Secondary menu
Feed aggregator
Angola: Police Use Excessive Force Against Peaceful Protesters
(Johannesburg) – Angolan police used excessive force and carried out arbitrary arrests while dispersing peaceful protesters in Luanda, the capital, on July 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch said today. Police unnecessarily fired tear gas and rubber bullets and assaulted protesters, injuring several people. They also detained 17 protesters, some of whom were released only after legal intervention.
The government should promptly and impartially investigate the use of force and the arrests, and appropriately discipline or prosecute those responsible, regardless of rank.
“Angolans should be able to peacefully protest government policies without being met with excessive force and other violations of their basic rights,” said Ashwanee Budoo-Scholtz, deputy Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The government needs to open an impartial investigation into these abuses, and hold those responsible accountable.”
Hundreds of people participated in the protest, which began in the São Paulo neighborhood and was slated to end at Largo 1º de Maio, a symbolic space in downtown Luanda. Youth movements and civil society organizations called for the protest following the government’s decision to raise fuel prices and eliminate subsidies for public transport without any public consultation.
“The protest … was a legitimate way to express dissatisfaction with the Angolan government’s insistence on applying anti-social policies,” said Simão Afonso, a lawyer who helped obtain authorization for the demonstration and provided legal assistance to detainees. “The repressive response by the national police is deeply regrettable. … The state does not fulfill its legal obligations concerning citizens’ rights, freedoms, and fundamental guarantees.”
The spokesperson for the Angolan Police General Command said on July 12 in a statement to the media that the police intervention in the march “aimed to maintain public order and tranquility, since the protesters did not follow the route.”
Aidilson Manuel, an activist and spokesperson for the protest, said they organized the protest in line with government requirements: “On July 10, we submitted a letter to the Luanda provincial government notifying them about the protest. We also delivered the same letter to the Provincial Police Command, which called us to discuss the route. The police suggested a different route than the one we had proposed. Official approval arrived on July 11 around 4 p.m., and it was favorable.”
Despite the official authorization, the police dispersed the protesters with tear gas and batons as soon as the group approached Largo 1º de Maio. “Without any prior warning, the crackdown began brutally,” Manuel said.
Manuel said that four people were seriously injured: “One was hit directly in the face by a tear gas canister, causing a deep cut that required surgery. Another suffered a serious injury to the mouth and needed urgent medical treatment. Two other protesters suffered fractures and extensive injuries after being assaulted by police officers.”
The police spokesperson said that two people were injured as a result of the protests. But the media reported that at least nine people were injured.
Angola is a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which obligate the government to respect and protect the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression.
The United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Guidelines for the Policing of Assemblies by Law Enforcement Officials in Africa provide that officers may only use force when strictly necessary. When using force, law enforcement officials should exercise restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense and to the legitimate objective to be achieved.
The 2020 UN Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement provides that tear gas should only be employed when necessary to prevent further physical harm and should not be used to disperse nonviolent demonstrations.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented instances in which Angolan security forces have used excessive force against peaceful protesters and arbitrarily detained them. Calls by Human Rights Watch and other organizations for meaningful and concrete security force reforms have resulted in some attempts to meet international human rights standards. However, the continued use of excessive police force during protests shows that the measures taken thus far have been inadequate, Human Rights Watch said.
“The police use of excessive force against peaceful protesters is part of broader security force problems in Angola,” Budoo-Scholtz said. “The government needs to adopt and enforce comprehensive reforms within the security forces to ensure that police officers uphold the law and are held accountable when they abuse protesters’ rights.”
A Disappointing Ruling in Italy with a Silver Lining
The Italian Constitutional Court’s recent ruling upholding a law that imposes sanctions on sea rescue groups casts a dark shadow over sea rescue, but that cloud has a silver lining: the court essentially said that the imperative to save lives justifies rescue ships disregarding state orders that could endanger migrants’ lives.
Validating the power of Italian authorities to impound NGO ships undoubtedly impedes rescues—it means valuable time lost when those ships could be conducting search and rescue operations and imposes financial and reputational burdens on NGOs struggling to do what’s right.
Yet the Constitutional Court laid down important principles that should guide how authorities exercise — and judicial authorities review — the power to sanction rescue organizations in the future.
First, the Court took into account jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights that requires courts to examine the severity and other pertinent factors of any sanction, to determine if it is equivalent to criminal punishment, even if it is labeled as civil or administrative. As a result, the Court correctly categorized impounding rescue ships as a punitive sanction.
In doing so, the Court implicitly acknowledged the criminalization of rescue at sea and signaled that the due process safeguards and higher evidentiary standards of criminal law are applicable. This should restrain if and when authorities seek to impound ships in the first place and afford rescue NGOs better defense rights when subjected to these measures.
Second, the Court stated, “an order that leads to a violation of the primary obligation to save human life and is likely to endanger it is not binding, and failure to comply with it cannot be sanctioned.” This is crucial because the principal reason Italian authorities use to impound rescue ships is an alleged failure of the crew to comply with instructions from the abusive Libyan Coast Guard. As we argued in Human Rights Watch’s amicus brief, requiring rescue ships to follow orders from the Libyan Coast Guard risks doing exactly that – endangering life in violation of the fundamental international law principle of nonrefoulement that prohibits sending individuals to places where they would likely face serious harm.
With the Court’s clear affirmation that illegitimate orders need not be obeyed, rescue groups should have stronger grounds to appeal detention orders. The ruling will not end the challenges rescue organizations face in Italy, but it should make authorities think twice about going after them and it should ensure they have a stronger legal protection if they end up in court.
Greece's Asylum Suspension Denies Rights, Puts Lives at Risk
Greece has suspended the ability for people coming by boat via North Africa to seek asylum –violating their rights, potentially putting their lives at risk and flouting its obligations under EU law.
The measure approved by Parliament on July 11 for a period of three months, blocks people coming by boat via North Africa from lodging asylum claims. Instead, asylum seekers and migrants will be summarily returned to their countries of origin “without registration.” Authorities justify the move by pointing to a recent increase in boat arrivals from Libya to the islands of Crete and Gavdos; among those arriving are people with clear protection needs, including many escaping conflict in Sudan.
A previous suspension of access to asylum by Greek authorities in March 2020 led to people on the move experiencing violence, chaos and suffering.
The Prime Minister wants to cooperate with Libyan authorities to prevent migrant departures, risking complicity in the forcible return of migrants and asylum seekers to Libya, where they face horrific abuses including in detention that the United Nations found amount to crimes against humanity. In late June, Greece deployed navy vessels off the Libyan coast to prevent people from reaching its territory.
The EU Fundamental Rights Charter imposes binding obligations on EU states to respect the right to asylum. Greece is also treaty-bound by the absolute prohibition on sending anyone to a place they face a risk of torture, and the principle of nonrefoulement, which prohibits the return of refugees and asylum seekers to places they risk persecution.
Since last week, there has been a chorus of condemnation by leading institutions, including the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, and the UNHCR.
It makes the silence from the European Commission all the more deafening. Each day the Commission fails to condemn Greece or take steps toward infringement proceedings worsens its collusion in the erosion of EU law at its borders.
Greece’s move to suspend the right to seek asylum also raises serious questions for Frontex, the EU border and coast guard agency that is heavily involved in supporting Greek border management. Last time Greece suspended access to asylum in March 2020, Frontex sent extra officers to assist, despite the clear breach of EU law. Frontex’s response this time will be a key test of its commitment to the EU Rights Charter.
Global: Caster Semenya’s Court Victory a Win for All Athletes
(New York) – In a landmark case for athletes’ rights, Caster Semenya, the star South African runner, won her case at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Human Rights Watch said today. The court ruled on July 10, 2025, that theprocess before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and the judicial review afforded by Switzerland’s Federal Supreme Court regarding sporting regulations on her eligibility to compete were inadequate to protect her rights.
Semenya had challenged regulations imposed by World Athletics, the global track and field governing body, that bar women with certain Differences of Sex Development (DSD) from competing in the female category unless they undergo medically unnecessary intervention to lower their natural testosterone levels. These regulations have long been criticized as scientifically dubious, invasive, and discriminatory.
“Caster Semenya is South Africa’s three-time world track champion, and is used to winning,” said Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch. “And after years of challenging systemic abuse of women athletes and her exclusion from sport on human rights grounds, she may have experienced her most important victory before the European court.”
The World Athletics regulations require women like Semenya, whose naturally occurring testosterone levels associated with specific sex development diagnoses fall above a set threshold, to reduce those levels to compete in specific events. These regulations, in effect since 2019, continue a long and damaging legacy of sex testing in sport.
Sports governing bodies contended that the 2019 regulations broke from the past 50 years of testing women athletes to confirm their sex. The practice was humiliating, degrading, and discriminatory and among other harm scrutinized women athletes’ bodies for conformity to arbitrary and subjective standards of femininity. However, Human Rights Watch research found that the revised regulations still subject women athletes to sex eligibility criteria that retain these negative, rights-abusing consequences.
World Athletics’ rules make the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, the mandatory and exclusive jurisdiction for disputes, meaning that Semenya had no choice about where to begin her case. Unsuccessful in arbitration, she then appealed to Switzerland’s Federal Supreme Court, which rejected her appeal on narrow grounds. Finally, she took her case to the ECtHR and won. Its Grand Chamber ruling is the final stage of these proceedings.
Although the European Court’s finding is one of procedural failings, the significance of the ruling is far-reaching, Human Rights Watch said. The court explicitly expressed concern over the deeply unequal relationship between the athletes and the bodies that regulate international sport. One of the court’s judges explicitly emphasized in her opinion that Semenya “was at a disadvantage vis-à-vis [World Athletics], not only as a professional athlete.... but also because she is a woman, she is black, and she is from the Global South.”
The court in essence found that the regulations, which impose severe interference with the athletes’ privacy rights, have never been properly assessed for whether they are necessary or proportionate under international human rights law, because the tribunals that Semenya had appeared before had not carried out a sufficiently rigorous review.
While the CAS acknowledged the regulations impact on fundamental rights and human dignity, it failed to give those considerations proper weight when deciding if the regulations should stand, the European court found. And the Supreme Court’s review was too technical and narrow to remedy that fatal flaw. As a result, neither World Athletics nor the International Olympic Committee has had to prove the compatibility of the regulations with human rights norms.
Human Rights Watch research has shown that the sex testing regulations are arbitrary, invasive, and degrading, and included its findings in a joint submission to the human rights court in Semenya’s case with the expert scholarsPayoshni Mitra and Katrina Karkazis. Such regulations harm all women athletes by perpetuating arbitrary scrutiny of women’s bodies in ways that are degrading and invasive of privacy, on grounds that are scientifically contested. Human Rights Watch said such regulations are also incompatible with respect for women’s rights to bodily integrity, freedom from cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, dignity, and non-discrimination.
The language used by the majority of the court in its judgment leaves little doubt about their negative view of the regulations for the harm they impose on women athletes and skepticism as to World Athletics’ alleged justifications for them, Human Rights Watch said. While they declined to rule on whether the regulations themselves violate the European Convention on Human Rights, citing Switzerland’s lack of responsibility for their adoption, four judges in the majority criticized the court for not doing more, stating that it had “failed to fulfill its role.”
While the court may not have struck down the regulations, a good faith reading can consider the judgment a fatal blow, Human Rights Watch said. At a minimum, World Athletics needs to suspend all application of the regulations until an independent and impartial tribunal conducts a rigorous review, using the appropriate standards necessary to protect the athletes’ fundamental rights, including those to private life and non-discrimination. And taking into account the critical tone of the court with respect to the regulations, World Athletics, in the interest of athletes, and in recognition of all available research that undermines credibility in the objective or scientific nature of the regulations, should drop the regulations and their quest to impose sex testing for women, Human Rights Watch said.
“International sporting bodies have shown scant regard for international human rights norms in setting these regulations, as if they are exempt from human rights standards,” Worden said. “Caster Semenya’s victory is a victory for all women and all athletes because the European Court found that the Court of Arbitration for Sport and Swiss Federal Tribunal had failed to uphold human rights norms despite credible claims of discrimination.”
Thailand: Authorities Abuse, Exploit Myanmar Nationals
(Bangkok) – Thai authorities are threatening, extorting, and detaining Myanmar nationals who fled the abusive military junta to seek safety in Thailand, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 48-page report, “‘I’ll Never Feel Secure’: Undocumented and Exploited Myanmar Nationals in Thailand,” examines how the Thai police frequently stop and interrogate Myanmar nationals and extort them with the threat of arrest and detention if they fail to pay bribes. Human Rights Watch found this practice to be prevalent in the town of Mae Sot near the Myanmar border, where people refer to Myanmar nationals as “walking ATMs.” Myanmar nationals, living under the constant threat of deportation that could put them at grave risk, restrict their movements to stay out of sight of police and other authorities seeking to exploit them.
July 14, 2025 “I’ll Never Feel Secure”“After fleeing conflict, persecution, and deprivation, Myanmar nationals need protection in Thailand,” said Nadia Hardman, refugee and migrant rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Instead, Thailand denies them secure legal status, and its authorities use that vulnerability to exploit and extort them.”
Since the military coup in Myanmar in February 2021, the junta has carried out widespread abuses across the country, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. Many people have fled violence, persecution, a collapsing economy, and aid blockages to go to neighboring countries. More than four million Myanmar nationals are currently in Thailand, nearly half of them undocumented.
In February 2025, Human Rights Watch interviewed 30 Myanmar nationals living in Thailand. Many are refugees under international law, even though they have not been recognized as such, and pathways to recognized status in Thailand are limited. These undocumented Myanmar nationals are compelled to seek out security and a livelihood in Thailand and to avoid being returned to repression, conflict, and humanitarian crises in Myanmar.
Those interviewed said that the Thai authorities’ practices scared and intimidated them, leaving them feeling marginalized and exploited in Thailand. Thai security personnel have engaged in racketeering through a semi-formalized system of extortion that involves “selling” unofficial “police cards” to Myanmar nationals looking for a pathway to documentation or just to avoid arrest. The only option for those not willing or able to purchase such cards is self-imposed house arrest.
A 30-year-old journalist from Myanmar who had fled to Mae Sot said, “The main threat [in Mae Sot] is the police. I was scared of them…. I got stopped [by the police] six times: three times I paid the police money, and they let me go.”
Even those paying for “police cards” are not fully protected against deportation. Mass deportations of Myanmar nationals, including children, continue across the country, without regard for the risk they might face upon returning to Myanmar. One woman said that despite paying a bribe for herself and her 12-year-old niece, Thai immigration authorities arrested them both, held them in a detention facility for nine days, and then deported them to Myanmar.
Most of the Myanmar nationals who spoke to Human Rights Watch were in the process of applying for or renewing a migrant worker’s card, commonly known as the “pink card.” This is the main document available to Myanmar nationals in Thailand that provides a legal status. The process requires an employer to sponsor the migrant worker.
Thailand is not a party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol. The country has no refugee law or formalized asylum procedures that are applicable to all nationalities. Instead, in 2023, the government introduced a new National Screening Mechanism under which some individuals, who are unable or unwilling to return to their countries of origin due to fears of persecution, can seek protection.
While presented as a step toward greater international protection, the National Screening Mechanism and its implementing regulations largely exclude certain nationalities from access, including migrant workers from Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos.
Myanmar nationals said that whether renewing their documentation as a migrant worker through a “regularization window” – a specific period during which the Thai government allows undocumented migrant workers to regularize their legal status – or applying for the first time, they relied on a broker to handle the process and paid, often exorbitant, fees to purchase the necessary documentation and manage the convoluted process. In all the cases that Human Rights Watch examined, the listed employer on their migrant worker’s “pink card” was not their actual employer, but a fabricated one.
While a pink card provides some protection from arrest, detention, and deportation, it is not the accurate or proper documentation for people who are most likely refugees, despite the absence of a system to recognize that status.
The Thai government should enact legislation that establishes criteria and procedures for recognizing refugee status and providing asylum that meets international legal standards, Human Rights Watch said. Refugee status should be open to all nationalities according to the same criteria, consistent with the international refugee definition, including complementary forms of protection for people fleeing conflict, and refugees should be authorized to work.
In the interim, Thailand should introduce a temporary protection framework for Myanmar nationals, recognizing the immediate needs of thousands of people who have fled persecution or the country’s conflicts. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has repeatedly said that there should be no forced returns to Myanmar: “People fleeing Myanmar must be allowed access to territory to seek asylum and be protected against refoulement.”
“Thai authorities should take steps in line with international standards to provide effective protection for people fleeing Myanmar,” Hardman said. “The Thai government should end the exploitation and suffering of several million undocumented Myanmar nationals.”
Standing Firm on Women’s Right to Live Free of Violence
There’s no question about it--we are in the midst of a destructive global backlash against women’s rights.
Against this regressive backdrop, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women held its 91st Session in June and July. In addition to reviewing countries’ compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the committee also issued a statement on the need to stand firm in upholding existing international human rights law.
The statement responds to an effort by some countries to develop a new optional protocol to CEDAW focused on gender-based violence. Any changes, the CEDAW Committee writes, “must be grounded in existing norms and standards.”
Gender-based violence against women and girls violates CEDAW. As the CEDAW Committee wrote in 1992: “Gender-based violence is a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men.”
Pushing for such an instrument on rights already enshrined in international law and amidst the global backlash against women’s rights, risks eroding rights firmly established under international law. The committee statement warns: “Any effort that creates a system of unequal protections among States Parties would jeopardize existing protections and guarantees under the Convention. The Committee is convinced that a new optional protocol might create a parallel process that could undermine full accountability under the Convention.”
The backlash against women’s rights is happening in an alarming number of countries; UN Women reported in 2024 that one in four countries was experiencing such regression. The rollback on reproductive rights—from Romania to the United States and elsewhere—is just one example. It is also increasingly evident in international spaces such as the UN, where women’s rights are both targeted by anti-rights campaigners and harmed by slashed funding. A growing number of states are, in these spaces, working openly to weaken women’s rights protections.
Women’s rights defenders around the world are still finding ways to make progress, while coming together to staunchly defend and apply international law, notably CEDAW, recognizing women’s right to equality. The CEDAW Committee’s words of caution deserve careful attention.
As the committee states: “The principle of non-discrimination in the Convention covers gender-based violence against women and girls.” The international instruments and interpretations are clear. What we need is for governments to fulfill their international legal obligations and stop all forms of violence against women.
Human Rights Cannot Be Sidelined in Australia-China Meetings
On July 12, Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is traveling to Beijing for another “annual leaders’ meeting” with Chinese President Xi Jinping. They will discuss global and regional issues as well as bilateral matters of trade and tourism.
The Australian government’s statement announcing the visit doesn’t mention human rights at all. It only makes a vague reference that direct engagement “at the highest level enables difference to be addressed.” Consistently, this has been the Albanese government’s method of relegating pesky human rights issues to little more than a disagreement, a “point of contention.” But they are not. Human rights are universal, protected, and promoted via a system of global rules and governance that applies to all of our fundamental rights and freedoms.
The Chinese government is one of the most repressive countries, and Hong Kong provides a disheartening case study on this point. Through the adoption of the draconian National Security Law in 2020, it effectively ended the semi-democracy Hong Kong enjoyed.
Human Rights Watch has documented how Chinese and Hong Kong authorities have almost entirely dismantled freedoms of expression, association, and assembly; free and fair elections; and fair trial rights and judicial independence. Human Rights Watch recently documented the government’s persecution and silencing of lawyers who challenge official abuses.
Since late 2016, the Chinese government has also intensified a widespread and systematic campaign of human rights violations against Xinjiang’s Uyghur population, which amount to crimes against humanity. This includes restricting travel of Uyghurs to promote “normalcy,” control diaspora, and maintain alternative narratives about Xinjiang.
Last year, Australia led a joint statement at the United Nations, urging the Chinese government to implement recommendations from the landmark 2022 UN report on violations in Xinjiang. Albanese should reinforce these concerns publicly in China and press for implementation of the UN’s recommendations.
Tibetans also face severe repression in China, making the question of the Dalai Lama’s successor, Tibet’s spiritual leader and an important symbol of Tibetan identity, increasingly urgent after he recently celebrated his 90th birthday.
However, the Chinese government’s repression isn’t confined to the country’s borders. Beijing also intimidates, surveils, harasses, and even forces the return of dissidents or critics overseas, in numerous countries, including the targeting of people in Australia.
During his visit, Albanese shouldn’t gloss over human rights concerns as simply a difference in “views.” Those differences have real world consequences for the countless people suffering under the yoke of Bejing’s repression. Albanese should reinforce messages about abuses in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and Tibet and urge the Chinese government to end its campaign of harassing and intimidating dissidents and diaspora abroad, including in Australia.
Cuba: Protesters Detail Abuses in Prison
(New York) – Protesters detained for participating in the peaceful July 2021 protests in Cuba have been subject to serious abuses in prison, Human Rights Watch said today. Despite a January 2025 deal that led to the release of some of these prisoners, hundreds remain in detention.
Former detainees who were released following Vatican-led negotiations in January told Human Rights Watch that they were beaten and held in solitary confinement as punishment. They described unhealthy and unhygienic prison conditions, including woefully inadequate food and water. They said that they remain under constant surveillance and strict conditions, some of which appear to have been imposed informally. Many fear being sent back to prison, and at least three of the people released have been rearrested.
“Four years ago, the Cuban government unleashed repression on thousands of Cubans who peacefully took to the streets demanding rights and freedoms,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “Today, hundreds remain behind bars in dismal conditions.”
Between March and May 2025, Human Rights Watch interviewed 17 former detainees by phone. These included people who were held in six prisons for men – Alto Río de Guanajay, Boniato, Cerámica Roja, Mar Verde, Valle Grande, and Unidad 1580 – and the Guamajal and Matanzas prisons for women. Several said they had been moved to prison camps or lower security facilities during their detention. Independent human rights organizations Cubalex, Justicia 11J, and Prisoners Defenders facilitated contact with some of the interviewees. Due to the risk of retaliation, Human Rights Watch has not disclosed the identities of most of those interviewed.
Numerous former detainees described physical abuse by prison guards. They said that guards beat them for shouting anti-government slogans or protesting about prison conditions. Many said they were subjected to stress positions such as “the bicycle” (also known as the “wheelbarrow”), in which prisoners are forced to run, handcuffed, with their arms raised above their heads.
Former detainees consistently described overcrowded cells and poor access to food and clean water for both political and ordinary prisoners. “If your family isn’t bringing you food, you die,” one former prisoner said. “The food they gave you was inedible. It had worms in it,” said another.
The former detainees described outbreaks of scabies, tuberculosis, dengue fever, and Covid-19, which they said were left untreated. They said prison officials regularly ignored medical concerns, and in many cases, punished detainees for raising concerns about unsanitary conditions or food shortages. Those who protested said they were frequently sent to solitary confinement, or denied visits, calls, or access to packages sent by their family members.
In January 2025, Cuban authorities announced the release of 553 prisoners following negotiations between the Cuban government, the Vatican, and the United States. Independent Cuban rights groups, including Cubalex, Justicia 11J, and Prisoners Defenders, estimate that about 200 of those released were political prisoners, and that the rest were ordinary prisoners.
On the day that the Cuban government announced the prisoners’ release, the Biden administration removed Cuba from the US list of countries that support terrorism, a designation that restricts US aid and trade. On his first day in office, President Donald Trump put Cuba back on the list.
Many of the protesters who were released said they are required to accept state-assigned jobs, report regularly to security agents, and request permission to leave their municipalities. Several also said they are barred from participating in public demonstrations, associating with opposition groups, and posting on social media. At least in some cases, such conditions appear to have been imposed informally and arbitrarily, as they are not included in a written order or court-ordered conditions of release.
Members of the intelligence services, known as “state security,” have followed those released on the streets and gone to their homes, former detainees said, to threaten and monitor them, and deliver written or verbal summons to appear in court or at the police station. “Although I was released from prison, I am still a prisoner,” one of them said. “It’s like being a prisoner in the street.”
In April, authorities rearrested José Daniel Ferrer, leader of the Cuban Patriotic Union (UNPACU) opposition movement, and Félix Navarro, founder of the Pedro Luis Boitel Party for Democracy, who had been released in January. In May, the authorities rearrested Donaida Pérez Paseiro, president of the Free Yoruba Association of Cuba, after she campaigned for her husband’s release on social media. Her husband remains imprisoned in connection with the 2021 protests.
Cubans continue to endure a severe economic crisis and face acute shortages of food and medicine, an important factor that brought Cubans to the streets in July 2021. A 2024 survey of over 1,100 people by the Cuban Observatory of Human Rights found that 7 in 10 Cubans skip a meal every day, and 61 percent struggle to afford basic necessities. People across the country also face daily power outages ranging from 4 to 20 hours.
As a result of poverty and political repression, Cubans have left the country in vast numbers. Ten percent of Cuba’s population – over a million people – left the island between 2022 and 2023, according to the head of the country’s national statistics office. Independent reports indicate the total figure may be much higher.
Governments in Latin America, Canada, and the European Union should condemn the Cuban government’s arbitrary detention and harassment of protesters, journalists, and activists and raise concerns about human rights abuses and the grave humanitarian situation in the country, Human Rights Watch said. Governments should also increase support for independent human rights groups and journalists in Cuba.
For more details and accounts from victims please see below.
Human Rights Watch documented a range of abuses against protesters and critics detained in connection with the July 11, 2021 protests, including beatings, solitary confinement, and poor prison conditions. These findings build on Human Rights Watch’s prior reporting on abuses against people who participated in the July 2021 protests, including due process violations, arbitrary detention and mistreatment.
Abuses and Poor Conditions in Prison
Beatings and Stress Positions
Numerous former detainees said that guards beat and otherwise abused them if they shouted anti-government slogans or complained about the prison conditions. They said guards also beat people detained for ordinary crimes.
Ferrer, the leader of the UNPACU opposition movement, said that in November 2024 guards tried to take him to the Boniato prison hospital for an arm injury. When he refused to go because he heard there was an ongoing tuberculosis outbreak there, he said, the guards punched him in the head and in his injured arm. “I was bleeding all day, from the wound,” he said. Ferrer said that they forced him to do the “bicycle,” then forced him into a car and took him to the Boniato prison hospital.
He also described an incident in December 2022, in which seven guards beat him for shouting “down with [Miguel Díaz] Canel [the Cuban president], down with the tyranny” during a family visit. He said they forced him to do the ‘bicycle.’ Later, they took him to a cell, where he said they hit him in the ribs. “I was lying on the floor, [a prison official] kicked me and fractured my nasal septum, blood was coming out of my nose.”
Five former detainees held in Guanajay prison said that between 30 and 40 guards violently repressed a hunger strike by 15 to 20 prisoners in November 2021. The former detainees said that, after they refused breakfast and lunch, prison guards entered their cells and shackled their hands and feet, threw them around different cells, beat them with batons, and dragged them through the prison.
One of them said that he was thrown down the stairs and taken to another area of the prison, where he was beaten again. He said he was later thrown into a truck with other prisoners, where guards continued to beat two of them. He added that guards later took him to the infirmary with a bleeding head wound. A medical professional warned him to stop the hunger strike to avoid further beatings, he said. Another former detainee said that guards brought dogs to his cell to intimidate him into abandoning the hunger strike.
A former detainee who said he was beaten that day said:
“I have indelible marks on my body…. My right ankle is swollen because of all the bruises they gave me…. I still have baton marks on my thighs, I don’t know what they did to me. I couldn’t move…. After they sent me back to my cell, a cellmate had to help me get out of bed because I couldn’t move by myself.”
The five former detainees described injuries to other protesters because of the beatings, including an older man whose hip, they said, was dislocated.
Solitary Confinement
Many former detainees described extended periods of solitary confinement, ranging from one day to nine months, in what they referred to as “punishment cells.” They said guards would send them to these cells when they complained about prison conditions or to prevent organized protests and hunger strikes. Ferrer said that he spent three years and four months consecutively in solitary confinement. Another former detainee held in Guanajay said that his multiple stays in solitary confinement added up to a year and four months.
A former prisoner detained at Guanajay said:
“For any stupid thing they would send you [to the punishment cell] for 15 days.… The cells were small, with the doors boarded up…. There is no ventilation in the front, it’s an iron door. They are dark…. You have to ask for water.”
A former detainee held in the same prison described beatings in these cells:
“Most of us were beaten. Every time you had any problem, or you complained or something, [guards] sent you to the punishment cell, they dragged you there and beat you up.”
A former detainee held in Boniato said he was beaten and put in solitary confinement several times for making requests to guards. In one incident, in 2022, he said:
“They brought me down in handcuffs using a hold they call ‘the bicycle,’ and they beat me with a hose all over my body. After, when I was in the solitary confinement cell, I was also threatened and slapped in the face by [a] guard.”
A former detainee described a case in the Matanzas women’s prison in which a woman was sent to a “punishment cell” for injuring herself. She said: “When the woman would cut herself, instead of giving her care, they would put her in the [solitary confinement] cell.”
Poor Access to Food and Water, and Sleep Deprivation
Former detainees described woefully inadequate or inedible meals in prison. Several said the food had worms in it and was sometimes spoiled.
Most former detainees described receiving a small piece of bread with tea or another beverage in the morning, and croquettes with a small amount of rice, and sometimes a small piece of meat, for lunch and dinner. One said that when there was no bread left, they would receive two spoonfuls of flour for breakfast. Former detainees said they relied on food packages brought by their relatives. “Many prisoners who have no family live lying in bed, because they would faint from hunger,” one former detainee said.
Former detainees said that access to water was limited and the water available was often visibly dirty, cloudy, foul-smelling, or containing flies or worms. Several former detainees said they relied on bottled drinking water provided by their families. Ferrer said:
“I only had two liters of water a day for all my needs. The water had sediment in it, mosquito larvae were hatching. I would leave the water for a while to see the sediment and check the smell it had. They would bring me water according to the intensity of my protest.”
A former detainee held in the Matanzas women’s prison said:
“[You would wash] only once a day, they gave you only a bucket of water, if they did at all. I can’t describe the water as drinkable. When you finished bathing, the bucket had dirt at the bottom. It was the same water for drinking. Almost every woman had moniliasis [yeast infection] because the water is terrible for washing yourself.”
In many detention facilities, several former detainees said that guards never turn off the lights, preventing them from sleeping. A former detainee held in Guanajay said:
“The lights never go out. The prisoners sleep with the lights on. I had a white LED lamp above my eyes.... And the walls were painted white. It consumed you.”
Another former detainee held in the same prison said that if the prisoners tried to cover the light with a piece of cloth, the guards would force them to take it off.
Unsanitary Conditions, Disease Outbreaks, Lack of Medical Attention
Former detainees described outbreaks of dengue, Covid-19, tuberculosis, chickenpox and scabies, and some described suffering from diarrhea or amoebic dysentery, which they believed were linked to the contaminated water and overcrowded conditions.
A former detainee who was held in Guanajay said:
“There were always outbreaks. The place was full of mosquitoes and bedbugs. If there was heavy rain, the water system backed up, and everyone felt sick to their stomach. They expected us to clean the cells but didn’t give us anything to clean them with.”
A former detainee held in Matanzas women’s prison said:
“You can’t sleep at night because of the bedbugs. The lockers are full of cockroaches.… There weren’t enough doctors. In fact, the nurse was the one who had to do all the work. If you had your own medicine, the nurse would administer it. But otherwise, since there was no doctor to take care of you, they didn’t take care of you and that was it.”
Several former detainees also said that their medical needs were routinely ignored and that there was no medication to help treat them. A former detainee held in Mar Verde said:
“There is no medical assistance because there is no medicine. There was one bathroom to wash and go to the bathroom, for 50 to 60 prisoners. There was no water to wash the toilets, and you couldn’t flush them.”
A former detainee held in Guanajay said:
“There’s nothing inside, no medicine at all. The few medications that come in disappear quickly. I assume the doctors or prison chiefs take it to sell it. If you have a headache, they say: “Lie down, put in some earplugs, and try to forget you have a headache.” That’s the kind of thing the medical staff would tell you.”
Surveillance, Strict Conditions Following Prison Release
As a result of a negotiation with the Vatican and the Biden administration, Cuba announced in January that it would “release” 553 people who had been convicted of “several crimes.” According to groups monitoring human rights in Cuba, about 200 of the detainees that authorities freed were political prisoners, and the rest were ordinary criminals.
All 17 former political prisoners interviewed said that they were released under strict conditions, which included several or all of the following: a ban on associating with opposition groups, appearing at public gatherings or crowded places, going out at night, criticizing the government, and leaving their municipality without municipal court permission. Many are required to report regularly at a court or police station. Most also said they were required to take on state-assigned jobs, for instance, in maintenance or cleaning.
Several former detainees said that court authorities communicated these conditions verbally but did not convey them in writing. Four parole documents reviewed by Human Rights Watch do not include these conditions.
Several also said that officials wearing civilian clothes come to their homes periodically and follow them on the streets. “They don’t identify as [state security agents], but I know it’s them,” one former detainee said. “They come [over] to me, and they tell me, ‘Hey, don’t do it again, look what happened to you.’”
One of the former detainees described the surveillance he faces in San Antonio de los Baños since his release:
“When I’m sitting in the doorway, for example, in my non-working hours, [the man] walks by and takes pictures of me. It’s the same person who I’ve been told has been taking photos around my house and he passes by a lot.”
Protesters, Critics Behind Bars
At least three of the political prisoners released in January have since been rearrested, allegedly for violating the terms of their release, and remain behind bars:
On April 29, state security agents rearrestedFerrer, the UNPACU leader. The Supreme Court said that he failed to attend two mandatory judicial hearings. The court also mentioned his activism and contact with foreign diplomats, though it claims these were not relevant to its ruling that he should be detained. In 2020, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found his detention at the time to be arbitrary and called on Cuba to release him.The same day, state security agents rearrested Navarro, founder of the Pedro Luis Boitel Party for Democracy. The Supreme Court said that he left Matanzas province several times without permission. Navarro had been sentenced to nine years for “public disorder,” “assault,” and “contempt” in connection with his participation in the 2021 protests.In June, state security agents rearrested Pérez Paseiro, president of the Free Yoruba Association of Cuba. Villa Clara’s provincial court published a social media post indicating that her release had been revoked because she did not attend court hearings. Pérez Paseiro had been sentenced to eight years for “public disorder,” “assault,” and “contempt” in connection with her participation in the 2021 protests. After her release in January, she had used social media to call for the release of her husband, who was also detained in connection with the protests.According to the rights group Prisoners Defenders, 420 people detained in connection with the July 2021 protests remain behind bars, and 751 are still serving sentences of some kind. Human Rights Watch has documented that many were subject to proceedings that violated due process guarantees and convicted for overly broad crimes, such as “sedition” and “public disorder,” and that some were sentenced to disproportionate prison terms. Those still in jail in connection with the July 2021 protests include:
Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, an artist who was arrested after posting a video saying he would join the July 2021 protests. He was sentenced to five years in prison, for “insulting national symbols,” among other crimes. He is being held at the Guanajay maximum-security prison.Ibrahím Domínguez Aguilar, a rapper who was arrested in July 2021 after calling on people to protest against the government. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison for charges of “assault” and “public disorder.” He is currently being held at the Boniato maximum-security prison in Santiago de Cuba. His family and Prisoners Defenders have reported that he has been severely beaten.US Terminates Protected Status for Afghans
The Trump administration’s termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Afghans in the United States will take effect on July 14, leaving over 11,000 Afghans in the US subject to immediate detention and deportation. A TPS designation allows people from certain countries the US government recognizes as temporarily unsafe to remain in the US and work legally.
Afghanistan under the Taliban is undeniably dangerous and unjust for everyone. But women and girls who are returned to Afghanistan will be particularly vulnerable.
The end of TPS comes just days after the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for two senior Taliban leaders over their systematic violations of women’s rights. Human Rights Watch has previously concluded that Taliban authorities were committing the crime against humanity of gender persecution against Afghan women and girls. These determinations reveal how imperiled Afghan women and girls will be if the US deports them back to Afghanistan.
Under the Taliban, who reclaimed power in Afghanistan following the US withdrawal in 2021, Afghan women and girls are no longer able to attend secondary school and university. They also face severe employment restrictions, limited access to health care, and strictly curtailed access to public spaces. Both Afghan women and some United Nations officials have described their situation as “gender apartheid.” TPS is a mechanism for circumstances that constitute generalized threats to safety, which is especially important for Afghan women who might lack documentation to show individualized threats to establish claims under the US asylum procedure.
The US should also consider that some Afghans with TPS are likely to now have children with US citizenship. They may be separated from their families or subjected to dangerous circumstances if their parents are forced to make the impossible decision of leaving them behind in the US or taking them to live under the Taliban.
The US government should recognize the dire conditions that await Afghans and reinstate TPS. Otherwise, the termination of these protections will force Afghans to confront unimaginable risk.
US Imposes Sanctions on UN Special Rapporteur
On July 9, the US government imposed sanctions on UN Human Rights Council-appointed Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967 Francesca Albanese under an executive order issued by President Donald Trump in February 2025.
In response, the following quote can be attributed to Liz Evenson, international justice director at Human Rights Watch:
"The US government’s decision to sanction Albanese for seeking justice through the International Criminal Court is actually all about silencing a UN expert for doing her job, speaking truth about Israeli violations against Palestinians and calling on governments and corporations not to be complicit. The United States is working to dismantle the norms and institutions on which survivors of grave abuses rely. UN and ICC member countries should strongly resist the US government’s shameless efforts to block justice for the world’s worst crimes and condemn the outrageous sanctions on Albanese."
For Human Rights Watch’s reporting on Israel/Palestine, please see: https://www.hrw.org/middle-east/north-africa/israel/palestine.
For Human Rights Watch’s reporting on international justice, please see: https://www.hrw.org/topic/international-justice.
US Lobbying Groups Target EU Corporate Accountability Law
As Europe emerges from a devastating heat wave, the European Parliament should reject efforts, including by industry groups in the United States, to weaken the European Union’s flagship corporate accountability law and its measures to tackle climate change.
The 2024 EU law, called the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, requires large companies operating in the EU to identify and address human rights and environmental harms in their operations and supply chains.
Unfortunately, lobbying by European and US companies, including the American Chamber of Commerce to the EU, has heavily influenced the European Commission’s “Omnibus proposal,” which would substantially weaken key provisions of the law, making it harder for victims of rights abuses to sue companies.
European and US fossil fuel companies have particularly targeted the law’s climate provisions, which require companies covered by the law to adopt and put into effect a “transition plan for climate change mitigation” consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, in line with the Paris Agreement.
On June 27, ExxonMobil Chief Executive Darren Woods asked President Donald Trump to address the law as part of trade negotiations with the EU. ExxonMobil has met with senior European Commission officials at least five times since the beginning of 2025 to discuss the law or related topics.
EU member states have proposed diluting the requirement for companies to “put into effect” climate mitigation plans, instead proposing only that companies adopt a plan setting out “reasonable efforts” to tackle global warming.
Burning fossil fuels is the primary driver of the climate crisis, accounting for about two-thirds of annual global greenhouse gas emissions. The production of fossil fuels is linked to severe human rights and environmental harms, including toxic air, unsafe water, and polluted ecosystems.
The fate of the EU’s corporate accountability law now rests with the European Parliament. Instead of succumbing to lobbying by powerful industries, parliamentarians should fight for a law that requires companies to take robust action against climate change and that holds corporations to account for human rights and environmental abuses worldwide.
Mozambique Begins Hearing into Police’s role in Post-Election Violence and Killings
On July 7, the former commander-general of the Mozambican police, Bernardino Rafael, whom the President dismissed in January 2025, appeared before the Office of the Attorney General (Procuradoria-Geral da República) for a hearing about the police’s involvement in the killing of about 400 people during the civil unrest that followed last year’s elections.
The attorney general had already announced the opening of 31 criminal proceedings against members of the Mozambican police implicated in the violent repression of those postelection protests.
The protests erupted in response to allegations of electoral fraud and were led by opposition candidate Venâncio Mondlane. They lasted for more than four months. Civil society organizations, including Plataforma Decide, estimate that approximately 400 demonstrators were shot dead and about 600 injured as a result of excessive police force. A previous Human Rights Watch report documented the killings of at least 10 prominent opposition party officials from October 2024 to March 2025.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented how the police used excessive force against protesters, including by indiscriminately firing tear gas and using rubber bullets and live ammunitions, sometimes in residential areas. In a case we documented in November 2024, a mother was preparing lunch for her 5-year-old son when her house was filled with teargas which the police were using to disperse the protesters.
The Attorney General’s Office has stated that the proceedings’ aim is to establish criminal responsibility of those responsible for unlawful abuses.
While the hearing has not yet resulted in formal charges or precautionary measures, the Mozambican government taking concrete steps to address police violence, launching multiple investigations, and hearing the testimony of senior figures is a step in the right direction for the national inclusive dialogue, which was established to discuss constitutional and political reforms following the postelection violence in October 2024. Although still in preliminary stages, these proceedings reinforce Mozambique’s stated commitment to justice and accountability for human rights violations.
To ensure that this process delivers, the government should ensure it remains independent and impartial, and that those responsible for serious violations are criminally charged. It should also embark on urgently needed security sector reforms and trainings that would bring it into better alignment with national and international standards regarding regulating peaceful protests.
Revised UK Social Security Bill Still Harms Rights
The UK government’s draft law to cut spending on disability-related social security triggered major opposition from within the ruling party, forcing the government to roll back some of the legislation in order to win a key parliamentary vote last week. However, the watered-down version of the bill will still negatively affect some with disabilities and long-term health conditions.
As the bill returns to parliament on 9 July, one troubling provision deserves particular scrutiny: from April 2026, the government will halve the amount of additional support it provides to new social security applicants “with a health condition or disability that restricts their ability to work.” Existing claimants would continue to receive benefits at the current rate. Parliamentarians should reject this two-tier system.
Universal Credit, the UK’s main means-tested social security support, includes an additional “health-related element” of around £105 a week, for certain people with long-term health conditions or disabilities. The “health-related element” recognizes – correctly – that people with long-term health conditions and disabilities may face additional costs. But under the bill, people applying for Universal Credit after April 2026 – even those who pass the government’s stringent assessment process – would still have their supplement halved to just over £50 per week.
Currently 2.1 million people—of the total 7.5 million getting Universal Credit—receive the “health-related element.” Estimates suggest that the proposed change could impact 750,000 people by 2030.
The injustice of such a two-tier system is evident: The additional costs for the support needed to perform everyday tasks will not miraculously halve for people who make claims after 2026. There are also real concerns that the bill, as currently worded, could also mean that current claimants who start working – only to later make a new Universal Credit claim – could end upgetting half the support.
Despite the hardship and misery it will cause for tens of thousands of claimants with disabilities and health conditions, independent calculations show that the bill won’t even save money.
Social security is a human right; genuine reform should guarantee the right to an adequate standard of living, and should ensure that there are no arbitrary inequalities baked into the system. Reform also requires consideration of linkages with public health provision, including mental health, and levels of social care.
This bill fails on all those counts. The government should scrap it.
A Year On, Guinean Activists Still Missing
(Nairobi) – Guinea’s military authorities should credibly investigate the disappearances of two political activists, make their whereabouts known, and either charge them with a recognizable crime or release them immediately, Human Rights Watch said today.
One year ago, security forces arbitrarily detained three members of the opposition coalition National Front for the Defense of the Constitution (Front National pour la Défense de la Constitution, FNDC), Oumar Sylla (known as Foniké Menguè), Mamadou Billo Bah, and Mohamed Cissé, in Conakry, Guinea’s capital, and transferred them to an unidentified location. Human Rights Watch received credible information, confirmed by national and international media, that security forces had tortured the three men. Cissé was released on July 10, 2024, while Sylla and Bah remain missing.
“It’s been one year since Sylla and Bah went missing, and the Guinean authorities have yet to carry out a credible investigation,” said Ilaria Allegrozzi, senior Sahel researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Guinean authorities should thoroughly and independently investigate the disappearances and prosecute those responsible.”
The authorities have opened an investigation into the disappearance of the three men. But they have denied any responsibility and failed to acknowledge the men’s detention or disclose their whereabouts, despite requests for information by lawyers representing the men, and by international and national human rights organizations.
On July 9, 2024, dozens of soldiers, gendarmes, and armed men in civilian clothes, stormed Sylla’s home and arbitrarily detained him and the others. The security forces repeatedly beat the three political activists, then took them to the gendarmerie headquarters in Conakry, and then to an army camp on Kassa island, off Conakry’s coast.
The FNDC has been calling for the restoration of democratic rule in Guinea following a military coup in September 2021. In August 2022, Guinea’s junta, headed by Gen. Mamady Doumbouya, dissolved the FNDC on politically motivated grounds, but it has continued its activities.
On the morning of his disappearance, Sylla, who is the FNDC coordinator, had urged his supporters to go out and protest on July 11, 2024, against media shutdowns by the authorities and the high cost of living.
Sylla was one of a number of people arrested in 2022 on charges of “illegal protest and destruction of public and private buildings” following violent demonstrations in Conakry in which at least five people were killed. Bah, the FNDC outreach coordinator, was previously arrested in January 2023 on charges of “complicity in the destruction of public and private property, assault, and battery” for taking part in protests. Both were released in May 2023 and cleared of all charges.
Since taking power, the junta has suspended independent media outlets, arbitrarily arrested and forcibly disappeared journalists and political opponents. Security forces have used excessive force, including tear gas and gunfire, to disperse peaceful protesters, leading to dozens of deaths since January 2024.
On June 21, gunmen abducted and tortured Mohamed Traoré, a prominent lawyer and former bar association president, in apparent reprisal against his decision to resign from the National Transitional Council, the junta’s leading transitional body.
The military authorities promised to hold elections before the end of 2024, but failed to meet the deadline, sparking opposition-led protests in Conakry in January. Following the protests, officials announced a new election timeline. Gen. Doumbouya has set September 21 as the date for a constitutional referendum and Prime Minister Amadou Oury Bah announced in May that presidential elections would take place in December.
“Four years into military rule, the suppression of rights and freedoms has only intensified,” said a prominent FNDC member who is in hiding. “The government has stifled free expression and assembly; it has incapacitated the political opposition through arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearance, harassment, and intimidation. Enough is enough.”
Enforced disappearances under international law occur when people acting on behalf of the government arrest, detain, or abduct people and then refuse to acknowledge the act or conceal their whereabouts or what happened to them. International law prohibits enforced disappearances, which violate fundamental rights to liberty and security and the right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
The International Convention for the Protection on All Persons from Enforced Disappearances provides that “no one shall be subjected to enforced disappearance” and imposes an absolute ban on secret detention. It also requires countries to end abusive practices that facilitate enforced disappearances including arbitrary incommunicado detention, torture, and extrajudicial executions.
Guinea is not a party to the treaty but is still bound by international human rights law prohibiting unlawful arrests, abduction, arbitrary detention, ill-treatment of detainees, and other due process violations. It guarantees victims of abuse the right to an effective remedy.
“When authorities deny knowledge of the detentions, they deprive detainees of any protections and make them vulnerable to even worse crimes, like torture,” Allegrozzi said. “The authorities should take immediate, concrete steps by credibly investigating the disappearances and ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.”
South Korea: Older Workers’ Low-Paid, Precarious Work
(Seoul) – South Korea’s age-based employment laws and policies discriminate against older workers, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The country’s inadequate social security system compounds the challenges that older people face.
The 72-page report, “Punished for Getting Older: South Korea’s Age-based Policies and Older Workers’ Rights,” documents how three age-based employment laws and policies – the mandatory retirement age of 60 or older, the “peak wage” system, and re-employment policies – harm older workers, and how inadequate social security programs exacerbate their situation.
July 8, 2025 Punished For Getting Older“South Korea’s laws and policies to protect older workers from age discrimination actually do the exact opposite,” said Bridget Sleap, senior researcher on the rights of older people at Human Rights Watch. “They deny older workers the opportunity to continue working in their main jobs, pay them less, and push them into lower-paid, precarious work, all just because of their age. The government should stop punishing workers for getting older.”
Between February and September 2024, Human Rights Watch interviewed 34 South Korean workers, ages 42 to 72, who worked in Seoul in the public and private sectors. Human Rights Watch also consulted 41 South Korean researchers, union workers, a journalist, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations, and reviewed national legislation and reports in Korean and English by the government, academics, workers’ associations, the media, and international institutions.
The South Korean law prohibiting age discrimination in employment, the Act on Prohibition of Age Discrimination in Employment and Elderly Employment Promotion, allows public and private sector employers to adopt a mandatory retirement age of 60 or older, regardless of a worker’s job skills. The use of mandatory retirement ages is widespread in the public sector and large companies with more than 300 employees.
Human Rights Watch found that the “peak wage” system, which permits employers to reduce older workers’ wages during the three to five years preceding their mandatory retirement, causes financial and mental harm and is based on an ageist stereotype. The system can negatively affect other financial entitlements as well, such as pension contributions, severance pay, and unemployment payments.
The employer of a 59-year-old man interviewed mandates that he must retire in a year. When he retires, he will earn just 52 percent of what he earned at 55. “It is discrimination because our income has been reduced because of our age,” he said. “It is not justified.”
Human Rights Watch found that being forced to retire also harmed older workers’ mental health and well-being.
A 59-year-old nurse, who will be forced to retire at 60 after working for 36 years, said: “I can’t imagine myself being out of this organization. It would feel like standing by myself on a windy road.”
Under international human rights law, treating people differently based on a prohibited ground, such as age, must pass a justification test to ensure the treatment has a legitimate aim and is both proportionate and necessary. But under South Korean law, mandatory retirement ages do not require justification, and older workers cannot challenge them as discrimination.
Human Rights Watch found that South Korea’s age-based laws and policies do constitute discrimination. The mandatory retirement age and peak wage system’s respective aims are to keep older workers in their main jobs until at least age 60, and to finance the employment of younger workers. However, the harm to older workers outweighs any benefits.
The government could use less harmful methods to achieve its aims, including professional development to enhance older workers’ skills and subsidizing employers to hire younger workers. While these policies affect all older workers, they have a disproportionate impact on women, who often have less opportunity over the course of their careers to achieve seniority, high salaries, and ample savings and pensions.
Under the domestic law prohibiting age discrimination in employment, local and state governments in South Korea have a responsibility to support older workers’ re-employment after retirement from their main jobs. This is not a solution though, as Human Rights Watch found that existing re-employment programs force older workers into lower-paid, more precarious work.
On average, workers 60 and older earn 29 percent less than younger workers, based on government data. Moreover, re-employed older workers are concentrated in low-paid occupations, such as security guards and care workers, that younger people do not want. Such age-based “occupational segregation” is a form of discrimination.
Click to expand Image © 2025 Human Rights WatchThese problems are exacerbated by an inadequate social security system that does not meet human rights standards, Human Rights Watch said. People forced to retire at 60 are only entitled to an unemployment benefit for up to 270 days but may wait up to five years before they are eligible at age 65 for the National Old Age Pension or Basic Pension. In 2023, only 40 percent of people 60 and older received a National Old Age Pension.
South Korea is obligated under international human rights law to ensure that everyone can enjoy their rights to nondiscrimination, work, and social security, regardless of age. The South Korean government should abolish the mandatory retirement age of 60 or older and peak wage system. It should also review re-employment and social security programs to ensure that older people have equal access to just, favorable, and meaningful employment opportunities and at least a living wage.
“South Korea’s age-based employment laws and policies discriminate against older people and future generations,” Sleap said. “The government needs to adopt a comprehensive anti-discrimination law to fight all forms of discrimination, including age discrimination and ageism.”
UN Funding Crisis Threatens Work of Human Rights Council
Today, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) expressed concern at the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ announcement that certain activities mandated by the council cannot be delivered due to a lack of funding. The council has sought clarity on why certain activities had been singled out.
Among the activities the commissioner says can’t be delivered is the commission of inquiry on grave abuses in Eastern Congo, an important initiative created—at least on paper—at an emergency session of the HRC in February in response to an appeal by Congolese, regional, and international rights groups. The establishment of the commission offered a glimmer of hope in the face of grave and ongoing atrocities in the region, and it was hoped it might be an important step toward ending the cycle of abuse and impunity and delivering justice and reparations for victims and survivors.
It is not only the activities highlighted by the commissioner that are impacted by the funding crisis, however. Virtually all the HRC’s work has been affected, with investigations into rights abuses—for example in Sudan, Palestine, and Ukraine—reportedly operating at approximately 30-60 percent of capacity.
In discussions about the proposed cuts, several states—notably those credibly accused of rights abuses—have sought to use the financial crisis as cover to attack the council’s country-focused investigative mandates or undermine the Office of the High Commissioner’s broader work and independence. For example, Eritrea invoked the crisis in its ultimately unsuccessful effort to end council scrutiny of its own dismal rights record.
Amid discussions on the current crisis, there has been little reflection among states on how the UN got into this mess. States failing to pay their membership contributions, or failing to pay on time, has compounded the chronic underfunding of the UN’s human rights pillar over decades.
The United States’ failure to pay virtually anything at the moment, followed by China’s late payments, bear the greatest responsibility for the current financial shortfall given their contributions account for nearly half of the UN’s budget.
But they are not alone: 79 countries reportedly still haven’t paid their fees for 2025 (expected in February). Among those that haven’t yet paid this year are Eritrea, Iran, Cuba, Russia, and others that have used the crisis to take aim at the council’s country mandates or to undermine the work or independence of the high commissioner’s office.
Rather than seeking to meddle in the office’s work or reduce the HRC’s scrutiny of crises, states should work with the UN to ensure funds are available for at least partial delivery of all activities they mandate through the council, particularly in emergencies.
Urgent investigations into situations of mass atrocities are key tools for prevention, protection, and supporting access to justice. They cannot wait until the financial crisis blows over.
Peru: Congress Undermines Fight against Organized Crime
(Lima) – Peru’s Congress is undermining the independence and capacity of judges and prosecutors to fight organized crime, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
July 8, 2025 Congress in CahootsThe 43-page report, “Congress in Cahoots: How Peru’s Legislature is Allowing Organized Crime to Thrive,” details how recent legislative actions and decisions by Congress have undermined efforts to investigate and prosecute criminal networks, eroded the autonomy of key public institutions, and rolled back environmental protections. President Dina Boluarte’s administration has often enabled this agenda, while relying heavily on declaring “states of emergency” – which suspend constitutional rights – as its primary crime-fighting tool.
“Congress’ assault on the rule of law has left millions of Peruvians more exposed to the threats of organized crime,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “Congress and the Boluarte administration should urgently reverse course and take effective steps to protect the rights of all Peruvians.”
Between September 2023 and December 2024, Human Rights Watch interviewed 125 prosecutors, judges, police officers, environmental defenders, Indigenous leaders, journalists, and government officials. Researchers visited Lima, Puerto Maldonado, Pucallpa, and Trujillo, and reviewed 34 laws, bills, and legislative decisions passed by Congress and 54 presidential decrees issued since 2023.
Peru’s security situation has worsened in recent years. The annual number of homicides rose by almost 137 percent between 2018 and 2024, according to police data, and preliminary figures for 2025 suggest another record year. Over half of the 2024 homicides were committed by contract killers, according to the police. Extortion complaints – particularly affecting urban areas and cargo transport – peaked in 2023, remained high in 2024, and may hit a new record in 2025.
Click to expand Image © 2025 Human Rights WatchCongress, more than half of whose lawmakers are facing investigations for corruption or other crimes, has taken steps to undermine the independence and capacity of courts and prosecutors. It has sharply limited prosecutors’ ability to obtain evidence and investigative leads from defendants willing to cooperate, a significant blow to efforts to dismantle criminal groups and detect connections to corrupt officials. It has modified the definition of “organized crime” in the criminal code to exclude many corruption offenses, while putting obstacles in the way of investigative searches. Moreover, lawmakers have arbitrarily removed high-level judges and prosecutors, often in ways that blocked investigations into corruption.
“An effective and rights-respecting security policy for Peru requires strengthening, not weakening, the tools forensic experts, prosecutors, and judges need to seek justice for victims of organized crime,” Goebertus said.
Congress has also passed laws that undermine environmental protections, including by retroactively legalizing the illegal deforestation of large areas and effectively shielding illegal miners from prosecution. Illegal mining, mostly gold and on a small scale, has surged in recent years, and is the largest offense leading to money laundering, according to government data.
While small-scale mining can be an important source of income for the poor, it also carries significant environmental, health, and labor rights risks when not subject to robust regulation and oversight. Nearly half of all attacks on environmental defenders and Indigenous leaders from 2020 to 2023 were linked to illegal mining, the Ombudsperson’s Office reported.
“The number of hectares affected by illegal mining continues to rise year after year, with no reaction from the state, bringing related crimes such as trafficking, rape, and homicide to these areas,” a high-rank prosecutor in the Peruvian Amazon told Human Rights Watch.
President Boluarte has increasingly relied on states of emergency to address crime, suspending constitutional rights in affected areas. However, these measures have not led to a reduction in violence.
Recent legislative actions have also threatened to severely restrict the work of independent journalists and civil society organizations in Peru. In March 2025, Congress passed a bill that significantly expands the government’s authority over journalists and nongovernmental organizations that receive foreign funding.
Peru is currently seeking membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a group of mostly high-income countries that promotes policies to improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world. More than a dozen OECD committees are reviewing Peru’s compliance with standards on public governance, environmental policy, and the rule of law.
“The OECD should secure commitments from Peruvian authorities to remove obstacles in the fight against organized crime, environmental destruction, and corruption, and to guarantee separation of powers,” Goebertus said.
272 Million Children out of School a Major Wake Up Call
Last week in Sevilla, Spain, governments gathered at the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development. Among key outcomes was the Compromiso de Sevilla, which received mixed feedback. It includes a pledge to “support adequate financing to ensure inclusive, equitable, and quality education for all.”
Just days before the conference, experts warned of declining national spending on education and significant cuts by donor governments to global education overseas assistance, including critical funding for humanitarian education responses.
The most recent global education data underscores the direct impact governments’ financing decisions have had on children’s lives: 272 million children and youth – 139 million boys and 133 million girls – are estimated to be out of primary and secondary school, with nearly 200 million out of secondary school globally. This represents an estimated increase of 21 million children out of school in 2023.
Yet even this stark figure understates the crisis. UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics and the Global Education Monitoring Report estimated 13 million children to be out of school in conflict-affected areas. Factoring in all children out of school due to armed conflict from Gaza to Sudan would bring the total out-of-school population closer to 285 million.
Global education exclusion rates are, in fact, higher: current global out of school estimates don’t count an additional 175 million unenrolled preschool-aged children, who are not benefiting from all-important early childhood education.
Chronic underfunding compounds many of the entrenched barriers and discrimination faced by millions of children. Without spending adequate resources, governments cannot deliver fully free public education, struggle to build and equip schools and provide quality learning materials, fail to attract and train qualified teachers, or adapt education systems to respond adequately to all emergencies.
All governments should honor their Seville pledges by taking real action.
Tackling the global education crisis requires governments to keenly protect public education budgets from regressive austerity measures and cuts, and allocate resources commensurate with their obligations to guarantee the right to education and commitment to create access to free, quality public education for all. They should meet internationally agreed education funding benchmarks to increase education spending to at least 4 to 6 percent of gross domestic product and/or at least 15 to 20 percent of total public expenditure.
Donor governments should especially recommit to funding education in line with overseas aid commitments and human rights obligations to provide international assistance and cooperation.
All governments should step up, not step away from their education funding commitments.
Prominent Activist Remains Detained in Niger
On July 4, a court in Niger’s capital, Niamey, rejected an appeal filed by prominent human rights activist and government critic Moussa Tiangari. Held in detention since December 2024, the appeal was Tiangari’s third attempt to get the politically motivated case against him tossed out.
Click to expand Image Moussa Tiangari, Niamey, Niger, June 2024. © 2024 Amnesty InternationalTiangari, 55, is the secretary general of the civil society organization Citizens Alternative Spaces (Alternative Espaces Citoyens, AEC). He was arrested at his home in Niamey on December 3, 2024, and his whereabouts were unknown for two days. On December 5, he was located at Niger’s Central Service for Combating Terrorism and Organized Transnational Crime.
A month later on January 3, 2025, the Niamey High Court charged Tiangari with “criminal conspiracy in connection with a terrorist enterprise” and “plotting against the authority of the state through intelligence with enemy powers,” among other offenses. If convicted of plotting with enemy powers, he could face the death penalty. Since then, he remains in pretrial detention and has not had his case come before a judge.
The court’s decision last week to keep Tiangari in detention comes just days after Niger’s interior minister banned a series of seminars on the right to food planned by AEC across Niger. Over 2.2 million people in Niger face acute food insecurity this year due to conflict, climate shocks, and soaring prices, according to the United Nations. The interior minister did not provide any reasons behind the ban.
Since it took power in a coup in July 2023, Niger’s military junta has cracked down on the opposition, media, and civil society. Former President Mohamed Bazoum and his wife have been arbitrarily detained for politically motivated reasons in Niamey since the coup. On May 31, the junta expelled the International Committee of the Red Cross—which was doing crucial humanitarian work—from the country, accusing the organization of “collusion” with armed groups.
Tiangari doesn’t belong in prison. He should be released, and the authorities should drop all charges against him. The authorities should further release all those arbitrarily arrested and stop their assault on civil society.
Inter-American Court Says Countries Must Prevent Climate Harms
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued an opinion on July 3, 2025, that countries must protect the climate system as part of their human rights obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights and other human rights law. It said that the climate crisis affects numerous human rights of individuals and communities, including Indigenous peoples, afro descendant, rural communities, and children, which must be protected under a high degree of care.
The Court underscored that its decision is applicable to all 34 countries that form the Organization of American States, including the United States and Canada. According to the court, preventing harm to the climate system is a global legal obligation, incumbent upon all states, which requires banning activities “that irreversibly threaten the vital balance of interdependent ecosystems that enable the survival of present and future generations on a habitable planet.”
The long-anticipated Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights was requested by Chile and Colombia in 2023. They asked the court to clarify states’ obligations under the American Convention, the San Salvador Protocol to that treaty, and other regional treaties.
The court said that countries need to adopt concrete, science-based measures to progressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels, agriculture, and deforestation. The court also said that governments need to hold polluters to account, adopt and implement mitigation and adaptation targets and strategies, and ensure that individuals and communities disproportionately affected by climate change can meaningfully participate in making climate policy.
In the context of communities considering relocation because of sea level rise and climate impacts, governments need to approach planned relocation as a measure of last resort, “in accordance with international and regional human rights standards,” and avoid reproducing cycles of dispossession.
Advisory Opinions in the Inter-American System carry significant political and legal weight. At the national level, the court’s opinion may help drive new climate commitments and ensure people can influence these decisions through meaningful participation. The decision explicitly demands that state authorities must ensure the compatibility of their climate policies with the Opinion. This is especially important since most countries in the region are yet to update their climate mitigation commitments.
The Americas already faces severe human rights threats due to climate change, affecting the Amazon, island territories, and Caribbean states. Human Rights Watch has previously documented that poor government regulation of harmful industries enables deforestation and burning fossil fuels, the main drivers of the greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming, with devastating effects for Indigenous peoples, forest dependent communities, and communities on the fence lines (that is, adjacent) to fossil fuel infrastructure.