years. One of his Special assistants, Bertie Ramcharan, who had written a good part of them, was very helpful and we managed to get a book out within only 6 weeks. The first copy was flown in to Geneva by the publisher and presented to Theo at a public farewell which the ICJ had organised for him. NGOs, some UN staff and students showed up in such large numbers at the university hall that the fire brigade had to refuse access to late comers. Speech after speech – including by Saddrudin Aga Khan – cantered on Theo role in getting the UN machinery on human rights to deal with violations more concretely and on his support for human rights NGOs…
With Ian Guest and many others, I remain convinced that Theo’s dismissal from the UN was the result of pressure by Latin American dictatorships with support from the Reagan administration. As stated in People Matter, he was “hired and fired for the same reason: his deep commitment to human rights”.
After his dismissal Theo and his family returned to the Netherlands where many were very disappointed that there was no real interest in giving him an equivalent position in the foreign affairs department and he ‘ended up’ in the new University of Maastricht as professor of international law, where together with others such as Cees Flinterman he bent the research programme into his favourite direction: human rights. He continued his involvement in international activism in a variety of functions: with NGOs (e.g. European Human Rights Foundation, IMADR, International Alert), and with the UN (e,g. the Sub-commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on Compensation 1990 -1993, Special Rapporteur on Torture 2001-2005, first Registrar of the UN Yugoslavia Tribunal). In 1998 he became the Head of the Dutch Delegation to the Rome Conference which created the International Criminal Court (ICC).
In 1985 he was called to Buenos Aires as a witness to testify against the nine military leaders (including Videla) for their human rights violations in the period 1976 en 1983. The UN had advised him not to go but he felt that he should do anything to end the impunity of these perpetrators. Theo’s testimony – he was called already on the 2nd day – was seen as crucial in establishing that the leaders of the Junta must have known about the massive violations. Theo took the same position with regard to the father of princess Maxima Zorreguieta (the wife of the king of the Netherlands). As Minister of Agriculture Jorge Zorreguieta must have known about the atrocities and should at least have taken distance instead of denying any knowledge. A position which Theo took in 2001 and was still heard defending in 2012.
In the light of Theo van Boven’s recurring clashes with Argentina it must have given him great moral satisfaction when on 26 November 2009 he received a degree honoris causa from the University of Buenos Aires as well as the highest decoration from the Government.
ICTJ stated: “Van Boven’s commitment to the pursuit of justice was relentless. He spoke up about impunity and accountability in contexts of repression such as the military dictatorships in Argentina and Chile, where he also championed the cause of the disappeared, even when political pressure limited others from doing so. Today, ICTJ honors his voice, his perspective, and his deep-rooted legacy. Inspired by his resolve, we will continue our commitment to uphold human dignity above all else in the pursuit of justice and lasting peace all over the world, however long it takes.“
On 18 May 2026 UN experts and Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International expressed serious concern about the yearlong pre-trial detention of lawyer and woman human rights defender Ruth Eleonora López Alfaro in El Salvador.
“As time passes without the trial beginning, the presumption that detention is necessary is weakened,” the experts said.
López has been held in pre-trial detention for a year, officially authorised since 4 June 2025. During this time, she has been denied regular visits, despite precautionary measures ordered on 22 September 2025 by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights. “This increases Ms. López’s vulnerability and puts her physical and psychological integrity at risk,” the experts said.
In maintaining judicial secrecy, the public is prevented access to hearings and the defence’s access to the criminal file is limited, thereby threatening the principle of equality of arms and the right to an adequate defence. The right to legal assistance of a lawyer of one’s choice is a cornerstone of the right to defence as established in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
“The circumstances of detention and the irregularities in the proceedings, point towards López being subject to reprisals because of her legitimate activities as a human rights defender and lawyer,” they said.
The experts underscored that there are elements suggesting that the criminalisation and prolonged pre-trial detention of Ruth López not only stem from her work exposing corruption and human rights violations, but also appear to reinforce patterns of social control designed to silence women leaders in the public sphere, while also seriously undermining the work of their organisations.
The experts urged the State to release Ruth López Alfaro immediately and consider alternative measures instead of keeping her in custody. They also called for the removal of the judicial secrecy imposed in the criminal proceedings, the cessation of all acts of harassment against her, and guarantees that she may carry out her human rights work without fear of reprisals. The experts are in contact with the Government of El Salvador on this matter.
On 15 October 2025, Fariba Nawa wrote about Mahshid Nazemi, Iranian human rights defender.
Mahshid Nazemi, an Iranian human rights activist, left her home one day in the fall of 2022 to walk to the corner store to buy yogurt for dinner. The sun had set in the valley in Isparta, a city in southwestern Turkey, and the air was crisp. Nazemi pulled the hat of her coat over her head. The streets were empty. She was tired and hungry. Suddenly, she saw two cars turn on their lights. A dated, navy-colored sedan with tinted windows drove behind her slowly as she walked. Nazemi became suspicious and stopped. The car braked and a pudgy, bearded man with a khaki shirt exited, cursing at her, calling her a prostitute. “Shut your mouth or we’ll send you to Iran in a suitcase,” Nazemi recounted the man saying. “Your sister is on death row. You want to go to Iran in a suitcase?”
A year later, she stood at the exact spot in Isparta, known for its roses and lavenders, as she retold her ordeal.
Nazemi’s case underscores a broader pattern of Iranian activists abroad facing intimidation and pressure from Tehran, despite the regime’s public denials of involvement.
For Nazemi, she says her plight began long ago as a woman in Iran, where women don’t have equal rights, and the situation has been likened to gender apartheid. Women can’t sing in public, their supreme leader has said riding a bike is shameful — though some women defy the taboo and ride bikes — their testimony is considered half of a man’s in court and their right to inheritance is less than men. Nazemi has survived a lot — imprisonment, sexual harassment, death threats and a deportation camp.
The night she was followed and harassed in the street would be a prelude to a series of dubious events terrorizing her life as a dissident in exile.
At that time, Nazemi was in Turkey, which has become an opposition haven for many Iranians. She was speaking out about political prisoners and crackdowns on protesters, while also helping dissidents in Turkey get legal aid and financial support. She’s been a dogged activist on behalf of women in her native Iran. Nazemi wasn’t doing that work alone. Her oldest sister Pouran Nazemi was at the forefront of the movement in Tehran. The renowned human rights defender has been in and out of Iranian prisons throughout her life. Nazemi said it was Pouran’s sacrifices that encouraged her to become an activist, too.
A selfie of Pouran (left) and Mahshid Nazemi nine years ago in Iran. The sisters haven’t seen each other in-person for a decade.Courtesy of Mahshid Nazemi
The sisters participated in previous uprisings in Iran, demanding democratic rights for women and minorities. They were both arrested in 2016, but Mahshid Nazemi was released. Her family told her to flee, so she went to neighboring Turkey and applied for asylum to a third country. When Pouran was also released from jail, she remained in Iran. But the sisters worked as a team online across the border. They talked to the opposition media, like Voice of America Farsi, making a case for regime change and a revolution.
Instead, the hardline clerical government arrested 22,000 protesters, including Pouran once again in 2022. The government also killed about 550 people inside Iran, calling them traitors and agitators. Then the regime came for those in the diaspora.
“Iran continues to target women human rights defenders abroad, and among the typical and easy-to-use methods are digital threats, such as phishing and hacking attempts, smear and defamation campaigns, as well as threats against family members in Iran,” said Michael Michaelsen, who studies Iran and transnational repression at the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto.
Nazemi has been the victim of all these tactics but she said the regime went a step further in sending their thugs to threaten her in person that evening in 2022. She reported the incident to the Turkish police, but they didn’t believe her until they found CCTV footage of the incident. A few days later, a Turkish immigration agent called and asked her to come to their office. She thought she might be getting asylum to a third country, somewhere safer than Turkey. But instead, the agent accused her of making a fake ID card, which Nazemi denied. It’s a scene she remembers vividly.
“I didn’t make a fake card. I’m not going to admit to something I didn’t do. If you want to deport me, do so,” Nazemi told the agent. Nazemi was detained and moved into a deportation camp. “The Islamic Republic must have informants in Turkish immigration offices. Otherwise, how would I have ended up in a deportation camp, right after reporting what happened about that night,” she said.
In the camp, Nazemi said the guards beat her, pulling out half of her hair. Another Iranian migrant, who was also detained, accused her of being transgender and threw soup in her face. Nazemi said she had to disrobe in front of the other detainees to prove she was a biological woman to prevent more abuse. She said the camp almost broke her. She had medication with her and one day she took a lot of pills at once. “I didn’t take them to die, actually, but to prove something, how badly they treated us that it got me to this point,” Nazemi said. Nazemi was hospitalized outside the camp, doctors pumped her stomach and she recovered. Police released her and she returned to Isparta and appealed the deportation. Turkey denied the appeal again, but by this time Nazemi’s story was out in the Western press.
The World shared her story, along with press coverage she received in the French newspaper Le Monde — that attention helped her get a visa to France after eight years of being stuck in the Turkish asylum system. She resettled in a French village in December 2023, and continued her activism — Nazemi has expanded her cause to advocate for Afghan migrants as well.
She still gets death threats on social media. Many of the senders say they are the “soldiers of the Islamic Republic.” The direct messages in her inbox on Instagram threaten her with execution, drowning, even rape. Nazemi is under French police protection and reports all the threats.
Cyrille Traoré Ndembi, 61, is the President of the Vindoulou Residents’ Collective, a neighbourhood on the outskirts of Pointe-Noire in the Republic of Congo. This retired community development specialist has been fighting to defend the residents’ right to a healthy environment since he moved there in 2019.
His house is located just ten metres from the Metssa Congo plant run by a subsidiary of the India-based Metssa Group. This recycling plant produced lead bars for export from 2013 to 2024, 50 metres from a school and in the middle of a residential area. Cyrille noticed severe health problems in his family including respiratory and digestive disorders. Blood tests on some residents showed lead levels far above the alert level set by the WHO.
Following Cyrille’s campaigning, and with the help of Amnesty International, the authorities ordered the plant’s closure in December 2024. Cyrille continues to fight for justice for his community.
“When I arrived in Vindoulou, I quickly realized the danger we were in. The air was unbreathable!
Black dust and fumes were spreading and invading our homes. Sometimes, when we went out, we couldn’t even see our nearest neighbour. The plant staff discharged oil and wastewater in front of our houses. Metal debris from the plant’s chimney fell onto our roofs. Once, I went to walk along the wall of the plant and debris fell on me like hail.
Right from the start, I had doubts about the legality of this activity in the middle of a populated area. I couldn’t understand how a substance as dangerous as lead could be recycled using processes that were, in my view, contrary to the standards and regulations in force.
‘My whole family was ill’
We arrived in Vindoulou in August 2019 and by January 2020 my whole family was ill. Our children were found to have the beginnings of pneumonia, bronchitis and bronchopneumonia. We also had diarrhoea and abdominal pains.
Across the neighbourhood, people had the same problems. I was told that the children who had moved away from Vindoulou no longer suffered from those symptoms.
The residents believed that nothing could make this company leave. For the community, it was David against Goliath. Some even called me King David.
I went door-to-door to convince people that something serious was going on. Everywhere I went, I reminded people of article 41 of our Constitution: every citizen has the right to live in a healthy environment.
I explained to people the benefits of getting organized together and taking up the fight. Today, our collective has over a hundred members.
From survivor to human rights defender
We tried to meet the directors of Metssa Congo. We met the plant’s manager, who said he was not authorized to comment on the subject. He promised us an audience with the CEO, but it never took place. They wouldn’t talk to us, simply saying that they had authorization to operate. We couldn’t even consult their environmental impact report, which is a document that we were entitled to access under the current legislation. After calling in a bailiff, I was finally able to consult another type of document, their environmental audit report produced after they had already begun operations.
In 2022, I went to meet Amnesty International’s representatives to alert them. From 2023 onwards, Amnesty investigated and provided funds to carry out blood tests on a sample of the population. We then had proof that people tested had high levels of lead in their blood.
At the time, the workers were against what I was doing. Now, most of them have joined us in our fight.Cyrille Traoré Ndembi
I took two blood tests, in March and September 2023. They showed blood lead levels above 400 µg/L. For the 17 other people tested, the levels were alarming. When the ministry carried out other tests in 2024, some ex-workers had levels of 1,000 µg/L – that’s enormous!
My youngest daughter just turned four. Of the nine children tested, she had the highest lead level, above 530 µg/L. I’m worried about her. She’s running fevers even though she has no infection.
Amnesty also helped us take legal action in 2023, to publicize our situation and, in the face of the administration’s inaction, to make a plea to the authorities. As a result, the minister [of Environment] came here and spoke to the population in December 2024. We as a collective did not have a formal audience with the minister. The authorities received Metssa Congo’s managers for an audience in Brazzaville [the Republic of Congo’s capital] several times, but never our collective! I’m not being heard. Ideally, we should be able to talk directly to the authorities.
I’ve been under pressure. Metssa filed a complaint against me alleging defamation in May 2024. I went to court, but Metssa didn’t show up. They were bolstered by the decision of the Supreme Court’s public prosecutor that allowed them to resume their activities after a suspension ordered by an administrative judge in April 2024.
One night, some young people came and threatened me. It was stressful, but I didn’t back down. At the time, the workers were against what I was doing. Now, most of them have joined us in our fight.
When the company’s operations were suspended again in June 2024 by the Ministry of Environment, we continued to fight because the word suspension meant nothing to us. We wanted to hear the word closure. When the decision was taken on 11 December 2024 to close and dismantle the plant, we were relieved, but the fight was far from over.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 