Posts Tagged ‘news’

Michele Garnett McKenzie new Executive Director of Advocates for Human Rights

October 20, 2025

Michele Garnett McKenzie

On 17 October, 2025, Minnesota-based NGO Advocates for Human Rights appointed Michele Garnett McKenzie as the new Executive Director.


In accepting her new role, McKenzie said, “I am honored to lead our smart, experienced, and dedicated team at a moment when our work could not be more urgent. My vision is clear: strengthen our capacity to protect human rights, forge strategic partnerships that amplify our collective power, and ensure The Advocates’ independence and resilience.

https://www.theadvocatesforhumanrights.org/Person/Index?id=3

https://www.einpresswire.com/article/859109580/the-advocates-for-human-rights-selects-michele-garnett-mckenzie-as-its-new-executive-director

New Guidelines on Environmental Protest and Civil Disobedience

October 20, 2025

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:

  1. 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.
  2. Reject criminalization of defenders: Authorities and media must stop portraying environmental activists as criminals and instead recognize their legitimate role in defending public interests.
  3. Protect civic space: Civil disobedience must not be used as a pretext to restrict fundamental freedoms or limit peaceful public expression.
  4. Ensure human rights–based policing: Law enforcement responses must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate — never arbitrary, excessive, or punitive.
  5. 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.

https://unipd-centrodirittiumani.it/en/news/un-rapporteur-michel-forst-issues-new-guidelines-on-environmental-protest-and-civil-disobedience

Guidelines on the Right to Peaceful Environmental Protest and Civil Disobedience – October 2025

MEPs shortlist three finalists for the 2025 Sakharov Prize

October 20, 2025

Members of the Foreign Affairs and Development Committees of the European Parliament voted on Thursday for the three finalists for the 2025 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought (in alphabetical order):

-Imprisoned journalists fighting for your freedom and ours, Andrzej Poczobut from Belarus and Mzia Amaglobeli from Georgia

    -Journalists and Humanitarian Aid Workers in Palestine and all conflict zones, represented by the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate, the Red Crescent, and UNRWA ;

    -Serbian students

    Find the biographies of the candidates and finalists by following this link.

    The Conference of Presidents, comprising European Parliament President Roberta Metsola and the leaders of the political groups, will choose the 2025 laureate from this  shortlist. Their decision will be announced in the Strasbourg Hemicycle during the plenary session on 22 October 2025.

    For more on the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought (and other awards with Sakharov in the name, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/BDE3E41A-8706-42F1-A6C5-ECBBC4CDB449.

    https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/de/press-room/20251008IPR30829/meps-shortlist-three-finalists-for-the-2025-sakharov-prize

    UN report highlights China’s targeting of human rights defenders abroad

    October 17, 2025

    On 15 October 2025 Sam Ellefson of ICII summarises the new report, which recounts recent reprisals from two dozen countries, underscores ICIJ’s reporting on how Beijing abuses international institutions in its campaign to silence critics abroad

    The targeted repression of human rights activists across borders is becoming more frequent and sophisticated, according to the latest annual U.N. report detailing acts of intimidation and reprisals inside the international organization.

    The report lists new allegations of reprisals from two dozen countries including China, echoing the findings of ICIJ’s China Targets investigation, which revealed how suspected proxies for the Chinese government surveilled or harassed activists at the U.N. headquarters in Geneva, the center of the human rights system.

    Two Hong Kong pro-democracy activists and a Uyghur linguist are among the cases compiled by the secretary-general between May 2024 and 2025, alongside updates on reprisals included in previous reports.

    “Allegations of transnational repression across borders have increased, with examples from around the world,” the report said. “Targeted repression across borders appears to be growing in scale and sophistication, and the impact on the protection of human rights defenders and affected individuals in exile, as well as the chilling effect on those who continue to defend human rights in challenging contexts, is of increasing concern.”

    Raphäel Viana David, the China and Latin America program manager at the International Service for Human Rights, a nonprofit that trains activists in U.N. advocacy, said the report reflected a shift within the U.N. in recognizing transnational repression as a tool states use to carry out reprisals.

    “The assistant secretary-general — who is the senior focal point on reprisals — when she presented the report at the Human Rights Council a couple of weeks back, emphasized this angle of transnational repression,” Viana David said. “This is an interlinkage that I think is increasingly evident, but that needs a little bit more disentangling.” [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2025/10/01/un-secretary-generals-2025-report-highlights-reprisals-against-human-rights-defenders/]

    In China Targets, ICIJ and 42 media partners exposed how Beijing has misused international institutions such as the U.N. and Interpol to target overseas dissidents. The investigation included interviews with 105 individuals across 23 countries who detailed how the Chinese government had reached beyond its borders to silence them.

    https://www.icij.org/investigations/china-targets/new-un-report-highlights-chinas-alleged-targeting-of-human-rights-activists/?utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit

    CESCR General Comment: States should protect environmental and Indigenous HRDs

    October 17, 2025

    The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) recently published its General Comment on the environmental dimension of sustainable development. In addition to recognising human rights defenders, the Comment clarifies State obligations towards marginalized communities and notes the importance of transitioning away from fossil fuels. It also outlines States’ extraterritorial obligations.

    ISHR provided two written inputs to the draft of this General Comment earlier this year – a standalone submission regarding the recognition and protection of environmental human rights defenders (EHRDs) based on the Declaration+25, a supplement to the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, and a joint submission in partnership with the Center for International Environmental Law, Earthjustice, FIAN International, the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam.

    States parties should respect, protect, and promote the work of environmental and indigenous human rights defenders, as well as other civil society actors who support people in marginalized and disadvantaged situations in realizing their Covenant rights.’ States parties should take all necessary measures to ensure that environmental human rights defenders and journalists can carry out their work, without fear of harassment, intimidation or violence, including by protecting them from harm by third parties.

    ISHR welcomes that priorities from the joint NGO submission to the CESCR are reflected in the General Comment, in particular Indigenous Peoples’ right to ‘free, prior and informed consent’ and the need to transition away from fossil fuels (including by reducing ineffective subsidies).

    However, we regret that the Comment does not more explicitly acknowledge the critical role of EHRDs in promoting sustainable development or strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) as an obstacle to their engagement. The CESCR has previously noted the risks faced by HRDs and provided guidance on their recognition and protection in the context of land issues in General Comment No. 26 and it should have extended this analysis to EHRDs in the context of sustainable development. The use of SLAPPs to silence HRDs has been acknowledged by other UN bodies, including in the most recent report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders, Ms. Mary Lawlor, to the Third Committee of the General Assembly.  

     Some additional highlights from the General Comment are set out below. 

    • The Committee found that ‘[t]he full realization of Covenant rights demands a just transition towards a sustainable economy that centres human rights and the well-being of the planet’. 
    • States should supervise commercial activity, establish a legal obligation for businesses in respect of environment and human rights due diligence, and ensure that victims of human rights violations stemming from businesses have redress. 
    • States have obligations to conduct human rights and environmental impact assessments, which are to be undertaken with ‘meaningful public participation’.
    • States have an extraterritorial obligation to ensure that any activities within the State or in areas under its control do not substantially adversely affect the environment in another country. This also extends to preventing businesses in the State from causing such harm in another jurisdiction. Even though the CESCR does not expressly mention it in the Comment, this should also apply to cases of attacks against EHRDs. 
    • The CESCR also clarifies States’ obligations towards marginalized communities, spotlighting the concept of intersectionality. It also explicitly notes that equal exercise of economic, social and cultural rights by women and men is a prerequisite for sustainable development, encouraging States to redistribute the unpaid domestic work undertaken by women and girls.
    • Environment-related obligations have also been set out for States in the context of specific Covenant rights, for example, the right to self-determination , right to freely utilize natural resources , right to work , right to an adequate standard of living, right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, right to education and other economic, social and cultural rights.
    • The General Comment recognises that certain communities are particularly vulnerable to the effects of environmental degradation – it calls on States to identify and protect those at risk. The CESCR focuses particularly on children (specifically calling for child rights defenders to be recognised and protected and for their participation in climate action to be facilitated), Indigenous Peoples, peasants, pastoralists, fishers and others in rural areas, and displaced persons.

    ‘Environmental degradation, including climate change, intensifies the vulnerabilities of individuals and groups who have historically experienced and/or experience marginalization. These vulnerabilities are shaped by intersecting factors such as socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, gender, disability, age, migratory status, sexual orientation, and gender identity.’

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/cescr-general-comment-states-should-protect-environmental-and-indigenous-hrds-work-in-the-context-of-sustainable-development

    Venezuelan María Corina Machado wins Nobel Peace Prize 2025

    October 10, 2025

    After persistent speculation about the possibility of the prize going to Donald Trump [see e.g.: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2025/07/24/nobel-peace-prize-choice-between-trump-and-albanese/], it was announced today 10 October that the Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado has won the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, winning more recognition as a woman “who keeps the flame of democracy burning amid a growing darkness.”

    The former opposition presidential candidate was lauded for being a “key, unifying figure” in the once deeply divided opposition to President Nicolás Maduro’s government, said Jørgen Watne Frydnes, chair of the Norwegian Nobel committee. “In the past year, Ms. Machado has been forced to live in hiding,” Watne Frydnes said. Despite serious threats against her life, she has remained in the country, a choice that has inspired millions. When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognize courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist.”

    Maria Corina Machado is well known in human rights circles having won previously 6 important human rights awards. See: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/b353c92c-72dd-418a-908c-9f240acab3be. But neither the Nobel Committee nor the mainstream media seem to be aware of this [as happened before e.g. in 2023″, see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/10/06/jailed-iranian-human-rights-defender-narges-mohammadi-wins-nobel-peace-prize-2023/]

    The Nobel Prize Committee clarified that “Maria Corina Machado meets all three criteria stated in Alfred Nobel’s will for the selection of a Peace Prize laureate. She has brought her country’s opposition together. She has never wavered in resisting the militarisation of Venezuelan society. She has been steadfast in her support for a peaceful transition to democracy.

    Maria Corina Machado has shown that the tools of democracy are also the tools of peace. She embodies the hope of a different future, one where the fundamental rights of citizens are protected, and their voices are heard. In this future, people will finally be free to live in peace.”

    https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2025/press-release/

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/oct/10/nobel-peace-prize-2025-live-latest-news-updateshttps://www.bbc.com/news/live/c1l80g1qe4gt

    https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c1l80g1qe4gt

    https://hrf.org/latest/hrf-celebrates-award-of-the-nobel-peace-prize-to-venezuelas-maria-corina-machado/

    Incredible number of NGOs (3700!!) condemn attacks on civil society in USA

    October 9, 2025

    Human Rights Watch stands with civil society and signed this letter, alongside more than 3700 other organizations, condemning the Trump administration’s attacks. It is a testament to our community’s solidarity.

    “We are a coalition of nonprofit and nonpartisan organizations formed to champion causes dear to all Americans. We work in communities across the country to protect our air and water, our right to vote, to worship, and to organize; we fight for consumers, workers, and our children; we advocate for civil and human rights at home and abroad; we have made it safer to drive on our roads, easier to start a business, and healthier to live in our cities. We span the full ideological spectrum. And today, we stand together for our democracy and in solidarity with the nonprofit groups unjustly and illegally targeted by the Trump administration, including in a new September 25 presidential memorandum. 

    We of course unequivocally reject political violence. But we won’t mince words. No president–Democrat or Republican–should have the power to punish nonprofit organizations simply because he disagrees with them. That is not about protecting Americans or defending the public interest. It is about using unchecked power to silence opposition and voices he disagrees with. That is un-American and flies in the face of the Constitution, including the First Amendment bar on targeting organizations for their advocacy. 

    Charities perform crucial functions in every community across our country, including providing healthcare, housing, education, religious services, food and water, and so much more. Like other nonprofits, the organizations threatened by President Trump have a mission to serve the public good and are composed of everyday people fighting for dignity, safety, and opportunity. 

    This attack on nonprofits is not happening in a vacuum, but as a part of a wholesale offensive against organizations and individuals that advocate for ideas or serve communities that the president finds objectionable, and that seek to enforce the rule of law against the federal government. Whether the target is a church, an environmental or good government group, a refugee assistance organization, university, a law firm, or a former or current government official, weaponizing the executive branch to punish their speech or their views is illegal and wrong. It is also an attack on the very notion that government power must serve the people, not those in office. 

    Charitable organizations serve our communities in various ways, playing a central role in public protection, health, accountability, anti-discrimination, and in creating the moral fabric of our nation. That is, of course, precisely why this administration is targeting them. They know that the organizations they are attacking exist to lift up the voices of everyday Americans and shine the spotlight of accountability on those who seek to abuse power. 

    Political violence is unacceptable. But efforts by the president of the United States to defund, discredit, and dismantle nonprofit groups he simply disagrees with are reprehensible and dangerous—a violation of a fundamental freedom in America. This Administration is trying to bully people into silence but speaking out is, and has always been, our collective mission. We stand with those wrongly targeted and with each other. No exceptions.”

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/10/08/an-open-letter-rejecting-presidential-attacks-on-nonprofit-organizations

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/letitia-james-indicted

    se also: https://www.fidh.org/en/region/americas/usa/united-states-plunges-into-unlawful-rule-and-extrajudicial-killings

    RSF World Press Freedom Index 2025: economic fragility now major threat

    September 22, 2025

    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.”

    Global Witness report 2024 documents killings and disappearances of environmental defenders

    September 22, 2025

    On 17 September 2025 Global Witness published its annual report , documenting killings and long-term disappearances of land and environmental defenders. 2024 shows continuing bad news.

    Julia Francisco Martínez stands at the graveside of her husband Juan, a Honduran Indigenous defender who was found murdered in 2015.

    Julia Francisco Martínez stands at the graveside of her husband Juan, a Honduran Indigenous defender who was found murdered in 2015. Giles Clarke / Global Witness

    Every year, Global Witness works with partners to gather evidence, verify and document every time a land and environmental defender is killed or disappeared. Our methodology follows robust criteria, yet undocumented cases pose challenges when it comes to analysing data

    Global Witness documents killings and long-term disappearances of land and environmental defenders globally. In partnership with over 30 local, national and regional organisations in more than 20 countries, we produce an annual report containing these figures, and we have done so since 2012.

    Our methodology involves a year-long process of cross-referencing data from different sources to ensure its credibility. Over 2,200 killings or long-term disappearances of defenders appear in our database since 2012 – with 146 cases documented in 2024.

    Every year, we maintain a database to keep a record of these crimes and create a comprehensive global picture of the systematic violence defenders face.

    The data provides a snapshot of the underlying drivers behind reprisals and indicates how some defenders and their communities face increased risks. Exposing these trends is the first of many steps to ensure that defenders and their communities are protected and can exercise their rights without fearing for their lives.

    Killings and disappearances documented between 2012 and 2024

    • 2,253 defenders have been killed or disappeared since 2012 Global Witness
    • 146 of these attacks occurred in 2024 Global Witness

    The accompanying press release goes into considerable detail on the methodology used.

    For last year’s report see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/09/18/global-witness-2023-2024-annual-report-violent-erasure-of-land-and-environmental-defenders/

    https://globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/land-and-environmental-defenders/documenting-killings-and-disappearances-of-land-and-environmental-defenders/

    https://www.rappler.com/philippines/deadliest-country-asia-environmental-defenders-2024/

    2026 budget proposal for UN80 reform points to disproportionate cuts to human rights pillar.

    September 22, 2025

    On 18 September 2025, ISHR said that analysis of revised 2026 budget proposal for UN80 reform points to disproportionate cuts to the chronically-underfunded human rights pillar. Together with peace and development, human rights constitutes one of the three key areas of action for the UN and thus should be adequately funded.

    On 16 September 2025, the UN Secretary-General published its report revising its earlier proposal for the UN’s 2026 budget (known as ‘Revised estimates’ report). The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) has analysed the revised budget and is deeply concerned about proposed cuts to an already chronically under-resourced human rights pillar. While demands on the human rights system do not cease to grow to address mounting global conflicts and crises, further cuts will significantly reduce effectiveness and efficiency, and its capacity to deliver on human rights protection to individuals and populations on the ground. 

    The UN’s human rights pillar has historically received significantly less funds than development and peace and security, accounting for just 7% of the UN regular budget and less than 1% of UN’s total expenditure. Any cuts to it would result in minimal savings but have significant and disproportionate adverse consequences for the rights of people around the world – Phil Lynch, ISHR Executive Director

    In recent years, a liquidity crisis fuelled by the late or non-payments of dues by the US and China had already prompted High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk to suspend the delivery of reports, workshops and other activities mandated by the Human Rights Council (HRC). The HRC has also reduced the length of its sessions, limiting space for States, experts and civil society to address some of the world’s most pressing rights issues and crises. 

    Additional cuts to the human rights pillar would further undermine the ability of the UN’s human rights bodies to continue to investigate atrocity crimes such as in Gaza, Myanmar and the  Democratic Republic of Congo, to support victims and human rights defenders, to assist States in improving their human rights policies, and to develop global human rights standards that protect us all.

    UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres stressed the cuts are ‘carefully calibrated’ and ensure balance between the UN’s three pillars (peace and security, development, and human rights). Yet, the proposed cuts to the budget of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of around 15% run much deeper than the 2026 proposed budget on development (targeted for around 12% cut) and peace and security (targeted for a 13% cut, excluding peacekeeping operations).

    Like a three-legged stool, if the human rights pillar is cut to the extent proposed then not only will it collapse, but the whole system will topple.

    ISHR is campaigning for the UN80 Initiative to be more than a simple accounting overhaul for the UN, centred only on cost-cutting. On July 21, ISHR and 16 civil society organisations signed an open letter to the Secretary-General and High Commissioner Türk with concrete recommendations and proposals to ensure that the UN human rights system is streamlined, strengthened and sustainable, guided by the aim of support human rights defenders, providing justice to victims and ensuring accountability for rights abuses.

    The cuts will next be reviewed by a UN budgetary committee traditionally hostile to human rights funding, whose conclusions will serve as a basis for States to negotiate.

    For more information, please contact: Raphael Viana David, ISHR, Programme Manager r.vianadavid@ishr.ch

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/un80-initiative-proposed-budget-cuts-disproportionately-hit-the-human-rights-pillar

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/unga80-over-270-civil-society-groups-urge-states-to-defend-human-rights-refugee-protections