On 19 April 2024, the OHCHR published the story of Wendy Flores -Risking it all to stand up for human rights in exile
“I had to leave Nicaragua irregularly. I left with a backpack, my computer, and the feeling that I was leaving my country for having defended other victims, for having accompanied them. I felt like I had committed a crime, when what I had been doing was defending human rights,” said Wendy Flores, a human rights defender from Nicaragua.
Flores studied law and became motivated to defend human rights after observing the injustices occurring in her country. She later joined the non-profit organization Nicaraguan Centre for Human Rights (CENIDH) as an intern in April 2002.
“I began to realise that I was a human rights defender because I was working for the victims, for their rights and supporting them as they faced a series of obstacles in the country,” Flores said.
Flores is currently living in exile, after the government began to cancel the legal status of several civil society organisations dedicated to the defence of human rights, as well as detaining their members, following the protests of April 2018.
According to an Office report, in early April 2018, demonstrations led by environmental groups, the rural peasant population and students erupted in Nicaragua to denounce the slow and insufficient response of the Government to forest fires in the Indio Maíz Biological Reserve. After this, more dissatisfaction grew from among the public from social security reform to the reduction of pension payments, which led to even more protests. The people protesting were quickly seen as Government opponents, which resulted in the repression of the protests, the criminalization of demonstrators and their arrests.
“During the last five years, in Nicaragua more than 3,600 civil society organizations have been cancelled. In December 2018, CENIDH was one of the first 10 organisations to be cancelled,” Flores said. “And even when we said we would continue to defend human rights, unfortunately we didn’t manage to do so inside the country because detentions started happening and it was obvious that that was going to prevent me from doing my job as a defender.”
Flores had to leave Nicaragua because of the risk of being criminalised for defending human rights and putting her family in jeopardy. “Feeling that I was leaving behind, even temporarily, my almost newborn son and my daughter, was one of the hardest situations I’ve faced,” Flores said.
Leaving Nicaragua forced Flores to reinvent her work as a human rights defender and with other human rights defenders who were also in exile, she established the human rights collective Nicaragua Nunca Más (Nicaragua Never Again). The collective aims to support victims, denounce human rights violations, and sends a symbolic message that, despite many obstacles and the need to live in exile, they continue to fight against impunity for human rights violations in Nicaragua.
“We were emotionally broken, apart from our families, disjointed, but we had the strength to continue denouncing human rights violations. And that was the main motivation that we had and that I identified with. In February 2019, we held a press conference to announce that we would continue our work as defenders in exile,” Flores said.
“And since then, we’ve continued to document cases of displaced people in Nicaragua. We’ve managed to identify more than 1140 cases in these five years. We’ve documented the way in which acts of torture have been perpetrated against political prisoners,” Flores said. “We’ve identified more than 40 methods of torture used against political prisoners and their families. And we’ve also identified perpetrators within these documented cases.”
Flores knows that those who remain in Nicaragua face danger, but she points out that there are also extraterritorial risks.
“Those of us who are outside have also experienced acts of siege and surveillance by State forces or forces installed outside Nicaraguan territory to persecute and intimidate defenders. In addition, the denationalisation imposed by authorities, affected more than 317 people who are mainly outside Nicaragua,” Flores said.
“For us to be able to return to Nicaragua, we would need a country that complies with international obligations, that initiates a process of dialogue with international mechanisms for the protection of human rights and that shows evidence that the country is going to undertake a democratic process and respect human rights,” Flores said.
For Flores, some of this evidence would include allowing international organisms such as UN Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to return to the country.
Our work for defenders in exile
Flores said the impact of UN Human Rights work for human rights defenders in exile has been vital for her as a human rights defender and the human rights movement in her country.
“The UN Human Rights Regional Office for Central America and the Caribbean (ROCA) supports the work of defenders in exile by providing technical assistance to facilitate their access to the human rights mechanisms of the UN and accountability at the international level, such as universal jurisdiction,” said Alberto Brunori, the Representative at ROCA.
Thanks to successive resolutions adopted since 2019, the Human Rights Council addresses the situation in Nicaragua at its sessions through oral updates and written reports submitted by UN Human Rights.
This way, the Office has succeeded in bringing the human rights violations that continue to occur in Nicaragua to the attention of the international community and has supported a solution to the crisis based on human rights principles and standards.
“The Office has advocated for host countries to provide defenders fleeing Nicaragua with the protection they need, as well as the necessary support for their work,” Brunori said.
“Human rights defenders who are forced to leave the country need international protection as they require a safe legal situation that allows them to continue promoting human rights without fear of being returned to Nicaragua,” Brunori said. “They also need their claims of insecurity in exile to be considered. Their work requires financial resources and the necessary political support to ensure that their work, their analysis, and their human rights proposals are included in the decisions that are made about Nicaragua at the international level. Supporting their work means contributing to a more democratic and human rights-based future for the country.”
For Flores, it is essential that the international community continues to keep an eye on Nicaragua.
“Networking and the work that other organisations can do, supporting human rights defenders, really becomes an action for life, because to live is not only to breathe and feed oneself, but to live has to be to live fully, and this has to do with the psychological, mental and physical conditions in which we can carry out our work,” Flores said.
On 1 April 2024, Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA is a human rights organization committed to protecting freedom of expression, press freedom, the right to assemble and protest, and access to information in Turkey. It serves as a vital platform where journalism and legal expertise merge to safeguard these freedoms, particularly for journalists, lawyers, and human rights defenders facing increasing challenges). SEMRA PELEK wrote about Mine Özerden, a human rights defender now detained for 700 days. The detailed statement if woth reading in full:
From Mine Özerden’s standpoint, the Gezi Trial began with an unsubstantiated criminal complaint. Despite efforts, no informant was identified. Tax inspectors investigated the allegations but couldn’t confirm them. The court ruled the phone taps used as evidence were illegal. Nonetheless, Özerden was sentenced to 18 years and has been in prison for nearly two years.
“I’ve said this repeatedly, and I’ll say it again: I still can’t comprehend why I’m here, and there hasn’t been anyone who could logically explain it to me yet.”
With these words, Mine Özerden began her defense during the session of the Gezi Trial held at the Istanbul 13th Heavy Penal Court on October 8, 2021. She posed the same question during her defense at the session held on January 17, 2022. Özerden has been asking the same question at every hearing since the initial session of the Gezi Trial on June 25, 2019. However, in the years that have passed, she has received no answer to her question throughout the entire legal process.
Mine Özerden’s lawyer requested an explanation from the prosecutor through the court regarding this matter. However, the court rejected the request: “The request for a statement from the Public Prosecutor regarding which acts and crimes are being attributed to the defendant Mine Özerden by the defense attorney has been rejected…”
The court failed to provide any justification or further clarification of the rejection. However, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, every defendant has the right to effectively present their defense, and the right to “be informed.” This means that prosecutors and courts are obligated to inform the defendant of the accusations against them to ensure a fair trial. The laws clearly state this right, however, Mine Özerden was not granted this right throughout the entire trial, and the judiciary system did not provide any logical explanation for this.
Let’s ask a question of our own here: Is there no answer to Ozerden’s question in the 657-page indictment written by the prosecution, which led to Osman Kavala’s aggravated life sentence and the 18-year sentences that Mine Özerden, Çiğdem Mater, Tayfun Kahraman, and Can Atalay have been given in the Gezi Trials? They are currently convicted of serious charges such as “attempting to overthrow the Republic of Turkey by force and violence” and “aiding this attempt,” which means the higher Court of Cassation also signed off on the decision. In the document of approval released by the Court of Cassation, is there any answer to the aforementioned question? No, there isn’t!
Scrutinizing the Gezi Trial files, one question remains: Why is Mine Özerden in prison?
And you can’t find the answer to that question. After poring over the files line by line, one can’t help but be reminded of Kafka’s novel, The Trial. So much so that you could replace the protagonist Josef K.’s name with Mine Özerden’s: “Somebody must have made a false accusation against Mine Özerden, for she was arrested one morning without having done anything wrong.”
This is exactly how the Gezi Trial, which today stands like a specter against the freedom of expression and assembly not only of the defendants but of the whole society, began for Mine Özerden.
Let’s start from the beginning: On September 26, 2013, a “criminal complaint” was sent via email to the Istanbul Communication Electronics Branch Directorate. According to the indictment, the person, who didn’t provide their name in “criminal complaint number 11167,” claimed to have “important information regarding the Gezi protests” and alleged that “before the protests began in Taksim, Mine Özerden opened bank accounts for several individuals under the direction of Osman Kavala from the Open Society Foundation.” According to the informant’s claim, the money collected in these accounts was intended to purchase “gas masks, bandages, and goggles,” which would then be “distributed to protesters.”
In the thousands of pages of the Gezi Trial file, this is the sole allegation concerning Mine Özerden.
Following up on this allegation requires due diligence in seeking the facts. Unlike Kafka’s novel, Özerden’s experiences are not allegorical but real; she has been held in Bakırköy Women’s Prison for nearly two years due to this unsubstantiated criminal complaint.
In the indictment, the prosecutor – after quoting the informant’s claim in quotation marks and bold black letters – immediately indicates in the next sentence that they “could not locate the informant”: “Upon the instruction of our Republic Prosecutor’s Office, an investigation was conducted into the IP address to obtain a detailed statement from the informant, however, no identification was made.”
In other words, the informant could not be found. So, were the bank accounts alleged by the informant opened?
No!
That, in fact, is the following sentence, where the prosecutor offers his admission that the informant could not be found. In the indictment, Istanbul Foundation’s 1st Regional Directorate’s investigation of the accounts of the Open Society Foundation, eventually preparing a report on this inquiry, but the report clearly stated that “no determination could be made regarding these allegations.”
In other words, the claim of an unidentified informant could not be substantiated.
On April 22, 2022 Mine Özerden’s lawyer submitted Tax documents, which proved that the informant’s claim was false to the file.
The court dismissed the Tax Inspectorate report and did not consider it as evidence.
Fact Two: No bank accounts opened; no purchase was made
Typically (in any rule-of-law state), when an informant cannot be found and an unsubstantiated criminal complaint is involved, the case is closed with a verdict of non-prosecution.
Moreover, according to the established jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, evaluating a purely unsubstantiated complaint on its own is also unlawful. Thus, this jurisprudence also warranted closing the case at this stage. The law is clear: you cannot prosecute anyone with a non-existent crime and an unsubstantiated allegation.
However, instead of closing the file at this point, the prosecutor opened another investigation completely unrelated to the Gezi inquiry. Mine Özerden was incidentally wiretapped within the scope of this investigation. It wasn’t until much later, when the Gezi Trial indictment was prepared, that the fact Özerden had been coincidentally wiretapped in this investigation emerged. When her lawyer officially questioned this, it was revealed that Özerden had never been a suspect in this investigation. Furthermore, there was no wiretap order issued against her in this investigation. Her lawyer had requested wiretap orders from the court, neither the police nor the prosecution had submitted these orders to the file.
In one of these coincidental wiretaps included in the Gezi Trial indictment despite having no relevance to the Gezi investigation, Mine Özerden had a conversation with Osman Kavala on May 30, 2013. In this conversation, Mine Özerden mentioned to Osman Kavala that she had received “some offers.” Someone suggested, “Let’s buy gas masks and distribute them to the youth.” The conversation continued with discussions on how this could be done, such as “maybe opening a bank account.” It was nothing more than an exchange of ideas, with the conversation ending with the suggestion, “One of the volunteers could probably do that.”
The claim of the unidentified informant was based on this conversation. Özerden, who was coincidentally wiretapped in an investigation, where she was not a suspect, was accused on the basis of this wiretap turned into a criminal complaint. Özerden’s lawyer requested the full resolution of this wiretap. However, neither the complete resolutions of wiretaps nor the wiretap recordings were found by the prosecution and were never submitted to the file.
The conversation between Mine Özerden and Osman Kavala remained at the level of ideas because the content of the conversation was not substantiated during the investigation and trial process. No bank account was found to have been opened. Something that doesn’t exist can’t be found in the first place.
There is no evidence in the file that gas masks, bandages, or goggles were purchased. Not a single invoice exists, nor is there any evidence anywhere that these items were found.
So, suppose even one piece of evidence existed in the file – for example, if a bank account had been opened or if an invoice for goggles had been found – what would happen? Opening a bank account and buying gas masks, bandages, or goggles is not a crime under any law. Therefore, Özerden’s lawyer brought goggles, gas masks, and bandages to the trial and asked the panel, “Is acquiring these items a crime?”
Fact Three: No Press Statements or Meetings were Found to Constitute a Crime or Incitement to Commit a Crime
Despite the lack of concrete evidence, the indictment directed the accusation of “aiding an attempt to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey by force and violence” against Mine Özerden. To strengthen such a serious accusation, the prosecutor highlighted Özerden’s voluntary coordination of the Taksim Platform and her continued membership in the board of directors of Anadolu Kültür, where she had worked years ago.
The Taksim Platform was established as a peaceful dialogue platform, holding weekly exchange of ideas meetings, and organizing art events. Although the activities of the platform fell within the scope of freedom of assembly and expression, it was criminalized in the indictment, yet no crime associated with the platform can be found.
Not a single press statement by the platform was included in the indictment. There was not any piece of evidence regarding which press statement or meeting of the platform, on which date, would constitute a crime according to the law. There was also no evidence that any post or statement released by the Taksim Platform could constitute a crime or incitement to violence in the indictment or the file.
The rationale behind the establishment of the Taksim Platform and all updates, statements and press releases ever released by the platform is still accessible today on the website taksimplatformu.com. So, if there had been even the slightest evidence that Taksim Platform was inciting violence, it would be easy for the prosecution to find and include in the indictment.
Moreover, the accusations against Özerden based on her membership in the board of directors of Anadolu Kültür were already refuted explicitly by the Tax Inspectorate report.
Fact four: Özerden was not in Istanbul during the Gezi protests.
It gets even stranger from here. In the indictment, Özerden is accused of organizing meetings of the Taksim Platform in Istanbul during the Gezi protests, attending the platform’s meetings, and even participating in violent actions in Gezi Park.
But the problem here is this: Mine Özerden was not in Istanbul during the Gezi protests.
The Gezi protests began on May 31, 2013. However, Özerden was working at a language school in Fethiye from June 1 to July 31, 2013. Furthermore, not a single video, photograph, or technical surveillance recorded by the police indicating Özerden’s presence in Istanbul during that period has been included in the case file.
However, official Social Security Institution (SGK) records proving Özerden’s presence in Fethiye during that period were submitted to the court. But neither the prosecutor during the investigation process nor the Istanbul 13th Heavy Penal Court during the trial took this into account. The Court of Cassation 3rd Criminal Chamber, which upheld the 18-year prison sentence, also did not. .
Even if it were the opposite, if Mine Özerden were in Istanbul during that time, it still wouldn’t prove anything. Being in Istanbul during the Gezi protests, organizing a meeting, or attending one is not a crime. On the contrary, the right to assembly and freedom of expression are protected by the Constitution.
Fact Five: Wiretapping is Illegal
So, what was written about Mine Özerden on all those pages in the indictment whenthere was no concrete evidence of a crime against her?
The indictment merely contains pages of phone conversations between Özerden and her friends! These conversations delve into personal matters, discussing, for instance, the exhaustion of life and the beauty of getting away from some stressors of life. In one conversation, for instance, Mine Özerden advises a friend to attend a conference in Istanbul where world-renowned philosophers Slavoj Žižek and Alain Badiou are speakers. The conference, titled ‘Globalization and the New Left,’ was organized by Bakırköy Municipality and MonoKL publications. However, this advice was included in the indictment as if it were a crime.
Similarly, Özerden’s response of “enjoy the beautiful weather, how lovely” to a friend saying “the weather was even better two or three days ago” is also included in the indictment as part of these casual conversations. None of the phone taps contain any reference to the organization of the Gezi protests. Instead, they clutter the file. Moreover, these wiretaps are illegal!
The Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court, which handled the case, determined that the wiretaps were illegal. In its decision dated February 18, 2020, acquitting 16 defendants in the Gezi trial, including Osman Kavala, Mücella Yapıcı, Can Atalay, Yiğit Aksakoğlu, Tayfun Kahraman, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, Yiğit Ekmekçi, and Ali Hakan Altınay, the court made the following legal assessment:
“We have 53 wiretap orders in our file. It is understood that the first wiretap order was issued for the offense of ‘forming and leading a criminal organization,’ not for the offense of ‘crimes against the government.’ Later, it was observed that Article 312 of the Turkish Penal Code (crimes against the government) was added to the requests and decisions for extending the wiretapping. However, Article 312 was not among the crimes subject to legal wiretapping as listed in Article 135/8 of the Criminal Procedure Code at that time. There is no wiretap order issued after that date. Therefore, it is accepted that the wiretap recordings are in violation of the law and are illegal evidence, considering the established precedents of the Court of Cassation and the principle that ‘the fruit of the poisonous tree is also poisonous.’ Hence, the wiretaps included in the indictment are considered as prohibited evidence.”
In other words, all phone conversations used as evidence against Mine Özerden, along with other defendants, were the fruits of the poisonous tree. In summary, the real crime was the wiretapping of phones.
But as if that weren’t enough, a new term called ‘revaluation’ was coined to justify the inclusion of wiretap recordings in the indictment. The indictment stated that “the revaluation of all evidence concerning the investigation, especially the wiretaps, was ordered.” However, there is no procedure called ‘revaluation’ in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mine Özerden asks: “Isn’t this openly insulting to use the word ‘revaluation’?”
They Were Convicted with the “Poisonous Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”
Ultimately, the acquittal verdicts were overturned. Despite no additional evidence being presented to substantiate the allegations, the convictions handed down by the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court on April 25, 2022, against Osman Kavala, Can Atalay, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, and Tayfun Kahraman were upheld by the Court of Cassation’s 3rd Criminal Chamber.
Osman Kavala, who was sentenced to an aggravated life sentence for the allegation of “attempting to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey,” has been in prison for over six years. Can Atalay, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, and Tayfun Kahraman, who were each sentenced to 18 years in prison for “aiding this attempt,” have been deprived of their freedom for 700 days.
Responding to our questions from prison, Mine Özerden made the following comment regarding the entire legal process:
“Not only do the institutions and decision-makers of the country I am a citizen of fail to protect our rights, but they also increasingly violate our fundamental, constitutional, and legal rights more and more everyday. For nearly two years, we have been deprived of our physical freedom without reason, evidence, or truth…
I find myself involuntarily caught in a senseless quarrel of irrationality and illogic. We are continuously instrumentalized by different political segments with various affiliations. My wish is for people from all walks of life to stand up against injustice and for a collective will demanding basic human rights to emerge.”
Mine Özerden still awaits a logical explanation as to why she is being tried, why she is being punished, and why she has been held at Bakırköy Women’s Prison for years.
Instead of explaining, the judiciary merely extends to her the poisonous fruit of a poisonous tree.
NGOs and activists paid tribute to the late Chinese human rights defender Cao Shunli by holding a moment of silence and applauding her name during their speaking time at the Human Rights Council.
Delivering a joint statement before the Council plenary on behalf of ISHR and 16 organisations accredited to the UN as well as 20 NGOs without consultative status, a human rights defender from the Chinese mainland concluded her intervention with a short silence and a call to States and NGOs to mirror the courage of human rights defenders and always stand in solidarity with them.
After the intervention, in a sign of respect to Cao Shunli, the room was filled with applause from NGOs and a handful of governments in honour of Cao and in solidarity with victims of reprisals for cooperation with the UN.
‘It is unacceptable to normalise reprisals,’ the human rights defender from the Chinese mainland said. ‘Cao’s courage inspires defenders globally, so let her legacy and name resonate in this room until there is accountability for all victims of reprisals,’ she emphasised.
In an attempt to silence the activist, the Chinese delegation raised a point of order protesting against the statement. This mirrored their 2014 response to ISHR and other NGO’s attempt to hold a moment of silence at the Council after Cao’s death, during which Chinese diplomats disrupted the session for over an hour. This time, Cuba, Venezuela, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Russia supported China in their attempt to silence activists’ right to speak at the United Nations.
In response to China’s attacks, Belgium on behalf of the 27 states of the European Union, supported by the United States of America, Canada and the United Kingdom, took the floor to defend NGOs’ right to speak freely.
‘We cannot allow Cao’s story and her work to be forgotten,’ said Raphaël Viana David, China Programme Manager for ISHR. ‘Ten years on, no one has been held to account for this emblematic case of tragic State reprisals. UN experts called for an inquiry in 2014, 2019 and once again last week. Governments cannot let Beijing off the hook: they must push for accountability for Cao’s fate and for that of all activists who have been persecuted for cooperating with the UN in standing up for human rights.’
ISHR and its civil society partners urge the international community to hold the individuals and institutions responsible for Cao’s death to account and to end all acts of reprisals and repressive measures seeking to restrict civil society space and prevent activists from engaging with the UN.
On 14 March 2024, a large number of leading NGOs paid tribute to Cao Shunli, and all human rights defenders targeted by the Chinese government for their commitment to uphold the promise of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/cao-shunli/]:
Cao Shunli was a brave Chinese woman human rights defender and lawyer. Working with fellow activists, Cao documented abuses, including the now-abolished ‘Re-education through Labour’ extrajudicial detention system, which she was also subjected to as a result of her human rights work. She campaigned for independent civil society to be meaningfully consulted and to be able to contribute to the Chinese government’s national reports to its first and second Universal Periodic Reviews (UPR). In an attempt to speak with government officials about the UPR, Cao courageously organised peaceful sit-ins with other concerned citizens outside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs despite great risks. She also submitted information on extralegal detention and torture in China to the UN and expressed the hope that ‘if we could get even 100 words’ into a UN report, ‘many of our problems could start to get addressed.’
On 14 September 2013, Chinese authorities detained Cao at the Beijing Capital International Airport as she was traveling to Geneva to participate in a human rights training, one month before China’s second UPR. Cao was forcibly disappeared for five weeks, until she resurfaced in criminal detention and was charged with ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’. By October 2013, it was clear that Cao Shunli was experiencing serious medical issues while in detention. After months of denial of adequate medical treatment, rejected appeals by her lawyers for bail on humanitarian grounds, and despite multiple calls from the international community for her urgent release, Cao died of multiple organ failure on 14 March 2014 in a hospital under heavy police guard to keep out her lawyers and friends.
Cao was one of the 2014 finalists of the prestigious Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders.
To this day, there has been no accountability for Cao Shunli’s death. The Chinese government refuses to admit wrongdoing, despite repeated calls in 2014 and 2019 by UN Special Procedures experts for a full investigation into this ‘deadly reprisal’.
Her case is one of the longest-standing unresolved cases in the UN Secretary-General’s annual reports on reprisals against civil society actors for engaging with the United Nations. China is one of the most consistent perpetrators of reprisals over time, and one of the most egregious perpetrators in terms of the sheer number of individuals targeted.
Cao is not alone: her courage, but also the abuses she endured, are unfortunately those of other human rights defenders who paid a high cost for cooperating with the UN. Her close colleague, Chen Jianfang was forcibly disappeared under Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location (RSDL) from 19-20 March 2019 after paying tribute to Cao Shunli on the 5th anniversary of her death. Chen was sentenced to four years and six months in jail for ‘inciting subversion of State power’ and left prison on 21 October 2023, after which authorities subjected her to strict surveillance. UN experts have raised with the Chinese government acts of reprisals against Chen Jianfang, but also Jiang Tianyong, Li Qiaochu, Dolkun Isa, Li Wenzu and Wang Qiaoling, among others. The recent instances of intimidation and harassment against NGO participants in China’s 4th UPR in January 2024 further highlight the gravity of the situation.
Li Qiaochu, Xu Zhiyong, Ding Jiaxi, Yu Wensheng, Xu Yan, Huang Xueqin, Li Yuhan, Chang Weiping: many other Chinese human rights defenders are today detained, disappeared, and at grave risk, for upholding the promise of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
These documented acts do not account for the even greater self-censorship and refusal to engage with the United Nation as a result of a generalised climate of fear.
Ten years ago, when ISHR and many other human rights groups sought to observe a moment of silence at the Human Rights Council in her memory, the Chinese delegation, together with other delegations, disrupted the session for an hour and half.
Cao Shunli is a paradigmatic case of reprisals, not only because of her prominence, but also due to the array of severe human rights violations against her, committed in total impunity. These range from Chinese authorities blocking her exit from her own country, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention, lack of due process, torture or ill-treatment and denial of adequate medical care, to subsequent death in custody, and the lack of accountability for these abuses. The lack of any progress in achieving accountability underscores the urgent need for continued international attention and pressure on the Chinese government to ensure justice for Cao and all human rights defenders who face persecution for their work.
Cao Shunli said before her death: ‘Our impact may be large, may be small, and may be nothing. But we must try. It is our duty to the dispossessed and it is the right of civil society.’
Today, we pay tribute to Cao Shunli’s legacy, one that has inspired countless human rights defenders in China and abroad. We urge UN Member States to call for a full, independent, impartial investigation into her death. We reaffirm that no perpetrator of reprisals, no matter how powerful, is above scrutiny, and that reprisals are fundamentally incompatible with the values of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Global Voices has released a special coverage called Empowering voices: Women in politics, which explores the state of women’s political participation around the world.
Human Rights First referred to a new report reveals that WHRDs face increasing harassment and threats from a global movement against gender equality and LGBTQI+ rights. The Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation, a leading feminist women’s rights organization, released Hope and Resistance Go Together: The State of Women Human Rights Defenders 2023, a report that found discouraging growth in harassment of WHRDs. The foundation surveyed 458 women’s and queer rights activists and interviewed 25 activists representing WHRDs from 67 countries affected by violence or conflict.
They found that 75% reported facing harassment for their activism, a 15% increase from two years ago, and 25% of respondents have received death threats. Most harassment comes from government authorities, but increased harassment from far-right groups and anti-gender equality actors is also driving these startling statistics. Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) across the world face resistance and violence. In 2022, at least 401 HRDs were killed for their peaceful work. But some of the obstacles facing WHRDs are distinct. https://humanrightsfirst.org/library/recognizing-women-human-rights-defenders-on-international-womens-day/
Human Rights Watch on 7 March carried a piece by Macarena Sáez who says inter alia:
On this International Women’s Day, we march for the one in three women who experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime. We cheer for countries like Argentina, Colombia, and Ireland that value our autonomy to choose to be pregnant and have legalized access to safe abortion, while protesting that abortion is still or again illegal in many places, including US states like Alabama and Texas. At the same time, we march to honor the women who marched before us, like the Mexican women who organized the first feminist congress in 1916 to push for family law reforms and their right to vote, and the Nigerians who waged their “Women’s War” against colonization and patriarchal laws in 1929. Their struggles sadly mirror the reality of many women around the world today – especially women who belong to historically marginalized groups – who continue to rally against violence and abuse.
Fearing the power of women’s solidarity and collective actions, governments have stifled women’s speech through restrictions on movement, censorship, smear campaigns, and criminal prosecutions. In highly repressive contexts, like Afghanistan and Iran, women suffer arbitrary detention, and even enforced disappearance and torture, for their activism. Meanwhile, social media companies have not done enough to protect women from online violence, chilling women’s freedom of expression on and offline. These barriers make it hard for women’s equality to become reality. Gender justice requires an enabling environment in which women can express themselves, speak and spread their political views, and participate in political and public life. Instead of repressing or tolerating the repression of women, governments should recognize our collective actions – and consequent power – and enshrine our rights in laws, policies, and practice. [https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/03/07/womens-voices-have-power-drive-change]
On 8 March 8, 2024 Almyra Luna Kamilla and Rosalind Ratana opined in IMHO on “Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia”
In recent years, Asia has been witnessing rising authoritarianism and shrinking civic space. Among those in the frontlines of resistance are young women human rights defenders. As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let us demand for an enabling world where women human rights defenders can continue their noble pursuits without fear of reprisals.
In Thailand, the royal defamation law is being excessively used to silence criticisms against the monarchy. Meanwhile in Sri Lanka, economic and political mismanagement has sparked peaceful protests that are met with violence and intimidation. The fate of Asia’s political climate hangs by a thread as elections are held across many countries, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Korea, and Pakistan. Now more than ever, governments across the region are finding ways to solidify their power, putting an even tighter grip on civil society to the detriment of democracy and people’s fundamental rights and freedoms.
Despite such challenges, many are courageously speaking out and taking collective action to reclaim power for the people. This includes young women human rights defenders – or Youth WHRDs – who are claiming space to call out human rights violations and to demand accountability from oppressive governments. [https://www.rappler.com/voices/imho/young-women-rights-defenders-asia/]
The Alliance for Human Rights in Afghanistan(a coalition of 9 major NGOs) urgently appealed to the international community to significantly bolster its support and actively safeguard the human rights of Afghan women and girls, including Afghan women human rights defenders who face persecution for their peaceful campaigns for rights and basic freedoms.
In 2023, the Taliban further intensified its oppressive policies toward women, girls, the LGBTIQ+ community, and religious minorities. Afghan women and girls have seen their rights and prospects increasingly curtailed, from greater enforcement of restrictions on education – including a ban on girls attending secondary schools and universities – to intensifying exclusion of women from political and public life. Women have been banned from a growing list of forms of paid employment, and economic barriers, such as the ban on women registering organisations and undergoing vocational training, have contributed to a sharp decline in women’s participation in the labour market, impeding their right to make a living. This exacerbates financial insecurity, widens gender disparities, and further confines women to the private sphere. Lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women face severe threats, including torture, sexual violence, forced marriage, and death. Victims of gender violence, including those who identify as such, lack minimal legal and practical support. Obstacles to healthcare and education have exacerbated poverty and vulnerability among women and girls. In 2023, new discriminatory restrictions imposed by the Taliban included the closure of all beauty salons, blocking women from overseas travel for study, mandating female health workers in some areas to have a male chaperone while travelling or at work, and prohibiting women from entering a famous national park.
The oppressive environment extends to female activists, NGO leaders and journalists. Notable cases include the arrests of women’s rights activists Neda Parwani and Zholia Parsi, the enforced disappearance and subsequent discovery of Manizha Seddiqi in Taliban custody to date, the arrest of Matiullah Wesa, founder of an NGO advocating for girls’ education rights, and the arbitrary detainment of Ahmad Fahim Azimi and Seddiqullah Afghan—both dedicated girls’ education activists, among many others. Journalists reporting on the Taliban, facing arrests and threats, equally illustrate the difficulties encountered by the media, particularly women, when covering crimes against women or advocating for women’s rights. Collectively, these cases underscore the near-total denial of freedom of expression, gender equality, or any other internationally recognized right in Afghanistan under the Taliban.
Amid this growing oppression, segregation and fear, Afghan women human rights defenders have urged the international community to exert greater pressure on the Taliban. They call on international bodies to involve Afghan women in all negotiations with the Taliban and to facilitate direct meetings between women and the de facto authorities to address their concerns. Afghan women have also stressed the importance of advocacy for women’s rights by external actors based on the voices and realities of women inside Afghanistan. They call for coordinated efforts between organisations inside and outside the country to defend the rights of Afghan women and girls.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, called on the Taliban to release women human rights defenders as the world marks International Women’s Day.
I reiterate my appeal to the Taliban to respect all the human rights of women and girls in Afghanistan, including to education, work, freedom of movement and expression, and their cultural rights, and I urge the meaningful and equal participation of Afghan women and girls in all aspects of public life. I call on the Taliban to immediately and unconditionally release all those who have been arbitrarily detained for defending human rights, especially the rights of women and girls.”
On International Women’s Day, the a group of NGOs (ALQST for Human Rights, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR), Front Line Defenders, Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR), HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement, International Service for Human Rights (ISHR),MENA Rights Group, Salam for Democracy and Human Rights) renewed their call on Saudi Arabian authorities to release all women human rights defenders (WHRDs), women’s rights activists and their supporters who are detained in contravention of international human rights standards. The organisations further call on Saudi authorities to lift travel bans imposed on WHRDs and their relatives, and to abolish the male guardianship system. [https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/civil-society-reiterates-their-call-on-saudi-authorities-to-release-jailed-womens-rights-activists/]
The President of Georgia awarded severl with mesla of honor: co-founder of “Safari” organization Babutsa Pataraia, human rights defender Ana Arganashvili, founders of “National Network for Protection from Violence”: Eliso Amirejibi and Nato Shavlakadze and founder of “Vedzeb” organization Tamar Museridze.
Now in its 18th year, the Secretary of State’s IWOC Award recognizes women from around the globe who have demonstrated exceptional courage, strength, and leadership in advocating for peace, justice, human rights, gender equity and equality, and the empowerment of women and girls, in all their diversity – often at great personal risk and sacrifice. The 2024 awardees and many earlier laureates can be found via the Digest link above.
USAID Administrator Samantha Power had the following to say: It has always taken bravery and stubbornness to stand up for human rights. But today the threats that human rights activists and defenders face – from threats to their families to legal retribution to imprisonment and outright violence at the hands of those who would prefer to see them silenced – those threats are grave, and sadly they are growing. In 2022, more than 400 human rights defenders were murdered, the highest number ever recorded in a single year. I am in awe of the women we are honouring today for their courage.
They refuse to back down because of a shared conviction captured by Fatima Corazon, one of the women we are recognizing today. As she puts it, courage, even in the face of danger and fear is the driving force to achieve positive change. The women we are honoring live this conviction every minute of every day. They have been unjustly imprisoned, they have been driven from their homes or trapped inside their homes, they have seen their families and their colleagues attacked, or they have received death threats and been assaulted themselves.
But they do not relent. They go on fighting, they fight for the rights of political prisoners, they organize movements to bring services to marginalized communities, they publish articles, they host rallies, and they call out injustice wherever they can. Even in the most dangerous places against all odds, they are continuing their work demonstrating incredible, inspiring courage and putting their lives on the line to defend human rights.
Benafsha Yaqoobi has dedicated her life to defending the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan. A former attorney and member of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, she has helped women escape violence and visually impaired children attend school. Today, she continues to fight for the future of Afghanistan – one that respects human rights and human dignity.
Born in Isla Luis Vargas Torres, one of the most violent enclaves within Esmeraldas, Ecuador, Fátima Corozo has put her life on the line to draw hundreds of young people away from rising gang violence and help them get the education and job opportunities they need to build the futures they want for themselves.
Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello was the only woman amongst 75 people imprisoned during the black spring, Cuba’s crackdown on dissidents two decades ago, Martha was jailed for her activism. After her release, she continued to fight for the rights of political prisoners documenting fraudulent court hearings and supporting activists and their families. Unfortunately, as the Secretary relayed, the Cuban government is preventing Ms. Roque Cabello from leaving the country. So she is not here to accept the award, but let us give her a heartfelt round of applause.
As a result of Fariba Balouch’s outspoken activism for the rights of women and systematically oppressed ethnic minorities in Iran’s poorest province of Sistan and Baluchestan, Iranian authorities have threatened her life. And after she escaped to London, they detained her son and brother in a further attempt to intimidate her. Yet, Ms. Balouch believes the only way forward is resistance, and she continues to advocate for marginalized communities in Iran refusing to be silenced.
On 14 February 2024, eight organisations, including FIDH and OMCT within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, expressed their grave concern over the closure of civic space, attacks on freedom of expression, rising militarisation and continuous disruption and shutdown of communication that threatens the work and safety of Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) and Women’s Rights Groups in Sudan:
February 14, 2024. We the undersigned groups and organisations would like to express our grave concern and raise the alarm over ongoing reports about the closure of the civic space, attacks on freedom of expression, rising militarisation and continuous disruption and shutdown of communication that threatens the work and safety of Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) and Women’s Rights Groups in Sudan.
Shutdown of Communications
On February 7th, 2024, Sudan witnessed a complete communications shutdown. Reasons behind this shutdown remain unknown in the absence of official statements from operating companies and the warring parties. This shutdown followed two days of the extensive interruption of communications at the end of January 2024. The interruption of communications and frequent shutdowns have life threatening implications and put the safety and security of WHRDs at risk. Without access to communications, WHRDs struggle to document and report on the mounting atrocities on the ground. The interruption of internet networks has also impeded women groups’ access to the mobile banking apps that facilitate money transfers to operate or secure protection for WHRDs at risk. The #KeepItOn coalition — a global network of over 300 human rights organisations from 105 countries working to end internet shutdowns — has raised concerns that “amid the ongoing brutal violence in Sudan, the continued weaponisation of internet shutdowns is a flagrant violation of international law.”
Attack on Wad Madani
Since the attack on Wad Madani, the capital of the central Al Jazirah state, in mid-December 2023, Women’s Rights groups and WHRDs have lost the resources collected since the start of the war. Dozens of WHRDs and Women’s Rights Groups were forcibly displaced for the second time, driven from the city that had been the humanitarian response hub for local and international NGOs. As WHRDs were forced to flee again, they faced enormous challenges searching for safe locations across states and neighbouring countries. Dozens of WHRDs were harassed, detained, summoned and threatened by both warring parties during the last few weeks.
Targeting of Activists
The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) launched an intensified attack on human rights defenders, humanitarian workers and volunteers, journalists, and peace activists in the last few months in the areas under their control. Aid groups and first responders faced rising restrictions of movement and supplies.
Rapid Support Forces (RSF) continued to arrest civilians, loot both public and private properties and perpetrate systemic sexual violence across the areas under their control. WHRDs and Women’s Rights Groups struggle to operate in these areas as the risks of sexual violence are growing.
At least five WHRDs and women first responders have been detained, summoned, harassed or threatened in the last few weeks. The attacks were reported in areas controlled by both warring parties. Since the war erupted, four WHRDs have been killed, two of whom were journalists. At least 11 women health workers were killed as well.
Closure of Civic Space and Restrictions on Freedom of Expression
In January 2024, Sudanese authorities in the relatively safer states in Northern and Eastern Sudan, including local governors, issued decrees to dissolve neighbourhood resistance committees. These grassroot groups were mobilizing and organising communities since the emergence of the protests movement in 2018. The governors of five states also banned publication of information and imposed heavy penalties on publishing information on social media or other newspapers regarding the security situation in their states. Journalists and activists were detained in three states and two women journalists were summoned and threatened by local authorities following these decrees. In the Blue Nile state, Red Sea and other states, meetings and other forms of peaceful civic activities are either banned or not authorized. Women’s Rights groups and other NGOs operating in these states are working in hostile and increasingly challenging environments. Civic space in Sudan is closed, with an increasing militarisation of the state and local communities.
Rising Militarisation
During the last three months, Sudanese authorities launched a mobilisation campaign to arm civilians in various states under SAF control. This campaign’s leaders attacked and threatened activists who criticized the armament of civilians, including women, girls and boys. Voices of peace activists are considered treasonous by SAF supporters. The widespread arms in the hands of civilians has led to unprecedented threats to women and peace and security, including gender-based violence (GBV) in the areas outside of the fighting zones.
We the undersigned groups call on:
The warring parties:
An immediate ceasefire and the prompt creation of safe corridors for humanitarian aid organisations and groups, and to guarantee the safety of their operations;
An immediate restoration of telecommunications across the country;
Cease attacks on health facilities, medical supplies, and health workers, and uphold obligations under international humanitarian law;
The international community:
States and international human rights, peace-building and feminist groups and organisations to work together to create an immediate long-term protection program for WHRDs (and their families) that addresses relocation needs (in several locations if needed), provides psychological support for post-traumatic stress caused by war and conflict, including due to GBV, and equips WHRDs’ with all the necessary means to continue their work in the defense of human rights;
States to provide support for the FFM and other international mechanisms mandated to document human rights violations in Sudan, including by ensuring that these entities have the necessary resources to carry out their work effectively;
States to support local initiatives providing humanitarian support to local communities as well as support services to victims, and to support civil society’s documentation and reporting efforts so that the evidence obtained can be used for future judicial proceedings, including for those related to SGBV crimes.
The international community to establish a mechanism for the disclosure of the whereabouts of the disappeared and the release of detainees, and to urgently address the issue of enforced disappearances and grave violations in detention centers, including GBV;
The international community to reinforce and protect medical staff in accordance with international humanitarian law;
The Fact Finding Mission (FFM) recently established by the UN Human Rights Council, to ensure accountability is pursued for GBV crimes committed by warring parties, to regularly and meaningfully engage with civil society in this process, and to ensure effective protection of witnesses and victims;
All other UN human rights mechanisms, including UN Special Procedures, to support the FFM’s work and to investigate GBV as a weapon of war, to call for the release of detainees and for the disclosure of the whereabouts of the disappeared, and to demand an investigation into violations in detention, including GBV;
‘Our impact may be large, may be small, and may be nothing. But we must try. It is our duty to the dispossessed and it is the right of civil society.’ – Cao Shunli
Ten years ago, Chinese woman human rights defender Cao Shunli was a victim of deadly reprisals for engaging with the United Nations.
The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) and partners invite you to attend a photo exhibition on 14 March 2024, at Place des Nations to honour her memory.
Cao Shunli was a brave Chinese woman human rights defender and lawyer. She campaigned for the meaningful consultation and contribution of independent civil society to the Chinese government’s national reports for its first and second Universal Periodic Reviews (UPR). On 14 September 2013, one month before this review, while on her way to Geneva to attend a human rights training organised by ISHR and CHRD, she was detained and forcibly disappeared by Chinese authorities for five weeks. When she resurfaced in custody in October 2013, she had been charged with ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’, and it was evident that she was experiencing serious medical issues in detention. Despite repeated international calls for her urgent release over months of being denied adequate medical treatment, Cao Shunli died of multiple organ failure on 14 March 2014, having been granted bail for medical reasons just days before her death. Cao Shunli was one of the finalists of the prestigious Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2014. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/cao-shunli/ as well as https://www.martinennalsaward.org/hrd/cao-shunli/]
To this day, Chinese authorities have ignored appeals seeking accountability for Cao’s death, including repeated calls by UN Special Procedures experts in 2014 and 2019 for a full investigation into this ‘deadly reprisal’. Her case remains the longest-standing unresolved case in the UN Secretary-General’s annual reports on reprisals. March 2024 marks the 10th anniversary of Cao Shunli’s death. A decade ago, when ISHR and many other human rights groups sought to observe a moment of silence at the Human Rights Council in her memory, the Chinese delegation, together with other delegations, disrupted the session for an hour and a half. China is consistently one of the most frequent perpetrators of reprisals against individuals or groups engaging with the United Nations. Frequently mentioned alongside Saudi Arabia, it has the second highest number of reprisals cases and situations reported by the UN Secretary-General since 2010.
Cao Shunli’s story is a paradigmatic case of reprisals, not only because of her belief in the importance of civil society participation in UN mechanisms, but also due to the array of severe human rights abuses she endured because of this belief, ranging from being barred from exiting her own country, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention, lack of due process, torture, ill-treatment, and denial of adequate medical care, to subsequent death in custody without any accountability for these abuses.
On 15 February 2024 AP carried the story that Venezuela’s government has ordered the local UN office on human rights to suspend operations, giving its staff 72 hours to leave, after accusing the office of promoting opposition to the South American country. The UN office was established in Caracas in September 2019.
The foreign affairs minister, Yván Gil, announced the decision at a news conference in Caracas on Thursday. Gil’s announcement came on the heels of the detention of the human rights attorney Rocío San Miguel, which set off a wave of criticism inside and outside Venezuela.
The South American country’s government said it had made a decision “to suspend the activities of the technical advisory office of the UN high commissioner for human rights and carry out a holistic revision of the technical cooperation terms”.
The government said the UN human rights office must rectify its “colonialist, abusive and violating attitude”, accusing it of playing an “inappropriate role” in the country and supporting impunity for people involved in attempts at assassination, coups, conspiracies and other plots.
The Venezuelan government regularly accuses members of the political opposition of plotting takeovers or the assassination of President Nicolas Maduro, all accusations vehemently denied by opposing parties and their members.
“We regret this announcement and are evaluating the next steps. We continue to engage with the authorities and other stakeholders,” said UN human rights office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani. “Our guiding principle has been and remains the promotion and protection of the human rights of the people of Venezuela.”
Venezuelan state television on Wednesday harshly criticized comments by the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, who just concluded a visit to Venezuela. Fakhri had said in a statement the government food program does not tackle the root causes of hunger and is susceptible to political influences.
San Miguel was taken into custody on Friday at the airport near Caracas while she and her daughter awaited a flight to Miami. Authorities did not acknowledge her detention until Sunday, and as of Wednesday her attorney had not been allowed to meet with her.
San Miguel’s daughter, ex-husband, two brothers and former partner were also detained following her arrest. Of them, only her former partner remains in custody.
The Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) is working with journalists in the Middle East and Northern Africa to investigate various violations affecting the safety of journalists and their ability to do their work.
Shutterstock
“I find myself wishing there was more protection [for investigative journalists], a sense of safety and even simply just hope. I watch in awe as they investigate crimes that they unfortunately know they could well be victims of in the future, or in some cases already have been.“ Zaynab Al-Khawaja, GCHR’s Journalists Protection Coordinator, working with journalists conducting the investigations
With a strong gender focus, the GCHR ensures that the majority of the investigations are carried out by women, empowering them and shedding light on cases involving women.
One investigation highlights the story of an anonymous woman journalist who quit her job and relocated due to sexual harassment. She writes:
A large proportion of society is aware of widespread harassment in the streets, resulting from an exacerbated hypermasculinity. However, statements by several Iraqi women journalists confirm that this phenomenon did not spare women in press and media outlets, forcing a considerable number of them to quit journalism for good.
The investigation also reported that 41% of women journalists in Iraq have been victims of harassment, forcing 15% to leave their jobs and 5% to quit their profession for good.
This data aligns with UNESCO’s Chilling report, revealing increasing offline and online attacks against women journalists, including stigmatization, sexist hate speech, trolling, physical assault, rape and murder.
Another investigation looked into the imprisonment and silencing of journalists, some facing fabricated allegations of sexual harassment. GCHR collaborates with the NGO Vigilance and 40 partners on a joint appeal to end the persecution and detention of journalists and human rights defenders exercising their right to freedom of expression. GCHR also supported a journalist in the Middle East investigating the case of a disappeared journalist in Syria.
Since 2022, GCHR and UNESCO have joined forces to support investigative journalism, reducing impunity for crimes against journalists and enhancing their safety through the Global Media Defence Fund. Established in 2019, this fund has supported over 120 projects globally, directly benefiting over 5,000 journalists, 1,200 lawyers and 200 non-governmental organizations.
In 2022, UNESCO published recommendations on addressing violence against women journalists, based on The Chilling, a global research project by UNESCO and the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ). All reports related to this project are available here on UNESCO’s website.
![[OPINION] Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia](https://www.rappler.com/tachyon/2024/03/women-rights-defenders-asia-mar-7-2024.jpg)
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 