Human Rights Watch News

Trinidad and Tobago: Bring Home Children, Women Held in Iraq

Human Rights Watch — Tue, 07 May 2024 18:08:00 -0400

(New York) – The government of Trinidad and Tobago should urgently bring home Trinidadian children and their mothers imprisoned in Iraq because of their alleged association with the Islamic State (ISIS), Human Rights Watch said today. Four Trinidadian women have been held along with their seven children, aged approximately 7 to 15, for nearly seven years.

On May 2, 2024, Iraqi prison authorities forcibly removed two Trinidadian brothers, ages 13 and 15, from their mother’s cell in Rusafa women’s prison in Baghdad and transferred them to a cell with other youths. Their mother, in a voice recording shared with Human Rights Watch, expressed fear that the two boys would be transferred to another prison. She said her youngest son suffered from asthma, anemia, and malnutrition.

“Trinidad and Tobago has publicly promised that it would bring home its nationals from Iraq and Syria, but not a single Trinidadian has returned home in more than five years,” said Jo Becker, children’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “These children, who are not responsible for any crime, should be in school in Trinidad and Tobago, not languishing in an Iraqi prison.”

The mother in the voice recording expressed further concern about her younger son with health problems: “They took my son from me, they told me he was too big to be staying in a cell with us. They put him in a cell with about 10 boys. We have no education for our children. Nothing. We are going on our seventh year in prison and our children are growing up here.”

Iraqi authorities are holding an estimated 100 children with their mothers at Rusafa prison. Many of the women are foreign nationals who have been charged with or convicted of terrorism-related offenses.

The imprisoned women said that they are willing for their children to be returned to Trinidad and Tobago without them. They said the Red Cross has visited them and that they communicated with the repatriation committee established by Trinidadian Prime Minister Keith Rowley in March 2023, but have had no response from the government regarding their or their children’s situation.

The four women were convicted of ISIS affiliation by Iraqi courts. Human Rights Watch has found serious, widespread flaws in the prosecutions of terrorism suspects, including foreign women. Three of the women are held with five of the children in Rusafa prison, where the women are serving 20-year sentences. A court in the Kurdistan region of Iraq convicted the fourth, who is being held with her two children in Erbil. She recently completed her 6-year sentence and is technically free to leave the prison, but the Trinidadian government has made no effort to assist her return.

The Iraqi authorities’ apparent denial of the children’s right to education over many years, possible responsibility for their lack of access to health care and adequate food, and recent separation of children from their mothers should galvanize Trinidadian authorities to urgently seek their nationals’ repatriation, Human Rights Watch said. The Iraqi and Trinidadian authorities should weigh the children’s best interests and right to family unity and consider repatriating both the children and their mothers, so their children could regularly visit their mothers as they serve out their sentences in Trinidad and Tobago, Human Rights Watch said.

“We are here just waiting, and time is wasting,” said one of the imprisoned Trinidadian women in a voice recording shared with Human Rights Watch on May 4. “Our children remain uneducated without any knowledge.”

A February 2023 Human Rights Watch report documented the unlawful detention of Trinidadian nationals in life-threatening conditions in Kurdish-controlled northeast Syria. Since 2019, at least 39 countries have repatriated well over 8,000 of their nationals from the region. Trinidad and Tobago has repatriated none of their nationals during that time.

“Trinidad and Tobago’s prime minister has pledged to bring the Trinidadians detained in Iraq and Syria home,” Becker said. “He shouldn’t wait any longer.”

Gaza: Israel Flouts World Court Orders

Human Rights Watch — Tue, 07 May 2024 12:30:00 -0400

Click to expand Image Egyptian trucks carrying humanitarian aid bound for the Gaza Strip queue outside the Rafah border crossing on the Egyptian side on March 23, 2024. © 2024 Khaled Desouki/AFP via Getty Images

(Jerusalem) – Israel is contravening the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) legally binding orders by obstructing the entry of lifesaving aid and services into Gaza, Human Rights Watch said today. Since January 2024, the court has twice ordered provisional measures requiring Israel to enable the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance as part of South Africa’s case alleging that Israel is violating the Genocide Convention of 1948.

On May 5, Israeli authorities closed the Kerem Shalom crossing after a Hamas rocket attack, and on May 7, they seized the Rafah crossing as part of its incursion in the area, thus blocking aid from entering and people from leaving Gaza via the primary crossings used in recent months. While Israeli authorities had allowed more aid trucks to enter in the preceding weeks and opened an additional crossing and a port for aid entry, the increase has been modest and nowhere near enough to meet the overwhelming need, according to United Nations and nongovernmental aid agencies. The groups said Israel continued to block critical aid items, and only a small proportion of the limited aid has been reaching northern Gaza, where it’s vitally needed.

“Despite children dying from starvation and famine in Gaza, the Israeli authorities are still blocking aid critical for the survival of Gaza’s population in defiance of the World Court,” said Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine director at Human Rights Watch. “With each day that Israeli authorities block lifesaving aid, more Palestinians are at risk of dying.”

On January 26, the ICJ ordered Israel to “take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian aid.” In light of the “spread of famine and starvation,” the court imposed additional measures on March 28, ordering Israel to ensure the unhindered provision of humanitarian assistance, in full cooperation with the UN, including by opening new land crossing points.

The court’s March order required Israel to report to the ICJ on the implementation of the court’s measures within one month. However, as of May 2, Israeli authorities continued to obstruct basic services and entry of fuel and lifesaving aid, acts that amount to war crimes and include the use of starvation of civilians as a weapon of war.

According to the UN, the average number of aid trucks into Gaza through Kerem Shalom and Rafah crossings increased by only 24 trucks a day in the month following the order – from an average of 162 trucks a day between February 29 and March 28 to 186 trucks a day from March 29 to April 28. This is only about 37 percent of the number that entered Gaza each day before October 7, 2023, when 80 percent of Gaza’s population relied on aid amid Israel's more than 16-year-long unlawful closure.

Israeli authorities have blamed the UN for distribution delays, but, as the occupying power, Israel is obliged to provide for the welfare of the occupied population and ensure that the humanitarian needs of Gaza’s population are met.

In response to United States government pressure, Israeli authorities opened the Erez crossing – a checkpoint between Israel and northern Gaza – for aid deliveries on May 1, allowing 30 trucks to enter. It's unclear whether further trucks have entered via Erez since then. In April, they also began allowing some aid to come from Ashdod port, a seaport south of Tel Aviv. In an April 30 response to a High Court petition challenging the restrictions on aid, the Israeli government said that it was also planning on opening an additional northern aid crossing.

Despite these increases, on May 1, Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders or MSF) stated that essential items like oxygen tanks, generators, refrigerators, and critical medical equipment continued to be blocked, that very little of the aid is reaching northern Gaza, and that there is “no clarity or consistency to what is allowed into Gaza.”

In early April, Human Rights Watch researchers went to Egypt's North Sinai region, which borders Gaza, and spoke to workers for 11 UN agencies and aid organizations sending aid into Gaza. All said that Israeli authorities continue to obstruct the entry of aid via Egypt. They said that the amount of aid, despite recentincreases, and the arbitrary rejection of critical items, meant that the colossal need for aid is not being met.

Aid workers said the Israeli authorities have provided no list of barred items and inspections staff are rejecting entire truckloads in an ad hoc manner with no explanation or possibility of appeal. “They refuse to give a list [of items that are barred from entry], saying it is an individual determination,” one said. Adding to the opacity of the process, they said that Israeli authorities generally don’t allow aid agency representatives to be at the checkpoints where aid trucks are being inspected.

Several people said that Israeli authorities, in some cases, bar items they consider “dual use,” which could be used for military purposes, but there is no clear list of what items are included. In response to a freedom of information request for lists of so called “dual use” items, Israeli authorities said that they were still using a list of dual use items that they had published in 2008. Tania Hary, executive director of the Israeli human rights organization Gisha, told Human Rights Watch, “We see them interpreting the list very broadly, which is nothing new, except it’s taking place on the backdrop of a humanitarian catastrophe.”

Since Hamas-led fighters attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, high-ranking Israeli officials have made public statements expressing their aim to deprive civilians in Gaza of food, water and fuel – reflecting the policy being carried out by Israeli forces. Other Israeli officials have publicly stated that humanitarian aid to Gaza would be conditioned either on the release of hostages unlawfully held by Hamas or Hamas’ destruction.

Israel’s Coordinator of the Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), the military body responsible for coordinating humanitarian aid into Gaza, has complete control over what can be taken into Gaza. After being inspected in Egypt, humanitarian aid trucks must go through two Israeli-controlled inspection sites: Nitzana and Kerem Shalom. People interviewed said trucks often have to wait for days, and sometimes weeks, for inspections due to limited working hours and scanning machines, as well as additional inspection procedures added since the October 7 attacks in Israel.

One UN employee told Human Rights Watch that a truck full of medical supplies had been sitting at the border for a month awaiting inspection.

Aid workers said that Israeli authorities have rejected most items with solar panels, motors, some metal parts, and even items stored in wooden crates, irrespective of their content. They said items like generators, water filtration systems, and oxygen, are consistently rejected. If any single item on a truck is rejected, the entire truck is denied entry, several aid workers said.

Human Rights Watch wrote to COGAT on April 2 seeking comment regarding Israel’s obstruction of aid but has not received a response.

Several people said that some trucks had been rejected several times for unknown reasons. They said aid workers tried to guess what might have caused the rejection and modified the shipments accordingly, but they were sometimes rejected again. “It’s a mystery with rejections,” a World Food Program worker said. “It’s not consistent. Some of the same items that have been approved to go in before are then rejected later.”

Aid workers said that more than six months into the hostilities, agencies are now automatically filtering out key lifesaving items from the trucks, only sending in what they anticipate will be allowed entry. That means they leave out critical items, including generators to provide electricity for equipment critical to health, water, and sanitation; repair items for water and sanitation infrastructure; and medical equipment like x-ray machines, because they anticipate rejection.

Since November, aid agencies sometimes have submitted lists of aid items to COGAT for preapproval. However, even when preapproval was given, on many occasions the items were still rejected at the checkpoints. The World Food Program staff member said that in one instance, the United Nations Population Fund, an agency focused on reproductive and maternal health, had received preapproval to send a maternity clinic to Gaza, but Israeli authorities twice rejected it at the border without explanation.

Several countries have responded to the Israeli government’s unlawful restrictions by airdropping aid. The US also pledged to build a temporary seaport in Gaza. However, aid groups and UNofficials have said such efforts are inadequate to prevent a famine.

In its March provisional measures order, the ICJ stated, “there is an urgent need to increase the capacity and number of open land crossing points into Gaza and to maintain them open so as to increase the flow of aid delivery,” as “there is no substitute for land routes and entry points from Israel into Gaza to ensure the effective and efficient delivery of food, water, medical and humanitarian assistance.”

Israeli authorities should urgently open additional land crossings and lift bans on critical aid items. They should provide aid agencies with a list of banned items and provide specifications for items that are allowed under certain requirements. Inspectors should provide written explanations for any rejections and allow agencies to appeal rejection decisions, Human Rights Watch said.

On May 4, Cindy McCain, an American who is director of the World Food Program, said, “There is famine — full-blown famine — in the north, and it's moving its way south.” On April 22, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) reported that “1.1 million people face catastrophic levels of hunger.”

“Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians face famine and many risk dying of starvation following Israel’s continued disregard for the law,” Shakir said. “The countries that continue to send arms risk being complicit in Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinians.”

Progress in Philippines’ Media Murder Cases Just a Start

Human Rights Watch — Tue, 07 May 2024 11:14:10 -0400

Click to expand Image Activists call for justice and protection of media workers during a rally following the killing of radio journalist Percy Lapid, Quezon City, Philippines, October 4, 2022. © 2022 Eloisa Lopez/Reuters

Advocates of media freedom in the Philippines got some good news within days of World Press Freedom Day on May 3. On April 29, police arrested a third suspect in the on-air shooting of radio broadcaster Juan Jumalon in Mindanao. And a court in Manila on May 6 sentenced the gunman responsible for the murder of the radio commentator Percival Mabasa, popularly known as “Percy Lapid,” to up to 16 years in prison. The Philippines normally draws global attention for having one of the worst records for impunity for killings of journalists.

The Presidential Task Force on Media Security proclaimed the Philippines to be a safer place for journalists. And President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said that he will ensure journalists can do their jobs without fear.

The arrest in the Jumalon killing and the sentencing of Lapid’s murderer, who accepted a plea bargain, do not directly address the bigger issue in those two cases. And that is that the individuals who masterminded these two murders remain at large.

The Marcos administration needs to do a lot more if the Philippines is going to discard its reputation as one of the world’s most dangerous places to practice journalism and ensure an environment in which members of the media can do their jobs safely.

Harassment and threats to Filipino journalists also come from the authorities. At least one journalist, Frenchie Mae Cumpio, has been in police detention for more than four years. Many journalists have also been subjected to government “red-tagging,” the practice of accusing them of being members or sympathizers of the communist insurgency. Being red-tagged can lead to threats, unlawful surveillance, harassment and even death.

Rather than resting on the laurels of the pending Jumalon trial and the incomplete Lapid case, the Marcos administration needs to rachet up its effots to protect journalists. It should immediately end the practice of red-tagging journalists and ensure harassment and killings of journalists are fully investigated and prosecuted, whoever is responsible. Foreign governments and donors have an important role to play in this and should scrutinize Philippine government claims on media freedom and the need to end impunity for attacks on the press.

UN: Revise ‘Pact for the Future’ to Focus on Rights

Human Rights Watch — Tue, 07 May 2024 00:00:00 -0400

(New York) – United Nations member countries should use negotiations on the “Pact for the Future” to commit to strengthening human rights, including promoting economic justice and protecting the right to a healthy environment, Human Rights Watch said.

The UN Pact for the Future, currently being negotiated, is expected to be adopted at the Summit of the Future, a special UN meeting slated for September 2024. Among the issues being discussed by the 193 UN member countries are economic policy reforms and how to realize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, as well as the emphasis that should be placed on human rights generally.

“The Pact for the Future shouldn’t become another UN document that gets adopted and then ignored,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch. “Governments should commit to action to end widening economic inequalities that deny billions of people their rights and a climate crisis that’s taking a mounting toll on lives and livelihoods around the globe.”

Many governments that recognize the importance of sustainable development often ignore that human rights are key to achieving this goal, Human Rights Watch said. They need to confront climate change and responsibly manage new technologies. And while most governments acknowledge the importance of complying with international humanitarian law in conflicts, they disagree on how to address atrocities against civilians in Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine.

Although the final text will be non-binding, the pact presents a critical opportunity to affirm a vision of human rights that can help bridge some of the sharp divisions between governments on these and other issues. In the process, governments should strengthen the ability of the UN system to deliver on the UN Charter by protecting and promoting peace and security, development, and human rights.

Some governments were disappointed with the initial draft of the pact due to what they considered its scant attention to human rights, diplomats told Human Rights Watch.

A number of countries are seeking to strengthen the human rights language in the draft pact. However, China, Russia, Cuba, Iran, and others have sought to weaken, dilute, or delete references to human rights.

Western governments are partly to blame for leaving space to those critical of a human rights approach, Human Rights Watch said. Their selective application of human rights undermines the credibility of such an agenda, particularly for countries in the Global South. While the United States and other Western countries justifiably condemn Russia’s atrocities in Ukraine, for example, many of them have not shown the same resolve concerning Israel’s atrocities in Gaza. While the European Union says it champions human rights protection globally, it opposes efforts at the UN to make the international tax system fairer for developing countries.

All governments’ assertions in support of human rights would resonate more powerfully if they applied them consistently, including in their own countries and with their friends and allies, Human Rights Watch said.

Rather than dismissing the views of countries in the Global South on international financial reforms, Global North states should support much-needed changes to the international financial architecture. Those include aligning international financial institutions’ policies and practices with human rights, supporting efforts to achieve a global tax treaty, combatting illicit financial flows, and reducing governments’ debt burdens.

The concept of a “human rights economy,” which has been championed by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, offers the potential to meet the legitimate demands of Global South countries through a more holistic approach to human rights.

Governments should also ensure that the pact reaffirms the centrality of human rights in confronting the climate crisis. They should explicitly endorse the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, recognized by the UN General Assembly in 2022, while emphasizing the urgent need for phasing out fossil fuels through a just transition that is consistent with human rights. Fossil fuels are the primary driver of the climate crisis, and all stages of their use have been linked to severe human rights harm.

The pact should also highlight the importance of civil society and the rights to freedom of speech, association, and peaceful assembly. The upcoming UN Civil Society Conference in Nairobi, Kenya on May 9-10 is an opportunity for the UN leadership and delegations overseeing the drafting process to hear from hundreds of civil society representatives from around the world. The drafters should listen carefully to civil society priorities for the Pact for the Future and its two annexes, the Global Digital Compact on “shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all” and the Declaration on Future Generations. Outreach to civil society organizations in the drafting process has so far been haphazard.

“Instead of standing by while governments trample on human rights, or selectively condemning abuses by their adversaries while ignoring those of their friends, UN member countries should commit to ending repression wherever it occurs and improving everyone’s lives,” Charbonneau said.

Israel: US Arms Used in Strike that Killed Lebanon Aid Workers

Human Rights Watch — Tue, 07 May 2024 00:00:00 -0400

Click to expand Image A man carries belongings of a paramedic killed at a paramedic center hit on March 27, 2024, by an Israeli airstrike in Habbarieh, southern Lebanon, March 27, 2024. © 2024 AP Photo/Mohammed Zaatari

(Beirut) – An Israeli strike on an emergency and relief center in south Lebanon on March 27, 2024, was an unlawful attack on civilians that failed to take all necessary precautions, Human Rights Watch said today. If the attack on civilians was carried out intentionally or recklessly, it should be investigated as an apparent war crime. The strike, using a US-made Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) guidance kit and an Israeli-made 500-pound (about 230 kilograms) general purpose bomb, killed seven emergency and relief volunteers from the town of Habbarieh, five kilometers north of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

The strike, after midnight, targeted a residential structure that housed the Emergency and Relief Corps of the Lebanese Succour Association, a nongovernmental humanitarian organization that provides emergency, rescue, first aid training, and relief services in Lebanon. Human Rights Watch found no evidence of a military target at the site. Just a week before, Israel reportedly submitted written assurances to the US State Department that US-provided weapons were not being used in violation of international law.

“Israeli forces used a US weapon to conduct a strike that killed seven civilian relief workers in Lebanon who were merely doing their jobs,” said Ramzi Kaiss, Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Israel’s assurances to the United States that it is abiding by the laws of war ring hollow. The US needs to acknowledge reality and cut off arms to Israel.”

The United States should immediately suspend arms sales and military assistance to Israel given evidence that the Israeli military is using US weapons unlawfully, Human Rights Watch said. Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry should also swiftly move forward with filing a declaration with the International Criminal Court, enabling it to investigate and prosecute crimes within the court’s jurisdiction on Lebanese territory since October 2023.

In a Telegram post on March 27, the Israeli military said that “fighter jets struck a military compound in the area of al-Habbariyeh in southern Lebanon” and that “a significant terrorist operative belonging to the ‘al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya’ [The Islamic Group] organization who advanced attacks against Israeli territory was eliminated along with additional terrorists who were with him.” A parliament member representing The Islamic Group, a Lebanese Islamist political party whose armed wing, the Fajr Forces, has been engaged in cross-border hostilities with Israel, told Human Rights Watch that no fighters from the group were killed in the strike, and denied any affiliation with the Emergency and Relief Corps of the Lebanese Succour Association.

Human Rights Watch interviewed six people from Habbarieh: the parents of three people killed, the owner of the house, a member of the emergency and rescue team who left the center shortly before the strike, a resident who was at the site shortly after the attack, and a local official. Human Rights Watch also spoke to the head of the Emergency and Relief Corps at the Lebanese Succour Association, a member of parliament representing the Islamic Group, and two people at the General Directorate of the Lebanese Civil Defense, including the head of the civil defense team that pulled the bodies out of the rubble.

Human Rights Watch also reviewed photographs of weapon remnants found at the site; photographs and videos of the site before and after the attack shared online by journalists, news agencies, and rescue workers; and footage shared directly with researchers. Human Rights Watch sent a letter with findings and questions to the Israeli military and the US State Department on April 19 but has not received a response as of time of publishing.

Footage of weapons remnants found at the site of the strike, and shared with Human Rights Watch, included a metal remnant marked “MPR 500,” confirming it was a 500-pound class general purpose bomb, made by Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems, and remnants of the strake and a tail-fin belonging to a JDAM guidance kit, produced by the US-based Boeing Company.

Two verified photographs, posted on the Emergency and Relief Corps Facebook page on March 28 and taken at the attack site, show remnants in the same location seen in the photographs sent directly to Human Rights Watch. The photographs were shared by a Habbarieh resident who was at the site shortly after the attack and by a journalist in Beirut who shared photographs of the same set of remnants displayed at the funeral service for the seven volunteers.

The seven people killed were all volunteers who had begun working with the center shortly after it opened its branch in Habbarieh in late 2023, their families, colleagues, and the head of the Emergency and Relief Corps said. Those killed were 18-year-old twin brothers Ahmad and Hussein al-Chaar, Abdul Rahman al-Chaar, Ahmad Hammoud, Mohammed Farouk Atwi, Abdullah Atwi, and Baraa Abou Qaiss; the oldest person of this group was 25.

The attack came shortly after 12:30 a.m., killing all seven workers at the center, said Samer Hamdan, the head of the civil defense team at the site. Photographs and videos taken by residents and journalists show the center razed to the ground and a destroyed ambulance parked nearby with distinguishable red markings on its back and sides.

Human Rights Watch found no evidence of a military target. The Israeli military’s admission in their Telegram post about targeting the center, given it was a relief center, indicates at a minimum their failure to take all feasible precautions to verify that the target was military and avoid loss of civilian life and damage to civilian objects, making the strike unlawful.

An Islamic Group official said that while some Islamic Group supporters are volunteers in the Lebanese Succour Association, they do not include any fighters from its armed wing, the Fajr Forces. Content posted on social media and reviewed by Human Rights Watch suggests that at least two of the people killed may have been supporters of the Islamic Group. In one case, the person posted four photographs to his Facebook page with the banner and imagery of the Islamic Group between 2016 and 2018. Another photograph posted on social media showed a third person holding an assault rifle while wearing camouflages fatigues. The person’s mother said that her son, like other men in the village, used rifles for hunting and was not affiliated with any armed group. Family members of the people killed, the Lebanese Succour Association, and the civil defense all said that the seven men were civilians and not affiliated with any armed group. A member of parliament representing the Islamic Group, which has a history of issuing public statements when its fighters are killed, told Human Rights Watch that none of its fighters were killed in the strike, and the group publicly denied any affiliation with the association.

“We turned every stone,” Hamdan said. “Everything we found were emergency and medical equipment and devices. Overalls, helmets, gauze, first aid kits. That’s it.”

In retaliation for the strike, Hezbollah said that it launched rockets at the northern Israeli town of Kiryat Shimona and the headquarters of the 769th brigade later that morning. The attack by Hezbollah killed one civilian, according to media reports. Later that day, Israeli strikes killed nine people, including Hezbollah and Amal fighters and three other medical workers affiliated with the two groups. As of May 1, Israeli attacks in Lebanon since October 2023 have reportedly killed at least 73 civilians, according to an AFP tally, in addition to more than 300 fighters.

Rocket and missile strikes and other attacks into Israel by Hezbollah and armed Palestinian groups in Lebanon since October 2023 have reportedly killed at least 9 civilians and 11 soldiers. More than 92,000 people have been displaced from their homes in south Lebanon and at least 80,000 people have been displaced from northern Israel.

Under international humanitarian law, all parties to the conflict have a duty to distinguish between combatants and civilians and to target only combatants. In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person must be considered a civilian. In the conduct of military operations, constant care must be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians, and civilian objects. All feasible precautions must be taken to avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, and damage to civilian objects. Each party to the conflict must do everything feasible to verify that targets are military objectives. Anyone who commits serious violations of the laws of war with criminal intent—that is, intentionally or recklessly—may be prosecuted for war crimes. The attack that destroyed an emergency and relief center containing only civilians shows a significant failure to take adequate safeguards to ensure that targets were military objectives and to prevent civilian deaths, Human Rights Watch said.

In March, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam submitted a joint memorandum to the US State Department highlighting a wide range of Israeli violations of international humanitarian law and finding that its assurances to use US weapons legally are not credible.

“The uninterrupted and unconditional flow of arms despite Israel’s systematic violations of the laws of war and impunity for those abuses facilitate the continued unlawful killing of civilians, including aid workers.” Kaiss said. “Israel's conduct in Gaza and Lebanon violates US and international laws, and President Biden needs to stop the flow of weapons as a matter of urgency to avoid further atrocities.”

Submission to the United Nations Secretary-General on Autonomous Weapons Systems

Human Rights Watch — Mon, 06 May 2024 17:50:00 -0400

Human Rights Watch appreciates the opportunity to submit its views and recommendations for consideration by the United Nations secretary-general in response to Resolution 78/241 on “Lethal autonomous weapons systems” adopted by the UN General Assembly on 22 December 2023. This historic resolution asks the UN secretary-general to seek the views of countries and other stakeholders on “ways to address the challenges and concerns raised” by such weapons systems “from humanitarian, legal, security, technological and ethical perspectives.”

This submission briefly summarizes our work on this issue, outlines specific challenges and concerns raised by autonomous weapons systems, and elaborates on ways to address these challenges and concerns through a legally binding instrument.

Download the full submission I. Background

Human Rights Watch is an international nongovernmental organization (NGO) in consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. We conduct research and advocacy to uphold human dignity and promote human rights and international human rights law across the globe. For more than 30 years, Human Rights Watch has documented and advocated for the prevention of civilian harm and human suffering caused by a range of arms, including landmines, cluster munitions, incendiary weapons, chemical weapons, and explosive weapons used in populated areas. We work to advance humanitarian disarmament, an approach that aims to prevent and remediate arms-inflicted human suffering and environmental harm through the establishment and implementation of norms.

In October 2012, Human Rights Watch co-founded the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots with six other NGOs working in the field of humanitarian disarmament.[1] The coalition, which is now comprised of more than 270 NGOs in 70 countries, advocates for the negotiation and adoption of an international treaty to prohibit and restrict autonomous weapons systems. On behalf of Human Rights Watch, Mary Wareham served as founding coordinator of the campaign from 2012 to 2021.

II. Challenges and Concerns Raised by Autonomous Weapons Systems

This submission is based on and informed by our years of research and advocacy on this issue. Since 2012, Human Rights Watch has published more than two dozen reports on autonomous weapons systems, most in conjunction with the International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC) at Harvard Law School. This research has explored the numerous serious ethical, moral, legal, accountability, and security challenges and concerns raised by weapons systems that select and engage targets based on sensor processing rather than human inputs.[2]

In November 2012, Human Rights Watch and IHRC released “Losing Humanity: The Case against Killer Robots,” the first major civil society report to examine the dangers of removing human control from the use of force.[3] This report – and later ones – found that allowing machines to select and attack targets without further human intervention would be incompatible with fundamental provisions of international humanitarian law, including the principles of distinction and proportionality.[4] Autonomous weapons systems would find it difficult to distinguish between combatants and civilians, particularly when the former commingle with the latter, because they could not interpret subtle cues. In addition, they would lack the human judgment to determine whether the expected civilian harm was excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage in rapidly changing case-by-case situations.

Human Rights Watch and IHRC have detailed the significant hurdles to assigning personal accountability to the actions undertaken by autonomous weapons systems under both criminal and civil law.[5] Accountability is essential to deter future unlawful acts, punish past ones, and recognize victims’ suffering. In both armed conflict and law enforcement operations, there is an accountability gap for the harm caused by autonomous weapons systems. It is legally challenging and arguably unfair to hold human operators criminally responsible for the actions of autonomous weapons systems if they could not predict or control those actions. There are a range of further obstacles to holding weapons manufacturers liable under civil law.

Autonomous weapons systems would also contravene basic principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience established by the Martens Clause under international humanitarian law.[6] The principles of humanity require humanity (including compassion) and respect for human life and dignity, neither of which autonomous weapons can express because they are inanimate objects. In addition, removing human control from the use of force crosses a moral red line for many and thus runs counter to their public conscience. Thousands of scientists and artificial intelligence experts, more than 24 Nobel Peace Laureates, and more than 160 religious leaders and organizations of various denominations have demanded a ban on autonomous weapons systems.

Autonomous weapons systems raise serious concerns under international human rights law because they are likely to be used in law enforcement operations as well as situations of armed conflict. Human Rights Watch welcomed the first UN report on autonomous weapons systems presented to the Human Rights Council in May 2013 by the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions Professor Christof Heyns of South Africa.[7] The seminal report recommended an immediate moratorium on what Heyns called “lethal autonomous robotics,” weapons systems that would select and engage targets without further human intervention.[8]

Research by Human Rights Watch and IHRC has found that autonomous weapons systems raise concerns under the foundational rights to life and to remedy and the principle of dignity.[9] Under the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of life in international human rights law, force may only be applied if it is necessary, a last resort, and proportionate. Weapons that operate without meaningful human control face challenges complying with all three parts of that test. A machine could find it difficult to determine if it was necessary to use force because as an inanimate object, it could not read subtle cues in people to determine whether they are true threats. The machines would lack human judgment to weigh the proportionality of an attack. While a human law enforcement officer may be able to avoid force by negotiating with a human who was perceived as a threat and defusing a situation, an autonomous weapon system would be unable to do this, and humans would be less likely to surrender to a machine. Autonomous weapons systems raise additional concerns, discussed above, about an accountability gap, which present challenges for the right to remedy.

Autonomous weapons systems would undermine the principle of dignity, a legal and moral concept, which implies that everyone has a worth deserving of respect. As inanimate objects, machines cannot comprehend or understand the value of human life or the significance of its loss. Allowing them to make life-and-death determinations thus strips people who are being targeted of their human dignity. In the process of determining whom to kill, autonomous weapons systems boil human targets down to data points. As Heyns noted: “To allow machines to determine when and where to use force against humans is to reduce those humans to objects…. They become zeros and ones in the digital scopes of weapons which are programmed in advance to release force without the ability to consider whether there is no other way out, without a sufficient level of deliberate human choice about the matter.”[10] Recent efforts to hardcode a threshold for civilian harm into automated systems have been inadequate and provide no constraint.

Security concerns noted by Human Rights Watch and IHRC include the risk of an arms race, the threat of autonomous weapons systems reaching the hands of states or non-state actors with no regard for international law, and a lowering of the threshold to war.[11] Because autonomous weapons systems would have the power to make complex determinations in less structured environments, their speed could lead armed conflicts to spiral rapidly out of control. Their use could foster crisis instability and conflict escalation.[12]

III. Ways to Address the Challenges and Concerns Raised by Autonomous Weapons Systems A Legally Binding Instrument

As a member of the Stop Killer Robots campaign, Human Rights Watch endorses its call for the urgent negotiation and adoption of a legally binding instrument to prohibit and regulate autonomous weapons systems.[13] Autonomous weapons systems are a grave problem that can affect any country in the world so clear, strong, and global rules are essential. Those rules should be legally binding to promote compliance among states that join the treaty. Experience shows that a legally binding instrument can also influence states not party, and even non-state armed groups through norm-building and stigmatization of the most problematic weapons.

Only new international law will suffice to deal with the dangers raised by autonomous weapons systems.[14] Measures such as a voluntary code of conduct would only pave the way for a future of automated killing. Voluntary commitments such as the 2023 US political declarations aimed at ensuring responsible use of weapons systems that incorporate Artificial Intelligence (AI) capabilities are completely insufficient and provide no restraint.

As Human Rights Watch and IHRC have reported, relevant precedent for a legally binding instrument can be found in Protocol IV to the Convention on Conventional Weapons, which preemptively bans blinding laser weapons.[15] Indeed, threats to the principles of humanity and dictates of public conscience, as well as notions of abhorrence and social unacceptability, helped drive countries to ban blinding lasers through the protocol adopted in 1995. While blinding lasers are a narrower class of weapons than autonomous weapons systems, the parallels show that drawing the line on problematic emerging technologies through prohibitions is feasible and effective.

A legally binding instrument should be accompanied by national legislation and other measures to implement and enforce the treaty’s provisions at the domestic level. We agree with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) recommendation that the instrument “should require States Parties to take all appropriate legal, administrative and other measures, including the imposition of penal sanctions, to prevent or suppress any activity prohibited to States Parties under the instrument undertaken by persons or on territory under their jurisdiction or control.”[16]

Essential Treaty Elements

Human Rights Watch, IHRC, and others have outlined the essential elements for an international treaty on autonomous weapons systems, following precent provided in previous disarmament treaties, international human rights instruments, and international humanitarian law, which all offer models for the proposed provisions.[17]

A legally binding instrument should apply to all weapons systems that select and engage targets based on sensor processing, rather than human inputs. While the treaty’s restrictions will focus on a narrower group of systems, this broad scope will help future-proof the treaty and ensure that no systems escape review. The new treaty should include: 1) a general obligation to maintain meaningful human control over the use of force; 2) prohibit weapons systems that autonomously select and engage targets and by their nature pose fundamental moral and legal problems; and 3) include specific positive obligations that aim to ensure that meaningful human control is maintained in the use of all other systems that select and engage targets.

The concept of meaningful human control is fundamental to such an instrument because most of the concerns arising from autonomous weapons systems are attributable to the lack of such human control.[18] The concept of meaningful human control should comprise a combination of components, such as, but not necessarily limited to: 1) Decision-making components, for example, the ability to understand how the system works; 2) Technological components, including predictability and reliability, and 3) Operational components, notably restrictions on time and space in which the system operates.

A new treaty should prohibit the development, production, and use of systems that inherently lack meaningful human control over the use of force given the links between loss of control and the challenges and concerns discussed above. The treaty should also prohibit the development, production, and use of autonomous weapons systems that target people in order to prevent the use of weapons systems that strip people of their dignity, dehumanize the use of force, or lead to discrimination. It should cover weapons that always rely on data, like weight, heat, or sound, to select human targets. These prohibitions would help protect civilians and other non-combatants in armed conflict, and reduce infringements of human rights during law enforcement operations. They should apply “under any circumstances” to ensure that the provisions cover times of peace and war.

The treaty should also include regulations (positive obligations) to ensure all other autonomous weapons systems are never used without meaningful human control. It should outline affirmative steps states parties would need to take to cover systems that are not inherently unacceptable but still have the potential to be used to select and engage targets without meaningful human control.

There are other types of positive obligations common to international humanitarian and human rights law that may be useful to include in a legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems. For example, reporting requirements would promote transparency and facilitate monitoring. Verification and compliance mechanisms could help prevent treaty violations. Regular meetings of states parties would provide opportunities to review the treaty’s status and operation, identify gaps in implementation, and set goals for the future.

The Way Forward

In terms of negotiating fora, the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) has run its course after providing a forum for useful discussions and the development of support for a legally binding instrument over the years. After more than a decade, it is clear that negotiations of a new instrument in the CCW are impossible. It is time to step outside of that forum to one that can aim higher, move faster, and be more inclusive of countries that are not party to the CCW as well as of international organizations and civil society. Disarmament precedent shows that stand-alone and UN General Assembly-initiated processes are viable options in which committed, like-minded states, in partnership with other stakeholders, can produce strong treaties in 15 months or less.[19]

The world is approaching a tipping point on this topic as support for negotiating a legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems reaches unprecedented levels.[20] The Stop Killer Robots campaign’s Automated Decision Research project identifies more than 110 countries that have expressed their desire through national and group statements for a new international treaty on autonomous weapons systems.[21] Human Rights Watch supports the joint call issued on October 5 by UN Secretary-General António Guterres and ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric for UN member states to negotiate a new international treaty by 2026 to ban lethal autonomous weapons systems.

Human Rights Watch affirms our strong commitment to work with urgency and with all interested stakeholders for an international legal instrument to ban and regulate autonomous weapons systems. We are grateful for the opportunity to share the above views and recommendations on ways to address this grave threat to humanity.

[1] See www.stopkillerrobots.org and also, Human Rights Watch, “New Campaign to Stop Killer Robots,” April 23, 2013, https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/04/23/arms-new-campaign-stop-killer-robots.

[2] Presentation by Bonnie Docherty, Human Rights Watch (HRW) to the Latin American and Caribbean Conference on Autonomous Weapons Systems, March 8, 2023, https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/03/08/expert-panel-social-and-humanitarian-impact-autonomous-weapons-latin-american-and.

[3] Human Rights Watch and IHRC, Losing Humanity: The Case against Killer Robots, November 19, 2012, https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/11/19/losing-humanity/case-against-killer-robots.

[4] See also, HRW and IHRC, Making the Case: The Dangers of Killer Robots and the Need for a Preemptive Ban, December 9, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/12/09/making-case/dangers-killer-robots-and-need-preemptive-ban.

[5] HRW and IHRC, Mind the Gap: The Lack of Accountability for Killer Robots, April 9, 2015, https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/04/09/mind-gap/lack-accountability-killer-robots.

[6] HRW and IHRC, Heed the Call: A Moral and Legal Imperative to Ban Killer Robots, August 21, 2018, https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/08/21/heed-call/moral-and-legal-imperative-ban-killer-robots.

[7] HRW, “US: Take Lead Against Lethal Robotic Weapons,” May 28, 2013, https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/05/28/us-take-lead-against-lethal-robotic-weapons.

[8] Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, UN document A/HRC/23/47, April 9, 2013, https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A-HRC-23-47_en.pdf.

[9] HRW and IHRC, Shaking the Foundation: Human Rights Implications of Killer Robots, May 12, 2014, https://www.hrw.org/report/2014/05/12/shaking-foundations/human-rights-implications-killer-robots.

[10] Christof Heyns, “Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights and Ethical Issues” (presentation to the Convention on Conventional Weapons Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, April 14, 2016).

[11] HRW and IHRC, Making the Case: The Dangers of Killer Robots and the Need for a Preemptive Ban, December 9, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/12/09/making-case/dangers-killer-robots-and-need-preemptive-ban.

[12] RAND, “Military Applications of Artificial Intelligence: Ethical Concerns in an Uncertain World,” April 28, 2020, https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3139-1.html.

[13] Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, “Submission to the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) for the Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace,” July 2023, https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Submission_StopKillerRobots_AgendaForPeace.pdf (accessed April 5, 2024), p. 3.

[14] HRW, “US: New Policy on Autonomous Weapons Flawed,” February 14, 2023, https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/14/us-new-policy-autonomous-weapons-flawed.

[15] HRW and IHRC, “Precedent for Preemption: The Ban on Blinding Lasers as a Model for a Killer Robots Prohibition,” November 2015, https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/11/08/precedent-preemption-ban-blinding-lasers-model-killer-robots-prohibition.

[16] International Committee of the Red Cross, “Submission on Autonomous Weapons Systems to the United Nations Secretary-General,” March 2024, https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/war-and-law/icrc_submission_on_autonomous_weapons_to_unsg.pdf.

[17] HRW and IHRC, New Weapons, Proven Precedent: Elements of and Models for a Treaty on Killer Robots, October 20, 2020, https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/10/20/new-weapons-proven-precedent/elements-and-models-treaty-killer-robots. See also, Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, “Key Elements of a Treaty on Fully Autonomous Weapons,” November 2019, https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Key-Elements-of-a-Treaty-on-Fully-Autonomous- WeaponsvAccessible.pdf (accessed September 3, 2020).

[18] HRW and IHRC, “Killer Robots and the Concept of Meaningful Human Control,” April 11, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/04/11/killer-robots-and-concept-meaningful-human-control.

[19] HRW and IHRC, Agenda for Action: Alternative Processes for Negotiating a Killer Robots Treaty, November 10, 2022, https://www.hrw.org/report/2022/11/10/agenda-action/alternative-processes-negotiating-killer-robots-treaty.

[20] More than 1,000 representatives from 144 countries and international organizations, industry, academia, and civil society attended the largest international conference ever held on autonomous weapons systems in Vienna on April 29-30. See the chair’s summary: https://www.bmeia.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Zentrale/Aussenpolitik/Abruestung/AWS_2024/Chair_s_Summary.pdf.

[21] Automated Decision Research, https://automatedresearch.org/state-positions/. See also, HRW, Stopping Killer Robots: Country Positions on Banning Fully Autonomous Weapons and Retaining Human Control, August 10, 2020, https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/08/10/stopping-killer-robots/country-positions-banning-fully-autonomous-weapons-and.

South Africa: Toxic Rhetoric Endangers Migrants

Human Rights Watch — Mon, 06 May 2024 09:28:15 -0400

Click to expand Image Protestors demonstrate in front of the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) against xenophobia and vigilantism in the country, Johannesburg, during Africa Day, May 25, 2022. © 2022 MICHELE SPATARI/AFP via Getty Images

(Johannesburg) – Candidates in South Africa’s forthcoming general elections have been scapegoating and demonizing foreign nationals, risking stoking xenophobic violence, Human Rights Watch said today.

On May 29, 2024, South Africa will hold general elections for the national and provincial legislatures. Among the campaign themes that have taken center stage is migration, in particular irregular migration, which is often accompanied by harmful and threatening rhetoric. While irregular migration has been a long-standing issue in South Africa, discourse around it has become more polemic as the country approaches the most contested elections since 1994.

“Politicians are using immigrants as pawns, without regard for their safety in an attempt to score votes ahead of the general elections,” said Nomathamsanqa Masiko-Mpaka, South Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch, “The Electoral Commission of South Africa, as an independent constitutional body which manages free and fair elections, should explicitly condemn the harmful rhetoric directed towards foreign nationals.”

The authorities should enforce the electoral code of conduct to address harmful anti-immigrant rhetoric by government officials and candidates who are not only addressing legitimate issues of border control and irregular migration, but are making foreign nationals targets of abuse.

Candidates are pushing a narrative not just that migration is out of control, but blaming undocumented migrants for the country’s ills and engaging in xenophobia, Human Rights Watch said. South Africa’s electoral code of conduct, which every candidate is required to abide by, prohibits language that provokes violence and requires candidates to speak out against political violence. In a country where xenophobic violence, including lethal violence, has been a persistent problem, rhetoric that scapegoats foreign nationals can all too easily spark violence.

In one example, the party, Rise Mzansi, in its January 20 manifesto, said it would “fix the asylum seeker system: stop its use as a de facto permit for economic migrants,” feeding into the narrative of bogus asylum seekers.

Herman Mashaba, leader of ActionSA, in a tweet in December 2023 stated that foreign nationals who run tuckshops use their businesses as illicit drug channels, destroying small businesses in townships and villages, and disrupting communities’ way of life.

On November 26, 2023, the leader of the Patriotic Alliance, Gayton McKenzie while speaking at the political party's 10-year celebration said of foreign nationals: “they must go home” contending that foreign nationals are responsible for crime, drug peddling, unemployment, and other problems. “We don’t want illegal foreigners here.”

Lesego More of the nongovernmental group, Democracy Watch Foundation, said that, “When you encourage communities to directly confront illegal immigration, this might result in violence and attacking illegal migrants.”

Government officials have also been stoking anti-immigration sentiment. Kenny Kunene, the deputy president of the Patriotic Alliance political party and the Johannesburg city member of the Mayoral Committee for Transport called for the “mass deportation of illegal immigrants who are staying in abandoned buildings that are taking rent” following an August 2023 fire in a building in Johannesburg’s central business district that killed more than 70 people. In the wake of the tragedy, many South Africans blamed foreign nationals, with some claiming that eviction laws protect criminals by making it difficult to remove people who are occupying buildings without authorization.

On April 10, the Cabinet approved a Department of Home Affairs (DHA) White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection with recommendations including withdrawing from the 1951 Refugee Convention and reacceding to it with reservations. The DHA minister, Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi, also said that limited resources might affect guaranteeing socio-economic rights to refugees, suggesting that long-established rights enshrined in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights as applicable to all, are now at risk.

“Migration issues are clearly being used to circumvent the real issues that are present in South Africa” Nyeleti Baloyi, advocacy officer at the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa, told Human Rights Watch.

For years South Africa has been grappling with sporadic and sometimes lethal xenophobic harassment and violence against African and Asian foreign nationals living in the country, including refugees, asylum seekers, and both documented and undocumented migrants. In 2019, South Africa initiated a five-year National Action Plan to combat xenophobia, racism, and discrimination. Despite this, sporadic incidents of xenophobic discrimination and violence have continued.

Xenowatch reported 170 incidents in 2022 and 2023 and 18 between January and April 2024. The authorities have yet to hold to account people responsible for past outbreaks of xenophobic violence, including in Durban in 2015 and the 2008 attacks on foreigners that resulted in the deaths of more than 60 people.

The anti-immigrant rhetoric used by politicians during the election campaign risks fueling more xenophobic violence, jeopardizing the protections in the South African constitution and international law, not only for foreign nationals but for South African citizens, Human Rights Watch said.

“If South Africa is to confront xenophobic discrimination, harassment and attacks, then it also needs to address anti-immigrant rhetoric and abandon retrogressive migration policies,” Masiko-Mpaka said. “The government can address irregular migration without using electioneering to endanger foreign nationals.”

Cambodia: UN Review Should Assail Loss of Freedoms

Human Rights Watch — Sun, 05 May 2024 21:00:00 -0400

Click to expand Image Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet (left), stands next to his father, Hun Sen, former prime minister and current Senate president, during the country’s 70th Independence Day, in Phnom Penh, November 9, 2023. © 2023 AP Photo/Heng Sinith

(Geneva) – United Nations member countries should press the Cambodian government on its human rights abuses, including targeting political opponents and dissidents, Human Rights Watch said today. On May 8, 2024, Cambodia will appear before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva for the fourth Universal Periodic Review of human rights conditions in the country.

Since its 2019 review, when Cambodia accepted 173 out of 198 recommendations received and took note of 25 others, the government has failed to address those commitments and the human rights situation in the country has worsened significantly. Human Rights Watch, in its submission to the Human Rights Council, said that the government had continued to violate the rights of those critical of the government, including in the months leading up to the UN review.

“Since its last UN review in 2019, Cambodia has become further entrenched as an essentially single-party state without meaningful elections, no media freedom, and a ruling party-controlled judiciary,” said Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Countries at the Human Rights Council should condemn the denial of fundamental freedoms in Cambodia and press the government to immediately adopt real reforms.”

On January 30, the Phnom Penh appeals court denied the request of the Cambodian political opposition leader Kem Sokha to review the terms of his home detention. Sokha, 70, who was sentenced on March 3, 2023, to a 27-year term on a politically motivated treason conviction, must continue to seek the approval of the prosecutor’s office for his defense lawyers to visit him.

The authorities have arrested 11 political opposition figures since the beginning of 2024 on politically motivated forgery charges in the lead-up to the scheduled May 26 local elections.

On April 5, police in Phnom Penh arrested three opposition activists from the Khmer Will Party and the Candlelight Party for allegedly forging reserved candidate lists. On April 9, two candidates for the district election and a Candlelight Party provincial party chief were also arrested for allegedly forging candidate lists. And on April 28, plain clothes police arrested a vice chairman of the Candlelight Party’s executive committee at his home and charged him with using forged documents. All seven remain in pretrial detention and face up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

On May 3, Cambodia’s Supreme Court upheld the baseless conviction against Chhim Sithar, leader of Labor Rights Supported Union of Khmer Employees of NagaWorld, and seven other union activists, with two receiving suspended sentences and sentences between one and two years for the others. The decision prolongs Sithar’s current incarceration and risks the immediate imprisonment of an additional five union members.

Hopes that the human rights situation in the country would improve after Hun Sen, who had been prime minister since 1985, on August 22 handed power over to his son, now Prime Minister Hun Manet, have not been borne out, Human Rights Watch said. Hun Sen remains head of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party and became Senate president on April 3. Human Rights Watch documented a similar pattern of intimidation and threats against opposition politicians ahead of the Senate elections in February. Cambodian government officials offered them bribes and other unlawful inducements to withhold their support from opposition candidates.

The government has not only failed to implement the recommendations it accepted during its last UN review with respect to democratic space, elections, and political freedoms, but it has continued to restrict free speech and media, labor unions and labor rights, and civil society.

The Cambodian government’s UN submission claims that legal reforms have improved human rights, but recent legislative efforts have proven to be tools for repression. For example, the government is currently seeking to adopt a cybercrime law that contains vague language, broad categories of prosecutable speech, and lacks protections for citizens, falling far short of international standards. The law also raises the criminal penalty on defamation to include jail time when it previously only included a fine.

A “false information” clause contains an overly broad definition of harming national defense and security, among other violations, with penalties of from three to five years in prison and up to a US$25,000 fine. Civil society and media groups sharply criticized earlier drafts of the law for restricting the rights to privacy and free expression and said the drafting process lacked inclusivity, transparency, and public participation.

“The UN Human Rights Council need only to look at the continued deterioration of the human rights situation to conclude that the Cambodian government is making empty promises,” Lau said. “UN member countries should urge the Cambodian government to ensure immediate, concrete, and meaningful reforms to allow Cambodians to exercise their basic rights.”

A Critical Week for Environmental Rights in Southeast Asia

Human Rights Watch — Sun, 05 May 2024 20:00:00 -0400

Last week, millions of people in Southeast Asia grappled with a record-setting heatwave that triggered thousands of school closures, put unprecedented pressure on power grids, and led to fatal heat strokes. The brutal temperatures underscore the need to hammer out the details of a regional environmental rights declaration, work that is underway today in Jakarta as a working group formed by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) convenes.

The draft already recognizes the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, to access environmental information, and to participate in environmental decisions. It also tackles transboundary haze, a recurrent cause for dispute among ASEAN members when smoke from fires leads to overwhelming air pollution across national borders.

The declaration has glaring omissions, however. To address them, Human Rights Watch urged the working group to include provisions on corporate accountability, climate-related mobility – when the effects of climate change, such as sea-level rise, compel people to move – and to ensure the declaration advances Indigenous rights.

Despite all ASEAN countries endorsing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the draft does not use the term “Indigenous peoples,” nor does it acknowledge their rights over their resources and territories. Further, it does not recognize Indigenous peoples’ contributions as the most effective caretakers of nature.

“ASEAN should place Indigenous rights at the heart of the declaration, such as the right to free, prior, and informed consent, rights to tenure, and the requirement for safeguards and accountability mechanisms,” said Dr. June Rubis, cofounder of Building Initiatives in Indigenous Heritage Sarawak. The Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact, a grassroots organization, called on the working group to ensure Indigenous participation in the drafting process.

The draft is also weak in addressing corporate accountability. As Human Rights Watch’s work in Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and elsewhere shows, companies are often responsible for environmental destruction or other rights abuses. The declaration should reflect the obligation of states to regulate businesses.

Confronted with rising sea levels and extreme weather events, the declaration should also acknowledge the need for greater rights protections for people compelled to move. Planned relocations should be community-led and carried out with transparency, participation, and nondiscrimination.

The working group has an opportunity to develop a framework in a region with no regional human rights treaty. But it cannot do so without recognizing those most affected by environmental abuses, or full accountability for those responsible.

Arrest Warrant Issued for Former Central African Republic President

Human Rights Watch — Fri, 03 May 2024 14:30:00 -0400

Click to expand Image François Bozizé, former president of the Central African Republic, during the first anniversary of the CAR Peace Agreement at the Palais de la Renaissance, in Bangui, CAR, on February 6, 2020. © 2020 Photo by Gaël Grilhot / AFP via Getty Images

Earlier this week, the Special Criminal Court (SCC) of the Central African Republic issued an arrest warrant for former president François Bozizé. He is charged with crimes against humanity allegedly committed between February 2009 and March 23, 2013, by the Presidential Guard and other security services at the Bossembelé military training center, referred to as “Guantanamo,” north of the country’s capital Bangui.

In April 2013, I interviewed 10 former detainees from Guantanamo who described conditions of near-starvation, constant beatings, torture, and extrajudicial executions. Later, I was taken to see two cells on either side of Bozizé’s private villa, concrete shafts in the ground with just enough space for a person to stand. A cement enclosure on top of the enclosures had air holes for a person to breathe, but no space to move. Reliable accounts by former prisoners indicate that individuals were placed in these cells and left there until they died.

The SCC is a novel court established to investigate and prosecute serious international crimes committed in Central African Republic since 2003. The court is staffed by both national and international judges and personnel.

Bozizé first fled Bangui in March 2013 as the Seleka, a mostly Muslim rebel coalition, took control of the Central African Republic amid widespread abuse, much of which was committed by Bozizé’s presidential guard, which killed at least hundreds of civilians and destroyed thousands of homes during unrest in the mid-2000s. Impunity for alleged crimes dates back even further. The Seleka gave rise to local militias, called anti-balaka, who in turn targeted Muslim civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.

Bozizé returned to the country in 2019 as it was wracked with conflict and later emerged as a key leader in a rebel coalition that attacked Bangui in late 2020 before going back into hiding in Guinea-Bissau.

Umaro Sissoco Embaló, the president of Guinea-Bissau, has told local media that he was surprised by the arrest warrant and that Bozizé had not done anything in Guinea-Bissau to call into question his exile status. Bozizé has been a glaring example of impunity in the Central African Republic for over a decade. Guinea-Bissau has a chance to play a role in finally bringing him to justice.

Nigerian Military Should Provide Details of Investigation into Deadly Airstrike

Human Rights Watch — Fri, 03 May 2024 13:00:00 -0400

Click to expand Image Nigerian Chief of Army Staff Lt. Gen. Taoreed Lagbaja, center, with other community leaders at the grave side where victims of an army drone attack were buried in Tudun Biri village, Nigeria, December 5, 2023. © 2023 AP Photo Kehinde Gbenga

The Nigerian military authorities said this week they had completed investigations into an erroneous Army airstrike in Tundun Biri Community, Kaduna state, which killed 85 people and injured dozens more in December 2023. Two officers have been indicted over the attack and will face court martial with the military’s disciplinary process.

While this announcement may mark progress towards accountability, authorities should provide answers to many of the outstanding questions about the investigation. This includes the terms of reference, those responsible for conducting the probe, the methodology, the findings – including those implicated. The army should also disclose measures recommended or put in place, if any, to prevent more erroneous airstrikes.

Since 2017, more than 300 people have been killed in strikes that security forces claimed were intended against bandits or members of the Islamist armed group Boko Haram but instead hit local populations.

Following the Tundun Biri airstrike in December, army authorities claimed responsibility for the incident and apologized to the community, while Nigeria’s president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, ordered an investigation to be carried out.

Human Rights Watch documented the loss, devastation, and trauma resulting from the December airstrike as well as a prior erroneous airstrike by the Air Force in January 2023, which killed 39 people.

Survivors and loved ones of those killed in these airstrikes have yet to receive compensation and services to help them through their loss, injuries, and trauma. The military’s announcement about the investigation’s conclusion did not mention any steps towards such efforts.

Far too many people have been killed by erroneous airstrikes by the Nigerian military. Authorities should build trust in their efforts towards accountability by ensuring transparency in the process and prioritizing reparations for victims.

Attacks Target Afghanistan’s Hazaras

Human Rights Watch — Fri, 03 May 2024 11:22:53 -0400

Click to expand Image Afghans mourn at a burial ceremony for Shia Muslims killed by gunmen who attacked a mosque in Guzara district of Herat province, April 30, 2024. © 2024 MOHSEN KARIMI/AFP via Getty Images

For many Afghans, the country’s armed conflict has never ended.

The armed group Islamic State of Khorasan Province (ISKP) attracted worldwide attention in March when it attacked the Crocus City Hall in Moscow, killing at least 143 people and injuring many others. Since emerging in Afghanistan in 2015, the group has carried out a bloody campaign mostly targeting Shia-Hazara mosques and schools and other facilities in predominantly Hazara neighborhoods.

In the most recent attack, on April 29, an armed member of the group opened fire on worshippers at a Shia-Hazara mosque in western Herat province, killing six, including a child. On April 20, a magnetic bomb attached to a bus whose passengers were primarily Hazara exploded, killing one and injuring 10. On January 6, a similar attack on a bus in Dasht-e Barchi, a predominantly Hazara neighborhood of Kabul, killed five people, including at least one child, and injured 14. Dasht-e Barchi has been the site of numerous ISKP attacks. When ISKP claimed responsibility for the January 6 attack, they said it was part of their “kill them wherever you find them” campaign against “infidels.”

Between 2015 and mid-2021, ISKP attacks killed and injured more than 2,000 civilians primarily in Kabul, Jalalabad, and Kandahar. Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan in August 2021, these attacks have continued – killing and injuring over 700.

The Taliban have long battled the ISKP, which have also targeted Taliban personnel. A suicide bombing outside a Kandahar bank on March 21 killed at least 21 people and injured 50, many of them Taliban ministry employees who had lined up to collect their salaries.

Attacks on Hazara and other religious minorities and targeted attacks on civilians violate international humanitarian law, which still applies in Afghanistan. Deliberate attacks on civilians are war crimes. Beyond the immediate loss of life, such attacks incur lasting damage to physical and mental health, cause long-term economic hardship, and result in new barriers to education and public life.

Like the previous Afghan government, Taliban authorities have not taken adequate measures to protect Hazaras and other communities at risk or provide assistance to survivors of attacks, though they are responsible for ensuring the safety of all Afghan citizens.

France: Macron Should Stand Firm on Rights in China

Human Rights Watch — Fri, 03 May 2024 02:00:00 -0400

(Paris) – French President Emmanuel Macron should lay out consequences for the Chinese government’s crimes against humanity and deepening repression during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Paris, Human Rights Watch said today. Xi’s visit on May 6-7, 2024, will mark 60 years of diplomatic relations between France and the People’s Republic of China, and will likely focus on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, conflict in the Middle East, and trade issues.

“President Macron should make it clear to Xi Jinping that Beijing’s crimes against humanity come with consequences for China’s relations with France,” said Maya Wang, acting China director at Human Rights Watch. “France’s silence and inaction on human rights would only embolden the Chinese government’s sense of impunity for its abuses, further fueling repression at home and abroad.”

Respect for human rights has severely deteriorated under Xi Jinping’s rule. His government has committed crimes against humanity – including mass detention, forced labor, and cultural persecution – against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang, adopted draconian legislation that has erased Hong Kong’s freedoms, and intensified repression of government critics across the country.

In March 2021, European Union governments unanimously agreed to adopt targeted sanctions against a handful of Chinese officials and entities deemed responsible for the crackdown in Xinjiang. China immediately retaliated with counter-sanctions, which contributed to cooling bilateral relations and the suspension of a bilateral trade deal.

Macron visited Beijing in 2019 and 2023, but refrained from publicly speaking out about the deteriorating human rights situation in the country. He should change course and publicly raise human rights concerns during Xi’s visit, Human Rights Watch said.

Specifically, Macron should urge Xi to end crimes against humanity in Xinjiang and release hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs who remain arbitrarily detained or imprisoned, including Rahile Dawut, a Uyghur academic, and Ilham Tohti, the economist and Sakharov Prize laureate. Macron should press Xi to end Chinese government oppression in Tibet.

Macron should also urge Xi to revoke the two draconian national security laws that Beijing imposed on Hong Kong. As both laws can be applied for actions outside of China, they affect Hong Kong people and registered businesses in France that criticize the Chinese government. Macron should press for the release of jailed Hong Kong pro-democracy leaders including Joshua Wong, Chow Hang-tung, and Jimmy Lai, among others.

Finally, Macron should press the Chinese government to end its relentless repression of peaceful activists across China, including by freeing the human rights lawyer Yu Wensheng and his wife, Xu Yan, arrested in April 2023 on their way to meet an EU delegation in Beijing.

However, speaking out on human rights, as the EU has repeatedly done in its statements, will only lead to positive results if accompanied by concrete consequences, Human Rights Watch said. Macron should make clear to Xi that France will pursue accountability for Beijing’s egregious crimes, including by pressing ahead toward a United Nations Human Rights Council-backed investigation in Xinjiang.

And he should spell out how Beijing’s continued repression will hinder trade and business between the two countries and with the EU more broadly; including once the EU’s due diligence and forced labor legislation come into force.

This approach to human rights is in line with Macron’s vision of “strategic autonomy” for Europe; an idea that the continent should be strong and not a strategic “vassal” to the United States, as well as not to rely too heavily on China for production. He has also described a “humanist model” that is based on values such as democracy and human rights.

“Macron should demonstrate the French government’s commitment to addressing Xi’s assault on rights inside and outside China,” Wang said. “That requires leadership, determination, and clarity on human rights. He should step up to the task, and not succumb to business as usual.”

Human Rights Watch Launches Podcast

Human Rights Watch — Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 -0400

(New York) – Human Rights Watch will present a podcast twice a month starting May 6, 2024, that will explore human rights hotspots around the world through the eyes and ears of people on the front lines. Rights & Wrongs will take listeners behind the scenes of in-depth Human Rights Watch investigations. 

Human Rights Watch researchers work in more than 100 countries across the globe, producing dozens of meticulously researched reports every year. Those reports, grounded in international human rights law, are directed at government officials and policymakers and aim to end abuses and change government policies. Rights & Wrongs will bring that research to life in an immersive medium with compelling accounts that are accessible to a general audience. 

“From a Ukrainian city to a Bangladesh shipyard, we will take listeners to the places where human rights violations are happening and hear firsthand powerful stories about the fight to speak freely, to get a decent standard of living, or simply, just to live,” said Mei Fong, chief media officer at Human Rights Watch.

Click to expand Image Ngofeen Mputubwele

The series will be hosted by Ngofeen Mputubwele, formerly of The New Yorker, and produced by Curtis Fox, a veteran podcast producer for National Public Radio and The New Yorker. Rights & Wrongs will feature interviews with Human Rights Watch researchers as well as voices from the countries where they work.  

The first episode of Rights & Wrongs looks at Human Rights Watch efforts to document the destruction of Mariupol as Russian forces laid siege and cut off communications to the Ukrainian city. Documenting what happened became all the more critical when Russia began destroying evidence of war crimes as it began to rebuild Mariupol in Russia’s image.

Subsequent episodes of Rights & Wrongs will explore how Human Rights Watch documented the killing of Ethiopian migrants by Saudi border guards at a remote Saudi-Yemen border outpost, how the shipping industry sends end-of-life ships to Bangladesh to be scrapped in dangerous yards that harm workers and pollute the environment, and how governments reach across borders to silence or deter dissent of their own nationals abroad.

Rights & Wrongs will be available on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, and Amazon.

Recognizing Journalists Living in Exile

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 20:00:00 -0400

Click to expand Image Afghan journalist and producer Sadaf Rahimi (L) directs the talk show "Tabassoum" (“Smile,” in Dari) hosted by Afghan refugee journalist Diba Akbari (center) and former Afghan actress Marina Golbahari (right) in Begum TV studio, an educational television channel aimed at middle and high school girls deprived of education by the Taliban authorities since August 2021, Paris, March 12, 2024. © 2024 GEOFFROY VAN DER HASSELT/AFP via Getty Images

Around the world, journalists who have been forced to flee their countries have continued to report on their homelands, exposing ongoing human rights violations while living in exile.

Today, May 3, is World Press Freedom Day. But independent media faces increasing threats from abusive governments and armed groups worldwide. In 2023, Reporters Without Borders reported a surge of requests for help from journalists being threatened because of their work. Last year, the organization provided financial assistance to 460 journalists who had to flee abroad; the top countries where it intervened were Afghanistan, Russia, Myanmar, and Palestine.

The lives of journalists in exile can be rocky. They have too few resources, are forced to work from a distance, and often undertake their reporting at personal risk. They may face uncertain immigration status, digital harassment from foreign intelligence agencies operating abroad, and threats to their relatives remaining in their home country. That’s in addition to the ordinary difficulties of adjusting to life in a new country and often learning a new language.

But more organizations are supporting journalists in exile, helping them form networks and continue their essential work. The Network of Exiled Media Outlets, together with the US-based International Center for Journalists, has created a toolkit for journalists in exile to share knowledge and best practices. The Europe-based JX Fund says it has supported more than 1,600 journalists who fled crisis regions in returning to work. The Afghanistan Journalists Support Organization works to boost communication among Afghan journalists worldwide, among other goals.

Today, Human Rights Watch and its partners announced the recipients of the 2024 Human Rights Press Awards for outstanding reporting on human rights issues across Asia. For the first time, this year’s awards included the category of “newsrooms in exile.”

Two media organizations won in this new category. Frontier Myanmar received the award for its coverage of how Myanmar’s military, steeped in Buddhist nationalism, has targeted Bayingyi, a Roman Catholic minority. Zan Times, a women-led publication covering rights abuses in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, received the award for its reporting on the increase in female suicides in the country.

This new category of awards should draw much-needed attention to journalists in exile, so that more groups will support their crucial investigative reporting.

Asia: 2024 Human Rights Press Awards

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 20:00:00 -0400

Click to expand Image The staff of the newspaper Etilaat Roz, keep on working even after the Taliban took control of the country, in Kabul, Afghanistan, September 19, 2021. © 2021 Marcus Yam/Getty Images

(Taipei) – Today, marking World Press Freedom Day, Human Rights Press Awards in Asia announced the 2024 winners and runners-up. The seven categories of awards are administered by Human Rights Watch, the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, and the foreign correspondents clubs in both Thailand and Taiwan.

Among the top winners are reporting on the rising number of suicides among Afghan women living under abusive Taliban rule; the persecution of religious minorities in Myanmar; and the Chinese government’s treatment of White Paper protesters who stood up against Covid-19 lockdowns.

“The Human Rights Press Awards recognize journalists who are uncovering some of the most pressing rights issues in Asia,” said Tirana Hassan, executive director at Human Rights Watch. “In an era in which rising authoritarianism generates autocratic leaders and mass disinformation, the role of journalists in exposing the truth is more critical than ever. We are thrilled to honor these courageous reporters.”

The seven categories of awards include the newly created “Newsrooms in Exile” category, as well as commentary, print, photography, video, audio, and multimedia. The winners will be honored at a ceremony in Taipei hosted by the Taiwan Foreign Correspondents’ Club (TFCC) on May 10, 2024.

“We are honored once again to be administering the Human Rights Press Awards,” said Dr. Battinto L. Batts, Jr., dean of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. “As part of our Cronkite Global Initiatives, we are proud to help recognize outstanding human rights journalism throughout Asia and the world.”

“It’s no coincidence that many winning entries are examples of brave journalism from Afghanistan, Hong Kong, and Myanmar, places where reporting has become increasingly difficult and dangerous,” said Thompson Chau, president of the Taiwan Foreign Correspondents’ Club. “The TFCC is honored to host the award ceremony in Taipei. Taiwan is an extraordinary place for a growing number of Asia-focused correspondents to live and work.”

Frontier Myanmar and Zan Times shared the top prize in the inaugural “Newsroom in Exile” category for their reporting on Myanmar and Afghanistan, respectively. Frontier Myanmar’s report uncovered the Myanmar military’s oppression of the Bayingyi, Roman Catholics of Portuguese descent. Zan Times gathered data illustrating the dire reality of the growing numbers of Afghan women and girls choosing death as preferable to living under Taliban repression.

“We're increasingly seeing media under threat in countries across Southeast Asia, which is why the new Human Rights Press Awards category for media in exile is so critically important,” said Phil Robertson, program committee chair at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (FCCT). “In countries such as Afghanistan and Myanmar, there needs to be greater recognition of journalists who bravely report human rights stories from the homeland they were forced to flee, and the FCCT is proud to be a part of that effort.”

The award for multimedia went to Al Jazeera for its piece, “‘If I die, I die’: Pakistan's death-trap route to Europe,” documenting the dangerous journey young Pakistani men undertake in search of work in Europe and the suffering of their families left behind.

The Initium won the investigative reporting prize in Chinese for its series on the anniversary of the White Paper Protest, featuring the lives and struggles of those who protested China’s “zero-Covid” lockdown policies in the wake of the pandemic.

The Guardian won the investigative reporting prize in English for its work, “Revealed: Amazon linked to trafficking of workers in Saudi Arabia,” which exposed the plight of Nepali migrant workers enduring forced labor and discrimination in Saudi Arabia. The reporting revealed the complicity of major multinational corporations that fail to police their supply chains.

Reporting on the Myanmar military’s airstrikes; abuses by the Bangladeshi elite police unit, the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB); issues facing the LGBT community in Hong Kong; and a global private hospital group embroiled in a “cash for kidneys” racket all won honorable mentions.

A complete list of winners is available here: https://humanrightspressawards.org/2024-winners

Tajikistan: Forcibly Disappeared Opponent Allegedly Tortured

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 19:00:01 -0400

(Berlin, May 3, 2024) – Tajik authorities should immediately confirm the detention and whereabouts of and release the opposition activist Sukhrob Zafar, Human Rights Watch, Norwegian Helsinki Committee, and International Partnership for Human Rights said today.

Based on a media report and reports from reliable sources, Zafar was forcibly disappeared while in Türkiye in March 2024, despite holding official UNHCR asylum seeker status there. The sources said that the Tajik State Committee on National Security is holding him in Dushanbe, is periodically torturing him, and has denied him medical assistance. The Tajik government has neither confirmed that he is in their custody nor his whereabouts.

“There are devastating reports that Sukhrob Zafar may already have lost his ability to walk as a result of torture, so prompt action could be a matter of life and death,” said Syinat Sultanalieva, Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Tajik authorities should immediately verify Zafar’s detention status and whereabouts and urgently investigate allegations that he has been tortured.”

Authorities should also ensure and confirm that Zafar receives his full due process rights, including contact with his family, access to a lawyer of his own choosing, and necessary medical treatment, the groups said.

Zafar, a senior figure in Group 24, a banned Tajik opposition group, was forcibly disappeared on March 10 in Türkiye, and his colleague Nasimjon Sharifov was forcibly disappeared on February 23. Both had previously been detained by the Turkish police in March 2018 at the request of Tajik authorities and threatened with extradition, but were eventually released.

Group 24 is a political opposition movement seeking political reforms in Tajikistan, which the Tajik authorities banned and designated a terrorist organization in October 2014, after the group called on the Tajik population to publicly protest against the government. In the last decade, Tajik authorities have cracked down brutally on the group and its members, imprisoning scores at home and driving large numbers into exile.

Recently, many exiled activists associated with the group have organized protests against the Tajik government in Europe and elsewhere. In response, Tajik authorities have sought their forced return from abroad, while some have allegedly been killed or forcibly disappeared.

A recent Human Rights Watch report on repressive governments targeting critics abroad includes accounts of the Tajik government seeking the arrest and extradition to Tajikistan of current and former members of Group 24 who have fled the country on charges of extremism and terrorism-related activities.

On April 23, eight members of Group 24 were detained in Rome during a protest about a visit by Tajik president Emomali Rahmon to Italy. They were released the next day, but the Tajik interior minister raised with his Italian counterpart the possibility of Italy detaining and deporting Tajiks with a search warrant or an Interpol Red Notice against them.

Türkiye is a member of the Council of Europe and party to the European Convention on Human Rights, and any involvement of, or acquiescence by, state agents in the forcible disappearance of and potential extrajudicial transfer of Zafar and Sharifov to Tajikistan is a serious violation of the convention.

The European Court of Human Rights has warned that “any extra-judicial transfer or extraordinary rendition, by its deliberate circumvention of due process, is an absolute negation of the rule of law and the values protected by the Convention. It therefore amounts to a violation of the most basic rights guaranteed by the Convention.”

“Türkiye should thoroughly investigate the unlawful actions on Turkish territory, which appear to have led to the forced rendition to Tajikistan of Zafar Sukhrob,” said Marius Fossum, regional representative in Central Asia at the Norwegian Helsinki Committee. “Zafar should be released pending a fair trial on any credible charges and provided with redress for the violation of his rights as a result of his forced removal to Tajikistan.”

Nepal's Opportunity to Protect Children in New Budget

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 18:05:33 -0400

When Nepal’s Finance Minister Barshaman Pun presents the budget on May 28, he has an opportunity to extend the country’s Child Grant program. Doing so would advance the economic and social rights of Nepali children, helping families across the country.

The Child Grant, also known as the child nutrition grant, is a proven Nepali success story. The program involves monthly payments to families with children under the age of five in 25 out of Nepal’s 77 districts, and all Dalit children under five across the country. It has been endorsed by numerous Nepali civil society organizations and international policy experts including UNICEF, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the European Union. But despite the praise, successive governments have not followed through on commitments to roll it out nationwide.

Therefore, it was encouraging when Nepal’s Minister for Women, Children and Senior Citizens, Bhagawati Chaudhary, announced this week that the government intends to extend the program to all districts. She also said the grant amount should be increased, as the current monthly payment of 532 Nepali rupees (about US$4) is insufficient.

“We are dedicated to ensuring that every child in Nepal, regardless of their location, receives the essential nutrition support they need for healthy growth and development,” Chaudhary said.

Studies underscore the transformative impact of the Child Grant, including increased birth registration rates, improved access to food and clothes, and lower likelihood of child labor for the recipients and their siblings. Research also shows that the program enhances public perceptions of the government, strengthening the social contract.

Nepal became a pioneer of social protection in South Asia by introducing a universal old age allowance in the 1990s. But with 40 percent of the population aged under 18, investing in social protection for children is key to ensuring Nepal’s future prosperity.

Nepal’s Constitution guarantees social and economic rights, including the right to social security for all children, and the Children’s Act of 2018 provides further guarantees.

According to a 2021 UNICEF study, expanding the Child Grant to children up to age 17 is financially feasible. Family poverty could drop by 16.8 percent, enabling families to afford better food, healthcare, and education.

The Nepali government’s extension of the Child Grant would be an important step toward a more equitable future and another example of forward-looking policy to countries around the world.

Thailand’s Upcoming Senate Election Fundamentally Flawed

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 16:01:50 -0400

Thailand’s Senate election slated for June will not undo the legacy of military rule but will obstruct the restoration of democratic rule.

The current Senate, appointed by the military junta in power from 2014 to 2019, expires on May 11. The Election Commission is now setting up regulations and procedures to elect 200 new senators from 20 social and professional groups, with 10 members from each group. They serve five-year terms.

Senate election is not decided by universal suffrage, only those who run for a seat can vote. The 2,500 baht (US$68) application fee, seven times Thailand’s minimum daily wage, is the first barrier to a broad-based and inclusive process. Candidates must be at least 40 years old, effectively disenfranchising young Thais who have vocally demanded political reforms in recent years. Members of political parties and public servants are barred from running –and thus voting.

Candidates cannot talk about policies or their plans if elected. The Election Commission only permits them to present a short, two-page resume explaining their background. Candidates are not allowed to use social media to reach out to a wider audience. The website Senate 67, created by a coalition of civil society groups, had to remove campaign information of some 1,000 prospective candidates after warnings from the Election Commission.

In the so-called “intra-group election” system, candidates cast votes among themselves within the same social and professional group. The top five then proceed to the second round where they vote for candidates from other groups. This process begins at the district level and continues at the provincial and then national level, with the winners at each level advancing to the next step. At the national level, the 10 candidates who receive the most votes from each social and professional group become the new senators.

Last year, the junta-appointed senators blocked the reformist Move Forward Party from forming a government despite winning the largest number of seats in the lower house of parliament. Although the new senators no longer vote for the prime minister, they still control the endorsement of office holders in key agencies – such as the Election Commission, the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and the Constitutional Court – which play critical roles in dissolving political parties and disqualifying parliamentarians. The Senate also retains the power to approve constitutional amendments.

For those seeking reform, Thailand’s Senate election is unlikely to bring it. The constitutional and legal frameworks that the military junta put in place all but ensure the election will maintain an oppressive status quo.

Azerbaijan: Free Jailed Human Rights Defender

Human Rights Watch — Thu, 02 May 2024 11:48:39 -0400

(Berlin, May 2, 2024) – Azerbaijani authorities should immediately free a prominent human rights defender, Anar Mammadli, and drop the charges against him, the Human Rights House Foundation said this week in a statement signed by Human Rights Watch and 28 other groups. Mammadi was arrested on April 29, 2024, on bogus “smuggling” charges amid an escalating crackdown on independent voices.

Mammadli, who is a member of the Network of Human Rights Houses, is also a founding member of the recently formed Climate of Justice Initiative. The group is a civil society undertaking that seeks to use the 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), which will take place in Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, in November, to promote civic space and environmental justice in Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan’s crackdown on freedoms of expression, assembly, and association raises grave concerns about how civil society, including activists, human rights defenders, and journalists will be able to participate meaningfully and push for ambitious action at COP29, Human Rights Watch said.

The statement urges other countries to use the momentum around COP29 in Baku to demand the release of Mammadli and all other political prisoners in Azerbaijan.