Secondary menu
Feed aggregator
EU Should Defend the ICC
(Brussels) – The European Union should defend the International Criminal Court (ICC) amid serious attacks on its mandate and mission, 58 nongovernmental groups said today. These attacks could undermine justice for victims of serious international crimes around the world, making urgent EU action to uphold the international rules-based order.
The ICC is the cornerstone of a broader system for accountability, acting as a court of last resort when other avenues to justice are blocked. The recent arrest and transfer of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte to face a charge of crimes against humanity before the ICC reaffirms the Court’s relevance and underscores its significance in ensuring accountability for the most serious crimes.
The EU and its member states have long been strong advocates for the ICC and have made legally binding commitments to promote the universality and integrity of the Rome Statute, the Court’s founding treaty. The EU has pledged to support the ICC’s independence, cooperation with the Court, and the implementation of the principle of complementarity, which ensures that the ICC acts only when national authorities do not genuinely investigate and prosecute, as appropriate, international crimes. This firm support has been essential to the ICC’s functioning since its establishment more than 20 years ago.
US President Donald Trump issued an executive order on February 6, 2025, authorizing the use of asset freezes and entry bans on ICC officials and others supporting the Court’s work. US sanctions targeting the ICC are an affront to victims and their families. Sanctions are never meant for prosecutors, judges, and others pursuing independent and impartial justice for core international crimes.
The US designated ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan for sanctions under the February 6 order and could issue additional designations in a bid to undermine ICC investigations it opposes. US financial sanctions have serious effects that go far beyond those targeted, and could result in the Court losing access to essential services necessary to carry out its mandate. The order appears designed not only to intimidate Court officials and staff involved in the Court’s critical investigations, but also to have a chilling effect on broader cooperation with the ICC, including by civil society organizations supporting victims.
While most EU member states have condemned the US sanctions in national and joint statements, the EU as a whole has yet to express its opposition in an official statement, in stark contrast to its clear positions following the imposition of similar sanctions by the first Trump administration in 2020. Expression of support for the ICC’s mandate is welcome, but the EU should also clearly denounce US sanctions on the Court, signal that they will not go unaddressed, and call on the US to rescind the executive order.
The EU should, without further delay, make use of the Blocking Statute to counter the US sanctions. This instrument aims to shield European operators from the effects of extraterritorial sanctions and could help ensure that the Court’s work can continue unaffected. The European Commission, the European External Action Service, and EU member states should also develop other measures to mitigate the impact of the sanctions on the ICC. The Court, the European Parliament, a number of EU member states, and civil society have already urged the European Commission to activate the Blocking Statute.
These are only some of the many threats facing the ICC, as well as human rights defenders advocating for justice before the Court. ICC officials face arrest warrants issued by the Russian Federation in retaliation for the Court’s decision to issue an arrest warrant against President Vladimir Putin for alleged war crimes in Ukraine. Meanwhile, legislation criminalizing cooperation with the Court has already been enacted in Russia and is under consideration by Israeli authorities. Moreover, the Court is still dealing with the aftermath of a sophisticated cyberattack that took place in 2023 and there are allegations that Israel carried out a nine-year espionage campaign on the Court.
Overcoming these threats to justice also requires EU member states to show they are steadfast in their own obligations under the Rome Statute, the groups said. In September, the EU rightly condemned Mongolia’s breach of its obligation as an ICC member country to arrest Putin.
On April 2, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began a visit to Hungary at the invitation of Hungary’s prime minister. The Hungarian government announced the following day that it would seek to begin the legislative process to withdraw the country from the ICC. As of April 4, Hungary had failed to arrest and surrender him to the ICC, disregarding an ICC warrant against him for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza and its ICC obligations.
Regrettably, officials from the governments of several other European Union member states, including France, Poland, Italy, Romania, and Germany have recently explicitly said that they would not uphold their obligations or failed to commit to enforce the court’s warrant. Italy has also returned an ICC fugitive to Libya, apparently flouting its obligation to arrest and surrender him to the ICC.
Without cooperation and arrests, there can be no justice before the ICC. Ambivalent or even negative signals about the validity of ICC decisions erode EU law, practice, and commitment to international justice and display regrettable selectivity, sending the message that the rule of law is for some, but not all.
The groups called on EU actors to take decisive action to reaffirm their commitment to and protection of the international rule-of-law, as follows:
The EU leadership, including Commission President von der Leyen, High Representative Kallas, and Council President Costa should urge governments across the EU to respect the EU’s position on the ICC, including on cooperation, universality of the Rome Statute, and safeguarding the independence of the Court, and respect their obligations to protect, uphold, and enforce the Court’s decisions.The EU, in particular through High Representative Kallas as well as the EU Council should publicly condemn the US sanctions against the ICC and reaffirm their unwavering support for the Court and its independence and urge the US to rescind the executive order authorizing sanctions.The EU Commission should also swiftly make use of the EU Blocking Statute by adding to it the US executive order authorizing ICC-related sanctions and develop any additional measures to protect the Court and counteract the chilling effect of sanctions on those cooperating with the Court.EU member states should unequivocally affirm they will enforce all their legal obligations under the Rome Statute, including executing all ICC arrest warrants, in all situations before the Court. EU leadership should spare no efforts in reminding member states of their legal obligations to cooperate with the ICC, and act to prevent and respond to any instance of noncooperation with the ICC.The supporting organizations are:
11.11.11
ACT Alliance EU
Adala For All
Advocates for the Future
Al Mezan Center for Human Rights
Al-Haq
Al-Haq Europe
Aman Against Discrimination - AAD
Amnesty International
Armanshahr|OPEN ASIA
Avocats Sans Frontières
Bir Duino Kyrgyzstan
Broederlijk Delen
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
CCFD-Terre Solidaire
Center for Constitutional Rights
CIDSE – International family of Catholic social justice organisations
CNCD-11.11.11
Coalition Française pour la Cour pénale internationale (CFCPI)
Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ)
Committee to Protect Journalists
DIGNITY - Danish Institute Against Torture
Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR)
Entraide et Fraternité
EuroMed Rights
European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, ECCHR
Foundation Sunflowers
Fundación Chile Sin Ecocidio
Fundación Internacional Baltasar Garzón –FIBGAR–
Global Initiative Against Impunity for International Crimes and Serious Human Rights Violations
Human Rights House Foundation
Human Rights Watch
Human Rights Without Frontiers
Institute for Environmental Security
International Commission of Jurists
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH)
MEDEL (Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les libertés)
Netherlands Helsinki Committee
No Peace Without Justice
Nürnberger Menschenrechtszentrum
Parliamentarians for Global Action
Pax Christi International
Platform for Peace and Humanity
Protection International
REDRESS
Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF) / Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
SOLIDAR
Stichting Stop Ecocide NL
Stop Ecocide Foundation
Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society
Syndicat de la magistrature
Synergy for Justice Stichting
The Finnish League for Human Rights
United Nations Association of Sweden
Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice
Young European Federalists - JEF Europe
Niger Junta’s Release of Detainees Falls Short
This week, Niger’s military junta released about 50 people from prison, including several former government officials, military officers, and a journalist who had been arrested following the July 2023 coup. Several others still languish behind bars on politically motivated charges, most notably former president Mohamed Bazoum and his wife.
The decision to release the prisoners followed recommendations by a national commission that represented participants to the February talks on the country’s transition to democratic rule. The release comes days after junta leader Abdourahamane Tiani was sworn in as Niger’s president for the next five years. All political parties have been dissolved.
Among those released are several of Bazoum’s ministers, including Mahamane Sani Issoufou, former oil minister, and Kalla Moutari, former defense minister, as well as Foumakoye Gado, secretary general of the former ruling party, the Nigerien Party for Democracy and Socialism (Parti Nigerien pour la Democratie et le Socialisme, PNDS-Tarayya), and journalist Ousmane Toudou.
Since the coup, the military junta has cracked down on the opposition, media, and peaceful dissent. The authorities have arbitrarily arrested several officials from the ousted government and people close to the deposed president, denying them due process and fair trial rights. The intelligences services detained many in secret before transferring them to high-security prisons on fabricated charges, including “threatening state security.” They have been brought before military courts, despite being civilians.
Bazoum and his wife remain in detention at the presidential palace in the capital, Niamey. In February, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, an independent expert body that investigates cases of deprivation of liberty, found that the detention of Bazoum and his wife was in violation of international human rights law, and called for their immediate release.
The prominent human rights activist and critic of the junta Moussa Tiangari, who was arbitrarily arrested in December 2024, also remains in detention on terrorism-related charges.
The junta’s release of former officials wrongfully held is a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done. Nigerien authorities should free all those, including Bazoum and his wife, who have not been credibly charged with recognizable crimes, and opposition figures and activists who have been targeted because of their political views. And the junta needs to recognize the rights to free expression, association, and peaceful assembly.
South Korea Court Removes President Yoon from Office
(New York) – The Constitutional Court of Korea ruled on April 4, 2025, to uphold the impeachment of South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk-yeol, and remove him from office for imposing martial law on December 3, 2024.
Yoon and several of his former senior officials still face criminal charges for insurrection related to their actions in December.
The following quote can be attributed to Lina Yoon, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch:
“Former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol’s attempt to impose martial law in December 2024 posed a grave threat to human rights and the rule of law. If martial law had been maintained, South Koreans would have faced the risk of arrest and detention without trial as well as severe restrictions on their freedom of expression and assembly, among other human rights violations. The Constitutional Court’s ruling was a decisive step to uphold human rights protections and democratic values.”
German Proposal to Strip Citizenship Endangers Human Rights
A leaked paper reveals that Germany’s conservative political parties, the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU), want to add a clause to Germany’s Nationality Law to allow the country to revoke German nationality from dual nationals if they are deemed “supporters of terrorism, antisemites and extremists.”
The proposal does not define who would be considered an “antisemite,” a “terrorist supporter,” or an “extremist.” None of the terms are defined in any offenses in the criminal law, and it is unclear what, if any, safeguards would exist to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory application, and violations of human rights.
This comes against the backdrop of Germany’s restrictions against pro-Palestine solidarity and a recent, widely-criticized parliamentary resolution on antisemitism that threatens human rights in Germany.
The leaked working group paper on migration stems from negotiations between the CDU/CSU and Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), seeking to form Germany’s next coalition government. The proposal carries serious risks for rights, such as freedom of expression, and risks fomenting discrimination. So far, the SPD has not agreed to this proposal and had previously opposed it.
Critics of the CDU/CSU proposal have rightly criticized it for appearing to instrumentalize German citizenship to pursue a political agenda based on subjective assessments of wrongdoing. The threat of German citizens being stripped of their citizenship for political opinions – for example, for expressing views about the war in Gaza – risks creating a chilling effect to quash views unpopular with the government.
While international law treats citizenship as a state’s prerogative, except where it leads to statelessness, withdrawal should not be arbitrary and only occur in exceptional and narrowly defined cases. Moreover, Germany has clear obligations under international and German constitutional law to protect freedom of expression and to avoid discrimination.
Article 16 of Germany's Constitution, the Basic Law, stipulates that “[n]o German may be deprived of his citizenship,” a clause that was introduced in response to the Nazi’s persecution of Jews and critics of the Nazi regime who were stripped of their German citizenship based on racial, religious, and political grounds. Germany’s reformed Nationality Law provides for very exceptional circumstances where citizenship can be lost, e.g. for joining a terrorist organization.
The SPD and other parties in parliament should reject the CDU/CSU proposal, which would foment division and discrimination. Instead, parties should ensure all German citizens have equal rights under the law.
Iran: UN Expands Investigations into Rights Violations
(Geneva) – The United Nations Human Rights Council’s adoption of a resolution to continue the Fact-Finding Mission on Iran and significantly broaden the scope of its investigations is a crucial step for tackling the deepening crisis of impunity in Iran, Human Rights Watch said today.
The Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, advocated for by a large number of human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, was originally established amid the deadly state crackdown on the Woman, Life, Freedom protests of 2022. The mission will now have the mandate to monitor and investigate allegations of recent and ongoing serious human rights violations; establish the facts, circumstances, and structural causes of such violations; and collect, consolidate, analyze, and preserve evidence of violations with a view to facilitate future legal proceedings.
“The council’s decision, supported by 24 states from all regions of the world, sends a strong signal that the impunity gap that enables gross violations of human rights and crimes under international law in Iran is increasingly closing,” said Bahar Saba, senior Iran researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The resolution ensures continued international scrutiny as well as collection and preservation of evidence to facilitate future prosecutions of perpetrators of crimes under international law, at all levels.”
In its March 2025 report, the fact-finding mission found that gross violations of human rights, some of which it found amount to crimes against humanity, are ongoing and recommended continuing investigations into the country’s human rights situation.
The extension and expansion of the fact-finding mission illustrates growing international recognition of the need to tackle systematic and structural impunity for human rights violations and crimes under international law, which has fueled cycles of state violence in Iran for decades. The mandate will be instrumental in holding perpetrators to account and supporting ongoing efforts by survivors, victims, and their families for their rights to truth, justice, and reparations.
The Human Rights Council also renewed the mandate of the special rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran, who has played a critical role in responding to the human rights situation in Iran, including by issuing urgent appeals to protect people at risk, in particular those at imminent risk of execution
The Human Rights Council resolution further drew attention to the dire human rights situation in Iran, which necessitates continued scrutiny. This included the ongoing surge in executions, the widespread violence and discrimination in law and practice against women and girls and persons belonging to ethnic, linguistic, and recognized or unrecognized religious or belief minorities, and the absence of accountability in Iran. It called on Iran’s authorities to cooperate fully with both the special rapporteur and the fact-finding mission, including by granting them unhindered access to the country.
States Take Steps Toward Reforming Economic Approaches with Rights
On April 3, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted by consensus a resolution about “the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights”. This year’s text focuses on the importance of development financing in fulfilling these rights.
The resolution, which has been adopted regularly since 2007, addresses for the first time key issues in global economic debates, such as international tax cooperation, debt, public services, and climate finance. These topics, relevant for the realization of rights everywhere, are particularly important to countries in the Global South which are primarily affected by the structural inequalities in a global economic system designed to favor wealthier states.
The broad engagement by UN member states during the resolution’s negotiation and its adoption by consensus show the topic’s importance and the capacity of states to come together to build common language on human rights and economic justice amidst global geopolitical tensions, as Human Rights Watch highlighted in its statement to the Council.
The resolution identifies how human rights should underpin the international financial architecture’s reform, stressing the need for structural change rather than marginal fixes. For example, it recognizes “the importance of ensuring that commitments arising from public and foreign debt do not impede States’ abilities to meet their obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights”. It also calls for economic policies that “advance the realization of human rights for all,” including by “promoting inclusive and effective international tax cooperation […] and to continue to engage constructively in the process towards developing a United Nations framework convention on international tax cooperation” that considers economic, social, and cultural rights.
The resolution contributes to a growing body of intergovernmental statements outlining the need to build human rights economies, which put people and the planet at the center of economic policy making, as called for in a recent joint statement delivered by Honduras on behalf of a group of countries during the Council session.
It will now be critical for states to champion the language agreed to in this resolution at other major intergovernmental meetings this year, including the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (in June), the Second World Social Summit for Social Development, and COP30 (both in November) and to demonstrate how rights can help make economic systems fairer.
UN: Treaty on Older People’s Rights Moves Ahead
(Geneva, April 3, 2025) – The United Nations Human Rights Council on April 3, 2025, began an intergovernmental process to draft an international human rights treaty on older people, Human Rights Watch said today. The consensus resolution is an important victory for human rights and multilateralism at a moment of increasing international uncertainty.
Older people around the world experience a wide range of human rights violations on a daily basis. They include violence and mistreatment; age-based discrimination; social, economic, and political exclusion; denial of access to care and support services; inadequate social security; exclusion from climate change responses; and abuses in armed conflict.
“The UN Human Rights Council’s decision to pursue an international treaty on the rights of older people is a landmark victory not just for older people, but for everyone,” said Bridget Sleap, senior researcher on the rights of older people at Human Rights Watch. “State support for this treaty is an important endorsement of the multilateral human rights system.”
Significant protection gaps for older people remain in the current international human rights framework. Years of advocacy by older people and civil society groups, notably the Global Alliance for the Rights of Older People (GAROP), led to this historic UN action. GAROP, a global network of more than 400 civil society organizations, including Human Rights Watch, has campaigned since 2011 to strengthen the rights and voice of older people all over the world.
In 2024, after 14 sessions, a dedicated UN Working Group on Ageing acknowledged existing gaps and highlighted the need to address them including through a new UN treaty, laying the foundation for the Human Rights Council’s action.
Older people and civil society organizations have engaged over more than a decade in UN processes, both in New York and Geneva, to gain support for a new international treaty. A group of countries consisting of Argentina, Brazil, Gambia, the Philippines, and Slovenia, listened to older people and civil society, and pushed this initiative forward at the Human Rights Council, the UN’s preeminent human rights body.
The first meeting of the intergovernmental working group is scheduled to take place before the end of 2025. The working group, which all UN member countries may join, should now proceed quickly and ensure meaningful participation and engagement from stakeholders, especially older people and their representative organizations from all regions of the world.
“Human rights last a lifetime, and rights in older age should be guaranteed as at any other time in our lives,” Sleap said. “Ageism, age discrimination, and violation of older people’s rights demand the same degree of attention and protection in the international human rights system as any other rights abuses. The fruits of decades of discussions and advocacy have brought us here, but much work lies ahead.”
US: End Campaign of Draconian Campus Arrests
(Washington, DC) – The US government should end its sweeping effort to arbitrarily arrest and deport international students and scholars in retaliation for their political viewpoints and activism related to Palestine, Human Rights Watch said today. The administration’s statements and actions reveal that its justifications for the arrests and planned deportations are illegitimate and false.
The recent spate of arrests is part of a wider crackdown on noncitizen students and academics. The administration, which seeks to punish and deter Palestine activism on university campuses across the country, also says it has revoked hundreds of student visas. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claims, without any credible explanation, that students’ and scholars’ activism is harmful to US foreign policy.
“The arrests and deportations of noncitizen students and scholars for expressing their political views are creating a climate of fear on campuses across the country,” said John Raphling, associate US program director at Human Rights Watch. “The Trump administration’s actions are an attack on free speech and threaten the very foundations of a free society.”
On March 25, 2025, masked federal agents wearing black hooded sweatshirts seized Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University doctoral student from Türkiye and Fulbright scholar on a student visa, from a public sidewalk near her home in a Boston suburb, and took her into custody. The federal government transported her over a thousand miles away to a detention center in Louisiana and said it intends to deport her.
DHS officials alleged that Ozturk “engaged in activities in support of Hamas,” apparently because she co-authored an opinion piece in a student newspaper calling on Tufts University to “recognize the Palestinian genocide” and divest from investments connected to Israel.
On March 8, DHS arrested and detained Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia University graduate and lawful permanent resident. Khalil was detained and slated for removal not because he is alleged to have committed any crime, but for his participation in campus protests related to the hostilities in Gaza. DHS has also sought to arrest and deport Yunseo Chung, a Columbia University undergraduate and lawful permanent resident from South Korea who has lived in the US since childhood.
Protests grew on college campuses across the US in the months following the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and Israel’s military operations in Gaza. As the death toll in Gaza soared amid grave human rights violations carried out by Israeli forces, campus protests proliferated and over 3,000 students were arrested in the spring of 2024. The protest movement emerged as a flashpoint during the 2024 presidential election.
As a candidate, Donald Trump falsely equated protests against the Israeli military’s extensive bombardment of Gaza with antisemitism and support for terrorism. He threatened “any student that protests, I throw them out of the country.” The Republican Party platform included a commitment to “[d]eport pro-Hamas radicals and make our college campuses safe and patriotic again.”
Upon taking office, President Trump said: “To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests … we will find you, and we will deport you.” Following Khalil’s arrest, the official White House X account declared “Shalom, Mahmoud” and announced a campaign against “terrorist sympathizers,” and Trump personally posted that “[t]his is the first arrest of many to come.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the administration had already canceled “hundreds” of student visas.
The Trump administration has claimed the right to revoke immigrants’ legal status based on a provision of the 1952 Immigration and Naturalization Act that allows the secretary of state to determine that a person’s presence in the country “would compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest.” The Trump administration is deploying this rationale mostly without serious explanation or individualized determination beyond citing the protest activity or political expression of the people it has targeted.
This assertion of unchecked authority fits a pattern, exemplified by the administration’s recent deportation to an El Salvadoran prison of 173 Venezuelans living in the US without a hearing under a contentious reading of the Alien Enemies Act of 1789. The administration claims that under this act, it can remove any Venezuelan citizens it deems to be members of a gang called Tren de Aragua, which it claims is connected to the Venezuelan government.
DHS Deputy Secretary Troy Edgar revealingly cited to “pro-Palestinian activity” as the reason for Khalil’s impending deportation and refused to answer whether protesting itself was grounds for deportation. Khalil has not been convicted of any crime or even disciplined by Columbia University, though well after his arrest, DHS said he omitted information on his green card application. Chung was once arrested then released for being present at a sit-in protest, but she has not been convicted of any crime. And Ozturk apparently did nothing more than co-author an opinion piece.
These immigration actions reflect the administration’s pattern of exerting pressure on universities to silence protests related to the ongoing hostilities in Gaza. The administration has threatened to terminate government funding and to conduct Department of Justice investigations if universities do not stop Palestine activism on campus. Officials have demanded that universities provide the names and nationalities of protesters and activists to law enforcement officials.
The US has a long and fraught history when it comes to advocacy and protest related to Palestine. The nongovernmental organization Palestine Legal has said that they responded to more than 1,700 complaints of “suppression incidents” of “speech supportive of Palestinian rights” between 2014 and 2020.
Punishing people for exercising their rights to free speech and assembly is a violation of international human rights law. Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the US ratified in 1992, noncitizens have the right to hold opinions and to express them.
These rights are especially important in an academic setting. Furthermore, the administration’s legal theories have been the basis for an attempted end-run around legal protections normally held by lawful residents facing removal from the US.
“The Trump administration is claiming the authority to punish and remove noncitizen dissenters at will, without showing any meaningful justification,” Raphling said. “These actions not only violate the rights of those being targeted, but by intimidating others into silence, they represent a much wider threat to the right to free expression.”
Argentina: Abusive Response to Protest
(Washington, DC) – Argentine authorities should investigate security forces’ use of force to confront a protest led by pensioners and review an “anti-protest” protocol that opens the door to abuse, Human Rights Watch said today.
On March 12, 2025, hundreds of pensioners gathered outside Argentina’s National Congress in Buenos Aires calling for improvements to their pensions and access to free medicines, among other demands. Hundreds of soccer fans and some “barra bravas” – hardcore supporters of particular Argentine soccer clubs who have been implicated in episodes of violent disorder –joined the protest. Some protesters committed acts of violence, including throwing stones and sidewalk debris at the police and burning police cars and garbage containers. The local government of the city of Buenos Aires said that 25 people were injured during the protest.
“There is strong evidence that members of the security forces responded with an indiscriminate and reckless use of force,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “The government should investigate and ensure accountability, instead of vilifying a judge who ruled on the protest.”
Human Rights Watch verified, geolocated, and analyzed 32 videos and photographs from the March 12 protest, sourced from television extracts, social media, and photographers’ professional portfolios. The videos and photographs show that a member of the National Gendarmerie fired a tear gas cartridge at Pablo Grillo, a freelance journalist, at 5:17 p.m. This was captured on a live television broadcast. The cartridge hit Grillo on the head, causing a severe brain injury. Human Rights Watch confirmed that the security force official shot Grillo from just over 50 meters away.
A video shows that the gendarme shot the tear gas cartridge toward Grillo at a horizontal angle. This contravenes international standards establishing that the only safe way to fire tear gas cartridges is at an arc so that they land on the ground at a slower velocity. An investigation by Mapa de la Policia, a coalition of human rights groups and investigators, also verified photographs and videos and identified the member of the gendarmerie who fired the tear gas cartridge. Grillo was taken to a hospital in critical condition. He remains in the hospital, although his condition improved in late March.
Additional videos and photographs show that in at least five incidents, members of national security forces fired teargas from domestically produced riot guns in a reckless and dangerous manner, firing teargas canisters horizontally at protesters, rather than at a safe angle. In other incidents, security forces doused protesters, including older people who were not committing acts of violence, with high-pressure water cannons mounted on trucks.
Human Rights Watch also verified six videos that show protesters throwing stones and debris at security forces from sidewalks, including from the interior of the square in front of Congress. Three videos show protesters burning a Buenos Aires police car as well as garbage containers. Protesters also harassed and physically attacked journalists covering the protest. According to the Security Ministry, 14 police officers were injured.
Early on March 12, Security Minister Patricia Bullrich stated that security forces were “deployed to enforce the anti-protest protocol,” a December 2023 resolution that allows security forces to use force in unjustifiable circumstances, Human Rights Watch said. The protocol effectively criminalizes any traffic disturbance caused by demonstrations and allows the police to use force “even when [the demonstrators] do not create a situation of danger.” It lacks provisions requiring the police to use reasonable means against protesters and repeals a 2011 resolution that prohibited the police from using riot guns to deploy tear gas canisters, which is what injured Grillo.
Security forces arrested 114 people at the protest, including at least five who were age 60 or older. A Buenos Aires city judge ordered that all of them be released arguing that “in most cases, the place where the arrest took place was not reported, nor were the circumstances of the arrest or the reasons for the arrest made clear.” The Security Ministry filed a criminal complaint against the judge for the crimes of prevarication, breach of duties, and concealment. The Justice Ministry announced that it would file a disciplinary complaint against the judge before the body in charge of sanctioning and removing judges in the city of Buenos Aires.
The Security Ministry also filed a criminal complaint alleging sedition and other crimes by the alleged protest organizers, including union leaders and opposition mayors. The Argentine criminal code broadly defines sedition as “publicly rising to stop the execution of national or provincial laws or resolutions of national or public officials.”
The vague definition of “sedition” in the Argentine criminal code can be used to criminalize free speech or disproportionately punish government critics, Human Rights Watch said.
Following the protest, Security Minister Bullrich said that the administration of President Javier Milei would not investigate security forces’ role in the March 12 protest, and praised them for “protecting democracy, institutions, and citizens.”
A unit in the Attorney General’s Office focused on human rights violations filed two criminal complaints regarding the actions of security forces on March 12. However, a dispute between two federal judgeships over the case has stalled that investigation.
Argentine judicial and administrative authorities have an obligation to pursue prompt, credible, and thorough investigations into evidence of excessive use of force during the March 12 protests, Human Rights Watch said.
“The Milei government is shielding police officers from accountability and harassing judges whose rulings uphold respect for protesters’ rights,” Goebertus said.
Burkina Faso’s Relentless Crackdown on Dissent, Media
“I rose through the ranks!” joked Maixent Somé, an exiled Burkinabè activist and critic of the country's military junta on X yesterday, after learning that his name appears on a list of wanted terrorists.
On April 1, Burkina Faso’s security minister published a list of individuals who are “actively wanted for criminal association in relation to a terrorist enterprise,” and called on the public to provide information on their whereabouts.
Among those wanted are Jafar Dicko, head of the Al-Qaeda-linked Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wa al-Muslimeen, JNIM), which has been fighting Burkina Faso’s armed forces since 2016, and other jihadist leaders such as Dicko Hamadoun, alias “Poulkotou”; Bolly Oumarou Idrissa, alias “Oumi”; and Dicko Hamadou Abou.
But the list also includes prominent critics of the authorities, such as exiled journalists Newton Ahmed Barry and Abdoulaye Barry, as well as exiled activists Naïm Touré; Ouédraogo Aminata, alias “Aminata Raschow”; Coulibaly Oumar; Barry Al Hassane; and Maixent Somé.
Some of these critics had recently denounced a massacre by government-allied militias of civilians around Solenzo, in western Burkina Faso, on March 11. In a March 15 interview Ahmed Barry described the junta led by Ibrahim Traoré as “tyrannical” and explained why he was forced to flee Burkina Faso: “When you don't agree with [the junta], you have the choice between exile, prison, or the front, and therefore death.”
Since taking power in a 2022 coup, military authorities have systematically cracked down on the media, the political opposition, and peaceful dissent, both outside and inside the country. On March 30, gunmen claiming to be gendarmes arrested Miphal Ousmane Lankoandé, executive secretary of the civil society group Balai Citoyen, in Ouagadougou, media and members of the group reported. Lankoandé’s current location is not known, raising concerns that he may have been forcibly disappeared.
Placing exiled journalists and activists on a terrorist list is a blatant attempt to intimidate them and could have a chilling effect on their work. Authorities should immediately remove their names from the list, respect the right to freedom of expression, and stop their crackdown on dissent.
New Risks from Latest Scheme under Italy-Albania Immigration Deal
After building immigration facilities in Albania that now stand empty, the Italian government has decided to turn one of them into an offshore detention center. But this will only replicate the problems already seen in detention centers within Italy.
The facility in Gjader, Albania, was built to accommodate and process adult male asylum seekers that Italian ships interdicted or rescued at sea. Under the 2023 agreement between Italy and Albania, men from countries Italy considers “safe” would be disembarked directly in Albania, across the Adriatic Sea from Italy, and subjected to a fast-track asylum procedure on the presumption they wouldn’t need protection.
But Italy’s courts forced the government to bring to Italy the handful of men taken to Albania under this scheme, rightly asking whether the countries Italy lists as “safe countries of origin” are entirely safe for everyone and declaring that it would be unlawful to detain these men under that presumption. The European Court of Justice is expected to rule on the issue, but in the meantime the facilities, part of an estimated 800 million euros investment, stand empty.
So the Italian government issued a decree on March 28 allowing the facilities to hold undocumented migrants, currently in Italy, who have been ordered detained pending deportation.
Italy already has 10 detention centers in Italy where people can be held up to 18 months while the government tries to deport them. The government doesn’t deport many of them – in 2023, only 10 percent of people under deportation orders were removed from the country. A 2021 report described these centers as “black holes,” while a report published in 2024 denounced it as a costly and inhumane system.
Opening such a center in Albania will replicate the problems already seen in Italy, as well as add new ones, such as the obstruction of legal aid, which could frustrate accountability when there are credible allegations of abuse. And there is nothing to suggest this change will make receiving countries more likely to accept returns – the main obstacle to deportations.
This move comes shortly after the European Commission endorsed the idea of “return hubs” located outside the European Union in its recently proposed Returns Regulation. Attempts to offload migration responsibilities and move people out of sight are cruel and unrealistic.
Rather than chasing costly, dodgy deals to evade their responsibilities, Italy – and the EU as a whole – should invest in managing migration in a humane and rational way.
Hungary: Arrest, Don’t Welcome ICC Fugitive Netanyahu
(Washington, DC) – Hungary should deny entry to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or arrest him if he enters the country, Human Rights Watch said today. Netanyahu’s office announced that he is planning to travel to Hungary on April 2, 2025, following an invitation by Prime Minister Viktor Orban.
Netanyahu is subject to an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on November 21, 2024, when the court’s judges issued arrest warrants against him and Yoav Gallant, his then-defense minister, for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip from at least October 8, 2023. These include starving civilians, intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population, murder, and persecution. Human Rights Watch has documented war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide committed by Israeli authorities in Gaza.
“Orban’s invitation to Netanyahu is an affront to victims of serious crimes,” said Liz Evenson, international justice director at Human Rights Watch. “Hungary should comply with its legal obligations as a party to the ICC and arrest Netanyahu if he sets foot in the country.”
As an ICC member country, Hungary is obligated to cooperate in securing the arrest and surrender of any suspects who enter its territory. Without its own police force, the ICC relies on states to assist in arrests.
Regrettably, officials from the governments of several European Union member states, including France, Poland, Italy, Romania, and Germany have recently explicitly said that they would not uphold their obligations or refused to commit to enforce the court’s warrant and arrest Netanyahu. Human rights activists and nongovernmental groups in Poland protested indications by the Polish government in January that Netanyahu would be welcome to visit the country without facing arrest.
All ICC members should uphold their obligations under the court’s treaty, Human Rights Watch said. The EU’s decision on the ICC commits the regional bloc to support cooperation with the ICC, including for arrests. The EU’s leadership and other EU member states, along with other ICC member countries, should publicly call on Hungary and all ICC member countries to cooperate with the ICC by arresting Netanyahu should he visit their territories.
In May 2024, the ICC prosecutor requested five arrest warrants in relation to the Palestine investigation – those against Netanyahu, Gallant, and also against three senior Hamas leaders. The Office of the Prosecutor later withdrew the application against two of the Hamas leaders after they were confirmed to have been killed. In November 2024, the ICC judges decided to issue an arrest warrant against the remaining Hamas official, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri (“Mohammed Deif”), at the same time it handed down the warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. In February, following confirmation of Deif’s killing, ICC judges terminated proceedings against him.
At the time the warrants were issued, Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó criticized the warrants as “shameful and absurd” and “unacceptable,” and Orban announced his intention to invite Netanyahu to Hungary. Vera Jourova, then-EU justice commissioner, reminded Hungary that that would be an “obvious breach” of Hungary’s obligations under the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding treaty, and damage Hungary’s reputation.
When US President Donald Trump issued an executive order in February that authorized the use of sanctions against ICC officials, in a bid in part to thwart the court’s case against Netanyahu, Orban announced his support for the US sanctions and called for a “review” of the country’s relations with the ICC.
Since his 2010 electoral win, Orban and his government have shown increasingly blatant disregard for the rule of law and human rights. In more than 14 years, it has curbed judicial independence, restricted and harassed civil society, and undermined media independence. Hungary’s worsening situation with democracy and rights led the EU to initiate a political enforcement process in 2018 under article 7 of the EU Treaty over the risk of Hungary’s actions breaching fundamental EU values. Orban traveled to Moscow in July 2024 to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, himself subject to an ICC warrant for serious crimes in Ukraine.
“Allowing Netanyahu’s visit in breach of Hungary's ICC obligations would be Orban's latest assault on the rule of law, adding to the country’s dismal record on rights,” Evenson said. “All ICC member countries need to make clear they expect Hungary to abide by its obligations to the court, and that they will do the same.”
Japan Makes High School Education Free – Again
Japan’s parliament, the Diet, voted this week to make public high school free for all children. Tuition fees had been abolished in 2010, but then reinstated in 2013.
The new measure, approved in the budget, will expand equal opportunity in education, and should increase education access and certainty for children of parents with unstable incomes or from immigrant and other marginalized backgrounds who sometimes struggle with the bureaucracy of tuition subsidies.
The initiative was pushed by the small opposition Japan Innovation Party, whose votes the minority government needed to pass the budget.
Currently, Japan subsidizes public high school tuition up to ¥118,800 (US$800) annually for students from households earning less than ¥9.1 million ($60,000). The new measure removes the income threshold, aiming to offer free public high school education to all.
International children’s rights law, enshrined in the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, obligates countries to progressively make secondary education available and accessible to every child. The United Nations Human Rights Council is now considering efforts to draft an update to this treaty to guarantee all children the right to free public secondary education with the same urgency as the guarantee of free primary education, long ensconced in international law.
Until now, Japan was the wealthiest country in the world, in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, without guaranteed free public secondary education for all. It also spends among the lowest GDP percentage on education among OECD countries. Moreover, access to free education had become increasingly inequitable across the country due to important initiatives by the Osaka prefecture and Tokyo Metropolitan governments to make secondary education free for children in their jurisdictions.
However, the new system maintains inequities in subsidy levels for children who attend public schools versus private schools, who in some circumstances receive greater financial support to cover the higher cost of private education.
Impressively, Japan has almost universal enrollment in schooling, although less so among recent immigrants. But the new measure is an important development in meeting Japan’s international obligations. It is important that the Diet pass an amendment to the Fundamental Law on Education to enshrine this expansion of free education so that these gains are secure from the whims of future governments.
Germany’s Social Democrats Should Defend EU Supply Chains Laws
Twelve years ago this April, the Rana Plaza factory building in Bangladesh collapsed, killing more than 1,100 garment workers and injuring more than 2,000 in one of the largest workplace disasters in modern history.
The Rana Plaza tragedy fueled a global movement calling for mandatory human rights rules for businesses, which ultimately led the European Union in 2024 to adopt the EU Due Diligence Directive, requiring large companies to adhere to human rights and environmental standards in their own operations and their global value chains.
However, Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, who are leading coalition talks to form the country’s next government, has vowed to “prevent” the law, portraying it as an “unnecessary burden” for companies. The CDU also wants to do away with other EU supply chain laws designed to tackle forced labor, deforestation, and the trade in minerals used to finance brutal wars.
Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), the other party in the coalition talks, should step up to preserve the EU Due Diligence Directive. Founded to protect workers’ rights, the SPD has long backed laws obliging companies to respect human rights in their supply chains, including the EU law.
As a powerhouse in the European Union, Germany could potentially destroy these protections, especially given the role of EU Commission President and CDU politician Ursula von der Leyen. Von der Leyen previously supported the laws but has recently made a U-turn, and now proposes to reduce the EU Due Diligence Directive to a meaningless shell. Many businesses are opposing this U-turn.
The Rana Plaza collapse tragically underscores the failure of voluntary industry initiatives to protect workers’ safety and rights. Disasters in the mining sector, as well as child labor, environmental harm, and other abuses have further highlighted the need for change.
The SPD should seek to ensure that any coalition agreement includes a commitment to uphold the EU’s laws on human rights in global supply chains. If that is not possible, an SPD veto would force the new German coalition government to abstain during an EU vote on proposals to gut or eliminate the EU Due Diligence Directive.
The SPD should stand up for human rights and oppose the CDU’s destructive path. Victims of corporate abuse need the EU’s legal protections more than ever.
Myanmar: Allow Immediate Aid to Quake-Stricken Areas
(Bangkok) – Myanmar’s military junta should allow immediate unfettered access to humanitarian aid for earthquake survivors and lift restrictions that impede the emergency response, Human Rights Watch said today. Since the earthquake struck at 12:50 p.m. on March 28, 2025, the military has carried out airstrikes and limited internet access in severely affected areas, further complicating the humanitarian response.
The earthquake struck central Myanmar, toppling buildings and damaging roads and bridges. The epicenter was in Sagaing Region, close to Myanmar’s second-largest city, Mandalay, and the capital, Naypyidaw. The Myanmar military reported that more than 1,700 people had died, although estimates by the US Geological Survey suggest a possible death toll of 10,000 or higher.
“Myanmar’s military junta still invokes fear, even in the wake of a horrific natural disaster that killed and injured thousands,” said Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The junta needs to break from its appalling past practice and ensure that humanitarian aid quickly reaches those whose lives are at risk in earthquake-affected areas.”
Days after the earthquake, people remain trapped in the rubble as family members and volunteer rescue workers desperately search for survivors with no machinery or safety equipment. In Sagaing, the regional capital, rescuers have run out of body bags and the city is filled with the odor of decaying corpses. “The bodies for volunteers to cremate are piling up,” said a rescue worker in a report shared with Human Rights Watch. “Even if they cremate a body every three minutes, they would have to work around the clock.”
Local journalists, humanitarian organizations, and social media report that many affected areas are without electricity and clean water. There are reported shortages of gasoline in both Mandalay and Sagaing cities. Food and other essential goods are in short supply because shops and markets have been closed. Across central Myanmar, people are sleeping outside and are in urgent need of shelter.
Within hours of the earthquake, the junta requested international assistance and declared an emergency in six states and regions. Large swathes of the country affected by the earthquake are under control of the anti-junta opposition or are contested. Information from these areas is limited due to military restrictions, including internet shutdowns, bans on VPNs, and popular social media platforms, including Facebook.
Several countries and international agencies have offered assistance, with foreign rescue teams reaching Mandalay and Naypyidaw within days. Although the junta indicated that all assistance was welcome, emergency workers from Taiwan were refused entry. A junta spokesperson also said that foreign media would not be allowed to report on the earthquake from inside the country.
In Sagaing, local media have reported restrictions imposed by local junta authorities, the military, and affiliated militia, requiring community members to seek authorization to respond to the earthquake by submitting lists of volunteers and items to be donated. The junta has not lifted curfews that have been in place since the Covid-19 pandemic, hindering rescue efforts.
Even prior to the earthquake, humanitarian needs had surged in central Myanmar where opposition groups have been fighting Myanmar security forces and allied militias since the February 2021 coup. In December 2024, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated the number of people in need of assistance was 2.1 million in Mandalay Region and 2.7 million in Sagaing Region. Prior to the earthquake, nearly 1.35 million people had been displaced in the two regions according to the UN refugee agency (UNHCR).
A humanitarian worker told Human Rights Watch that people who had fled fighting and sought shelter in monasteries, convents, and other religious buildings have been displaced yet again due to earthquake damage to these structures. Earthquake survivors also face risks from dislodged landmines, which often shift during natural disasters.
Hospitals in central Myanmar are overwhelmed with those injured. The country’s healthcare system has deteriorated since the coup, with shortages of medical supplies and personnel. Local media reported that the junta had recently closed seven private hospitals in Mandalay because they had hired doctors and other medical staff from the civil disobedience movement.
In previous natural disasters, including Cyclone Mocha in 2023 and Cyclone Nargis in 2008, the Myanmar military has refused to authorize travel and visas for aid workers, release urgently needed supplies from customs and warehouses, and relax onerous and unnecessary restrictions on lifesaving assistance.
The junta is obligated under international human rights law to uphold the rights to life, health, and shelter. Under international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflict areas, Myanmar’s military and opposition armed groups are obligated to facilitate rapid and unimpeded impartial humanitarian assistance to all civilians in need and cannot withhold consent for relief operations on arbitrary grounds.
Donors should rapidly support the earthquake response while seeking ways to channel aid through independent local groups, rather than only through junta authorities, given the military’s track record of corruption and misuse of disaster assistance funding and materiel. Effective aid delivery hinges on engaging local partners that have the networks and experience to navigate a difficult environment and reach those most in need, Human Rights Watch said.
“Myanmar’s junta cannot be trusted to respond to a disaster of this scale,” Lau said. “Concerned governments and international agencies need to press the junta to allow full and immediate access to survivors wherever they are.”
Karakalpak Lawyer Imprisoned in Uzbekistan Alleges Torture, Again
New allegations of ill-treatment and torture by Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov, the wrongfully imprisoned Karakalpak blogger and lawyer, have emerged following a prison visit by his lawyer.
In a March 24 statement, Tazhimuratov’s attorney, Sergey Mayorov, detailed “mental and physical torture,” including beatings by other inmates at the behest of prison officials and filthy conditions in Tazhimuratov’s cell. Tazhimuratov said his personal writings have been stolen and prison officials have apparently delayed and cut short his telephone calls to his family.
This is not the first time Tazhimuratov has alleged ill-treatment and torture in detention. At his trial in 2022, he claimed that while in pretrial detention, police had beat him and stood on his head, causing him to lose consciousness. In 2023, he filed complaints about inadequate healthcare and food in prison.
In his statement, Mayorov also said that between March 4 and 7, the first four days of his client’s 10-day stint in solitary confinement after an altercation with another inmate, guards seized Tazhimuratov’s uneaten food before he could break his fast, which he was keeping during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Denying a prisoner food during religious fasting is a violation of the obligation to respect Tazhimuratov’s freedom of religion as well as his right to freedom from inhumane treatment.
Mayorov also said that he had met with a prison official regarding Tazhimuratov’s allegations, noting that his client told him he had repeatedly tried to file complaints “to protect his rights,” but that the appeals “do not leave the [facility].” Mayorov has asked the prosecutor and Ombudsman to investigate.
Inhuman treatment of detainees is strictly prohibited under customary international law, and Uzbekistan is a party to several international human rights treaties that include the prohibition on torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It’s important that obligations to prevent, investigate, and punish acts of prohibited treatment are met and that officials promptly investigate Tazhimuratov’s allegations and ensure he comes to no harm while in prison.
Yet as Tazhimuratov and other activists languish in prisons and forced psychiatric detention, Uzbekistan is gearing up host to a high-level European Union-Central Asia Summit later this week. As EU officials look to deepen bilateral agreements with Uzbekistan, they should stress the importance of upholding the rule of law and call for Tazhimuratov’s and other activists’ unconditional and immediate release.
Backsliding on Landmines Endangers Civilian Lives
The International Day for Mine Action on April 4 is a moment to highlight the work of the thousands of deminers around the world who clear and destroy landmines and explosive remnants of war. They risk their lives to help communities recover from armed conflict and its intergenerational impacts.
But due to devastating developments driven largely by two countries that have not banned antipersonnel landmines – the United States and Russia – this Mine Action Day does not feel like much of a celebration.
For over three decades, the US has been the world's largest contributor to humanitarian demining, mine risk education, and rehabilitation programs for landmine survivors. But the Trump administration’s deep cuts to foreign aid are now disrupting mine clearance operations. Thousands of deminers have been fired or put on administrative leave pending the completion of so-called reviews. It’s unclear if this crucial support will continue. The price of Trump administration cuts will be evident as casualties increase.
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and uncertainty over Europe’s future security are also contributing to a challenging environment. Defense ministers from Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania announced in March their intention to withdraw from the 1997 treaty banning antipersonnel mines.
Russian forces have used antipersonnel landmines extensively in Ukraine since 2022, causing civilian casualties and contaminating agricultural land. Ukraine has also used antipersonnel mines and has received them from the US, in violation of the Mine Ban Treaty.
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk sought to justify his government’s proposed withdrawal, telling parliament, “anything that can strengthen Poland’s defense will be implemented. We will use all available options.” Days later, Poland’s defense minister said the government intends to restart production of antipersonnel mines.
There’s nothing sophisticated about the antipersonnel mines used in today’s armed conflicts. They are indiscriminate weapons that predominately harm civilians, violate human rights, and have long-term societal impact. Embracing antipersonnel mines undermines international humanitarian law and long-standing civilian protections.
The proposed treaty withdrawals raise the question of what other humanitarian disarmament treaties are at risk: chemical weapons? cluster munitions? The military utility of any weapon must be weighed against the expected humanitarian damage.
To avoid further eroding humanitarian norms, Poland and the Baltic states should reject proposals to leave the Mine Ban Treaty. They should instead reaffirm their collective commitment to humanitarian norms aimed at safeguarding humanity in war.
Why We Need a ‘Human Rights Economy’
Since 2020, the five richest men in the world have doubled their fortunes while almost five billion people have become poorer. A growing sense of economic injustice and insecurity is contributing to the rise of authoritarian movements around the world. Meanwhile, the world is set to blast past global heating targets. But this is not inevitable. What if, instead, economic decisions were made with people and the planet at the center?
This is the idea behind the concept of a human rights economy, which means putting rights at the heart of economic policymaking. The concept draws from the work of human rights scholars and organizations around the world, while supporting transformative economic approaches emerging from other movements, including climate justice, gender justice, and decolonization.
International human rights law guides how global resources should be used for everyone’s benefit while protecting the environment. It obligates governments to use the maximum of their available resources – individually and through international cooperation and assistance – to realize human rights. This includes economic, social, and cultural rights, such as to health, education, social security, housing, food, and water, as well as the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.
Yet governments have failed for decades to align their economies or international cooperation with these obligations. The exponential increase in resources has done too little to improve the lives of billions of people while devastating the planet. That needs to change.
Several human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, have collaborated on a working paper, available in English, French, and Arabic, which details how governments should set human rights as guideposts against which economic policies can be assessed, such as to progressively raise adequate revenues to fund universal public services and social security systems, as well as a just transition to sustainable energy.
At the same time, the paper recognizes that governments are often constrained by the global economic system within which they operate. Implementing human rights economies therefore means transforming the international financial architecture, including related to tax, debt, and the governance and operations of international financial institutions, to align with human rights. It also means moving beyond the longstanding fixation on GDP and growth as a measure of economic progress to metrics that reflect people’s lived reality and the environment.
Our current economic approach is putting people and the planet in crisis. Human rights offer a blueprint for a far better approach.
Sudan: 20th Anniversary of Darfur ICC Referral
(The Hague) – Ongoing atrocities fueled by rampant impunity and an accountability gap across Sudan require comprehensive justice responses two decades after the United Nations Security Council referred the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor, Human Rights Watch said today.
On March 31, 2005, the Security Council adopted resolution 1593, giving the ICC a mandate over crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide committed in Darfur from July 2002 onward. ICC investigations led to the opening of several cases addressing crimes committed in the region from 2003-2013. But today, nearly two years after the current fighting began in April 2023, the ICC’s mandate remains limited to Darfur even as serious abuses are being committed across Sudan. The UN-backed Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan and the African Commission for Human and Peoples’ Rights-mandated Joint Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan, are international and regional mechanisms mandated to investigate, but not prosecute, current violations committed across Sudan.
“The warring parties have trapped the Sudanese people once again in an impunity-fueled cycle of violence, committing horrific atrocities and leading to the world’s worst humanitarian crisis,” said Liz Evenson, international justice director at Human Rights Watch. “Governments should commit publicly to explore all avenues to close the accountability gap in Sudan, so that victims of today’s crimes will not have to wait another two decades for justice.”
Since the fighting erupted on April 15, 2023, between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), both warring parties have committed war crimes, such as executing detainees and mutilating their bodies, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law, including in Khartoum, North Darfur, Gezira, and South and West Kordofan states, Human Rights Watch research has found.
The RSF has committed crimes against humanity, including in an ethnic cleansing campaign in West Darfur in 2023, and widespread acts of sexual violence in areas of Khartoum, the capital, since 2023. The RSF and allied militias also have raped scores of women and girls in the context of sexual slavery in South Kordofan since September 2023.
The ICC prosecutor, in January 2025, signaled that his office expects to request arrest warrants based on investigations into crimes committed since April 2023 in West Darfur. The 2005 Security Council referral limits the court’s jurisdiction to Darfur.
In its September and October 2024 reports, the UN fact-finding mission documented international crimes across the country and called for the Security Council to expand the jurisdiction of the ICC to cover all of Sudan. It also urged governments to use all available international justice options, including the establishment of an internationalized judicial mechanism for Sudan and universal jurisdiction prosecutions before domestic courts to complement the ICC’s work. The fact-finding mission also called on Sudan to cooperate with the ICC.
Other countries should use this anniversary to pledge publicly to work together to implement the fact-finding mission’s recommendations and ensure stepped-up justice responses for the country, Human Rights Watch said. Governments should make sure they speak at the highest level to the need for focused efforts on accountability at key upcoming meetings, including the European Union’s April 14, 2025, meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council and the April 15 London high-level conference on Sudan. Accountability efforts should center Sudanese voices and can draw from international experience with national and international efforts as in Ukraine and Syria.
States should also give their full support for evidence preservation and documentation of today’s crimes, to lay the groundwork for accountability. This should include support for the UN fact-finding mission and the African Commission for Human and Peoples’ Rights-mandated Joint Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan. States should ensure that these bodies have the necessary political and financial resources to carry out their mandates, effective coordination and cooperation between them and with the ICC, and access to Sudan and neighboring countries.
Governments should also increase financial and technical support to civil society organizations to document human rights violations and campaign and strategize for justice through Sudanese civil society-led initiatives. This includes urgently filling the gap created by funding cuts by the United States government, and condemning the warring parties’ targeting of human rights defenders and lawyers because of their role in documenting human rights abuses.
A verdict is pending in an ICC trial of former Janjaweed militia leader, Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman (Ali Kosheib), on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur in 2003-04 and 2013. Twenty years after the Security Council referral, however, the Kosheib trial stands alone.
Following Omar al-Bashir’s ouster as Sudan’s leader in April 2019, the transitional government—a power-sharing agreement between civilian and military groups—had a window of opportunity to ensure accountability for past rights abuses. The transitional government took small steps on accountability. But it failed to prioritize accountability for serious rights abuses, and nascent legal reforms were cut short following the 2021 military takeover.
Al-Bashir and two former Sudanese leaders wanted by the ICC have yet to be handed over. The Sudanese authorities should immediately surrender al-Bashir and those wanted by the court, Human Rights Watch said.
ICC member countries should ensure that the court has the required resources to carry out its work. All UN member states should urge the Security Council to back the ICC’s mandate in Darfur, including by enforcing the court’s findings of noncooperation in arrests, Human Rights Watch said. States should also call on the government of Sudan to accept the ICC’s jurisdiction across the country.
The 20th anniversary of the Security Council’s referral is a reminder of the ICC’s essential role as a court of last resort and comes amid an open challenge to the court’s independence. On February 6, 2025, US President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order that authorizes asset freezes and entry bans on ICC officials and others supporting the court’s work in investigations the United States opposes, and applied these sanctions to the court’s prosecutor, Karim Khan. US sanctions are likely to have a wide impact on the court’s work, including in the Darfur situation. The United States is not a party to the ICC, but has supported the ICC’s work in Darfur.
ICC member countries should reaffirm their commitment to defend the court, its officials, and those cooperating with it from any political interference and pressure. The European Union should urgently impose its blocking statute to mitigate the effects of US sanctions, Human Rights Watch said.
“The Darfur referral 20 years ago showed what the international community could do to support justice as an essential element of international peace and security,” Evenson said. “Governments should draw on the experience of the intervening decades in pursuing creative pathways to justice at national and international levels to follow up on that 20-year-old promise.”
Uzbekistan: Free Blogger from Forced Psychiatric Detention
(Berlin, March 31, 2025) – The Uzbekistan government should immediately release and compensate the blogger and activist Valijon Kalonov who has been forcibly detained in a psychiatric hospital since December 2021, the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights and Human Rights Watch said today.
On February 28, 2025, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) issued an opinion regarding the legality of Kalonov’s detention under international human rights law. It found that he had been “arbitrarily detained” and urged the government “to release him immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations.”
“Valijon Kalonov’s forced psychiatric detention is nothing more than retaliation for his criticism of government policies,” said Umida Niyazova, director of the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights. “Kalonov did not call for violence, threaten violence, or say or do anything that posed a threat to anyone.”
Kalonov is a 55-year-old blogger from Jizzakh city, in Central Uzbekistan, who has criticized the government of Uzbekistan and in 2021 called for a boycott of the presidential elections. He had also spoken out against China’s discrimination against the Uyghurs.
In August 2021, the authorities placed him under arrest and charged him with “threatening public safety” and “insulting the president online” on the basis of statements he posted on social media. The authorities alleged the statements contained ideas of “religious fundamentalism,” as well as public insult and slander against Uzbekistan’s president.
Kalonov was placed in a psychiatric hospital in the Jizzakh region after a court, in December 2021, ruled that he could not be held criminally liable and should undergo compulsory psychiatric treatment. Those who know Kalonov say he does not have any mental health disability, which also would not be justifiable grounds on which to detain him.
In its 2021 ruling, the court cited a state-commissioned psychiatric assessment of Kalonov, which had concluded that “Kalonov Valijon suffers from a chronic mental illness in the form of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and a violation of logical thinking. At the time of the crime, he did not understand and was not fully aware of his actions. The crime committed by Kalonov, his mental state and illness can be dangerous for society.”
This is not the first time the Uzbek authorities have used bogus psychiatric assessments and forced psychiatric treatment to silence and discredit critics, the rights groups said. Kalonov’s detention follows a pattern of similar cases in which activists have been falsely diagnosed with mental illness based on state-ordered forensic examinations.
The veteran rights activist Elena Urlaeva was forcibly detained in a psychiatric hospital five times between 2001 and 2016. While she was in the hospital, officials tied her to her bed for hours and forcibly administered psychotropic drugs, which have had a lasting physical and emotional impact.
Michael Perlin, professor emeritus at New York Law School, is founding director of the International Mental Disability Law Reform Project. He was co-petitioner of the complaint filed to the UN working group and told the rights groups that “[f]orced psychiatric detention is a barbaric abuse of the medical profession that dates back to Soviet times. In circumstances such as those in this case, it is a violation of the prohibition on improper treatment and should be immediately prohibited.” He also underscored that “[b]ecause forced psychiatric treatment is often administered in institutions far from any third-party oversight, patients, whether they have a mental disability or not, are extremely vulnerable to abuse.”
In its February 28 opinion, the UN working group concluded that Kalonov was arbitrarily detained in violation of articles 2, 7, and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2, 19, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The working group urged the Government of Uzbekistan “to ensure a full and independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding Kalonov’s arbitrary deprivation of liberty” and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of his rights.
Uzbekistan’s international partners should urge Uzbekistan to immediately release Kalonov and provide reparations, in accordance with the working group’s decision. They should also call on Uzbekistan to implement fully another working group decision in February 2023 concerning the blogger Otabek Sattoriy. In that decision, the working group concluded that “the basis for the arrest and subsequent detention of Mr. Sattoriy was in fact his exercise of freedom of expression” and to release him immediately and provide reparations. In February 2024, Sattoriy was granted early release from prison, but he has not been given any reparations.
The government of Uzbekistan celebrated the recent election of its National Center for Human Rights director, Akmal Saidov, to the UN Human Rights Committee, as an expert in his individual capacity. Yet Uzbekistan has a demonstrably poor track record when it comes to implementing decisions of UN human rights bodies, including the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. The Uzbekistan government should respect all UN human rights bodies and experts and act in accordance with their decisions, the groups said.
“The government of Uzbekistan needs to release Kalonov immediately, but they also owe him reparations and should investigate how he ended up in psychiatric detention in the first place,” said Mihra Rittmann, senior Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Kalonov shouldn’t have to spend another day unlawfully and abusively locked up.”