Secondary menu
IHRP external news feeds
US Central Command Contradicts Cluster Munition Policy
Admiral Brad Cooper, head of US Central Command, condemned on March 17 Iran’s “reckless” use of cluster munitions, calling it an “inherently indiscriminate type of munition.” Human Rights Watch has also confirmed Iran’s use of these weapons in March in populated civilian areas in Israel, which may amount to war crimes.
While Admiral Cooper’s condemnation contradicts current US policy, it could reflect a shift in how the military views cluster munitions.
His comments are in line with the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted by 124 states, which recognizes the weapons’ inherently indiscriminate nature. Cluster munitions typically open in the air, dispersing dozens or hundreds of explosive submunitions or bomblets over a wide area in a way that cannot discriminate between combatants and civilians. At times, bomblets fail to detonate on impact, in effect acting like landmines, waiting for someone to trigger them. Whenever they detonate, bomblets spread hundreds or even thousands of preformed metal fragments.
Although the US military last used cluster munitions in a strike in Yemen in 2009, it has retained the right to use them and maintains stockpiles of these weapons.
The most recent US policy, dating back to President Donald Trump’s first term in 2017, indefinitely delays a phased ban on the United States using what it terms “unreliable” types of cluster munitions. The ban—introduced in 2008 and meant to take full effect in 2019—defines “unreliable” cluster munitions as those with a detonation failure rate of more than 1 percent.
And the United States has continued to sell and acquire other, more apparently “reliable,” types of the munitions, such as those which it says have a failure rate of less than 1 percent. In 2023, President Joe Biden approved a series of transfers of cluster munitions to Ukraine that were transferred via Germany and Poland. Reports emerged in February 2026 that the Pentagon had signed a deal worth at least US$210 million to acquire these weapons from an Israeli government-owned manufacturer.
The United States should immediately destroy its stockpiles, cancel deals to buy more cluster munitions, and confirm the US won’t transfer or use these weapons. Unless such action is taken, any condemnation of an adversary’s use of the weapon will lack credibility
Russia: Internet Shutdowns Escalate
(Berlin, March 31, 2026) – Russian authorities increasingly impose broad mobile internet shutdowns under the pretext of public safety, Human Rights Watch said today. Over the past month, they blocked mobile internet and cellular access in areas of Moscow and Saint Petersburg for almost three weeks.
On March 29, 2026, police detained at least 14 people at a peaceful protest against internet restrictions in Moscow, and 5 more people in other cities. Two said they were beaten. The authorities banned the protests in at least 40 cities across Russia under false pretexts. They also arrested and threatened organizers ahead of the planned rallies.
“Russia’s internet shutdowns and the crackdown on peaceful protesters are blatant violations of Russia’s obligations to respect freedom of expression, of information and of assembly,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch.
On March 5, internet users in mostly central and southern parts of Moscow reported unavailable cellular network and mobile internet. Mobile service providers said that the issues were due to “externally” imposed restrictions. Users reported that connectivity varied within the affected areas, sometimes from street to street.
On March 11, Dmitry Peskov, a presidential spokesperson, said that “all recent connection and internet restrictions in Moscow were introduced in accordance with [Russia’s] legal framework and aim at ensuring the safety of Russian citizens.” He also said the measures would remain in place for “as long as necessary to ensure the citizens’ safety.”
On March 9, the authorities began blocking mobile internet in Saint Petersburg and the neighboring Leningrad region, following an announcement by the Leningrad region governor about a possible internet slowdown due to the threat of drone attacks by Ukraine.
On March 24, the mobile internet reportedly became available in Moscow. But internet users in Saint Petersburg continued reporting issues accessing the internet, coinciding with the announcement of air raid and internet slowdown state alerts by the Russian System for Warning and Action in Emergency Situations.
Russian authorities have been blocking mobile internet in many regions due to drone attacks since at least spring 2025. The Moscow Times reported that Russia had the most mobile internet shutdowns of any country in 2025.
Human Rights Watch spoke to seven people who confirmed protracted mobile internet blocking in Orel, Vladimir, Nizhniy Novgorod, Novorossiysk, and Moscow. In some regions mobile internet access has been restricted for more than six months. In Nizhniy Novgorod, the authorities have been restricting mobile internet access since May 2025. Regional authorities cited the threat of Ukrainian drone attacks as justification. Ukrainian areas occupied by Russia have also faced such shutdowns.
Mobile internet blocking, especially coupled with a lack of cellular access, affects rights and freedoms of internet users, preventing them from accessing basic services. During the March blocking in Moscow, users could not connect to messengers and maps, use ATMs or taxi apps or pay for services via card machines if they were not connected to landline internet. Users often could not access public Wi-Fi. According to some estimates, Russian businesses lost 1 billion rubles for every day of the Moscow shutdown.
During the recent mobile internet shutdowns, mobile service providers sent out notifications outlining the lists of websites, the so-called whitelists, that should remain accessible when the internet was blocked, but users said that at times, even these censored resources would not load.
The “whitelists,” announced by the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media in August 2025, were to include “all resources essential to everyday life,” said the minister, Maksut Shadayev. In September, the first version of the lists was published, including the websites of state media, state services online, government agencies, Russian social media and streaming platforms transparent to the government. It has been expanded several times to include online shops, food delivery, major taxi services, banks, and other services.
While the criteria for getting on the list are not fully clear, the Ministry compiles it “in consultation with state bodies responsible for security.” All the listed resources are registered and have infrastructure based in Russia, and are obligated under Russian law to share information with state agencies.
Sergei Boyarskiy, head of the State Duma Committee on Informational Technology, Communications and Policies, said that Russian messenger MAX, for instance, is included on the lists as it cooperated with Russian state bodies via closed channels, while Telegram, a foreign platform that authorities have taken steps toward banning, was predictably not included.
The switch to whitelists is an incremental shift in Russia’s online censorship. Previously, authorities fully or partially blocked access to specific sites. The latest approach introduces new challenges to circumventing censorship and accessing information, Human Rights Watch said.
On March 26, Boyarskiy said that internet shutdowns were a “new norm” and shutdowns without access to even whitelisted sources were also possible.
Prior to the March 29 protests, regional authorities in 40 cities rejected notifications of planned assemblies to protest blockings, with bogus pretexts such as COVID-related restrictions, threats of terrorism or drone attacks, snow, tree inspections, repair works, sports festivals, and other government events. Authorities in Yakutsk issued a blanket ban on all events to protest internet restrictions due to “increased attention from malicious actors.”
In the days before March 29, law enforcement searched homes, detained organizers, and issued “warnings” against “violating the law.” Five organizers were sentenced to 15 days of detention for allegedly disobeying law enforcement in Moscow, an administrative offense; a Rostov rally organizer was sentenced to 10 days of detention and was allegedly beaten in custody.
According to International Telecommunication Union data from 2024, internet usage in Russia is predominantly through mobile broadband connections. While landline internet has not been affected to the same extent recently, government internet censorship technology facilitates full landline internet blockings, including by the Federal Security Services without a court order.
The increasing blocking in Russia violates the right to seek, receive, and provide information and ideas through all media, including the internet. Any restrictions imposed on internet access and related communications, whether in the context of potential Ukrainian drone attacks or otherwise, must have a proper legal basis, and be both necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate purpose. The protracted internet shutdowns and cell networks shutdown across the regions of Russia, as well as in Russia-occupied areas of Ukraine, cannot be justified and do not comply with international human rights law, Human Rights Watch said.
Russian authorities should restore unrestricted access to the internet and communications networks and end the prosecution of peaceful protesters against internet shutdowns. The international community, foreign governments, and technology companies should support the groups working to ensure access to information online and censorship circumvention.
“A government has no legitimacy to determine what is ‘essential’ for an average internet user in Russia or limit internet access to a handful of state-approved resources,” Williamson said. “Neither should it prevent people from peacefully protesting its assault on their right to access an open and free internet.”
US: New Unlawful US Boat Strike
(Washington, DC) — The United States’ latest strike on a vessel in the Caribbean, which reportedly killed four people, highlights a sustained pattern of unlawful use of lethal force outside any context of armed conflict, amounting to extrajudicial executions, Human Rights Watch said today.
The US Southern Command announced on March 25, 2026, that it had carried out a “lethal kinetic strike” against a boat it said was involved in drug trafficking. The strike is the 47th in a series of lethal strikes by the US military in the Caribbean and Pacific oceans, resulting in a total of 163 people killed.
“These strikes aren’t one-off incidents, they’re part of a pattern of using military force where the law does not permit it, over and over again,” said Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that these strikes have faded from public attention does not make these violations any less grave or unlawful.”
International law draws a clear line between armed conflict and law enforcement. There is no armed conflict in the Caribbean or Pacific between the US and any drug-trafficking organization, and so there is no group of people who are a legitimate military target.
Outside of armed conflict, the deliberate, lethal use of force is only lawful when strictly necessary to protect life. Suspected criminals are not otherwise lawful targets for these deliberately lethal US strikes, and no information has been released to the public showing that any of the people targeted and killed posed an imminent threat to the life of any person.
The US government should immediately end this campaign of lethal strikes, Human Rights Watch said. It should also ensure accountability for these unlawful killings, properly assess the harm caused to victims and their families, and provide redress for that harm. If the Trump administration continues to avoid taking responsibility for these unlawful killings, Congress should ensure independent investigations and accountability.
“When unlawful force is repeated over time, it risks becoming normalized,” Yager said. “That’s dangerous because it opens the door to using lethal force whenever and wherever a government wishes and without constraints.”
Iran: Military Stepping Up Child Recruitment
(Beirut) – Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is conducting a campaign to recruit children as young as 12 to volunteer to become “homeland defending combatants,” Human Rights Watch said today. The military recruitment and use of children is a grave violation of children’s rights and a war crime when the children are under 15.
On March 26, 2026, an official from the IRGC’s 27th Mohammad Rasulullah Division in Tehran said that a campaign to enlist civilians, called “Homeland Defending Combatants for Iran,” had set the minimum age at 12. Amid thousands of attacks by the United States and Israel across the country, children at military facilities would be at serious risk of death and injury. Iranian officials should revoke the campaign and prohibit all military and paramilitary forces in Iran from enlisting children under 18.
“There is no excuse for a military recruitment drive that targets children to sign up, much less 12-year-olds,” said Bill Van Esveld, associate children’s rights director at Human Rights Watch. “What this boils down to is that Iranian authorities are apparently willing to risk children’s lives for some extra manpower.”
The campaign aims to attract civilians to provide cooking services and medical care, distribute items, and deal with damaged homes, as well as for security activities such as staffing checkpoints, operational patrols, intelligence patrols, and vehicle convoys, said Rahim Nadali, an IRGC official, in an interview with Iran’s Defa Press News Agency. The advertising poster for the recruitment drive, published by the news agency, also lists these activities and features two children, a boy and a girl, alongside two adults, including a man in a military uniform.
In a televised interview, Nadali said that “[in relation to] intelligence and operational patrols, teenagers and the youth repeatedly have come and said that they want to take part in them. For the Basij checkpoints that you see across cities now, we have had many young people and teenagers demanding to be present in them. Given the ages that were making demands, we have set the [minimum] age at 12. Meaning now there are kids of 12 and 13 who want to be present in this space.”
Applicants can register at Tehran mosques that house Basij bases, Nadali and the recruitment poster said. The Basij force is under the IRGC’s command.
Over the past month, the United States and Israel have reportedly carried out what they say are tens of thousands of airstrikes against numerous Basij and IRGC facilities and multiple Basij checkpoints in Tehran, killing and wounding personnel.
Children in Iran have already been subject to unlawful attacks. Human Rights Watch determined that an unlawful attack on a primary school in Minab, Iran on February 28 that killed dozens of schoolchildren and other civilians should be investigated as a war crime. According to a preliminary US military report, the United States was responsible for the attack. Human Rights Watch has said that Congress should hold dedicated hearings on the US military’s targeting practices.
Iran has for years enlisted children under 18 in the Basij force, and the IRGC sent Afghan immigrant children living in Iran as child soldiers to support the Assad government during the civil war in Syria. Human Rights Watch documented that boys as young as 14 were killed in combat. According to Iranian officials, in the 1980s, authorities recruited hundreds of thousands of children to fight in the Iran-Iraq war, with tens of thousands killed.
The office of the United Nations Special Representative on Children and Armed Conflict states that “no matter their role, [children] associated with parties to conflict are exposed to acute levels of violence.”
Iran’s laws explicitly provide for the military recruitment of children as young as 15.
Under the “bylaws and regulations of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,” individuals must be at least 16 years old to be eligible for employment by the IRGC, including as permanent staff, contractual staff, and special Basiji personnel. Special Basijis are honorary IRGC guards who “possess the qualifications of an [official] guard and… commit to being available full-time to the IRGC when needed.” However, under article 94, children ages 15 and above can qualify as an “active” member, who can “collaborate with the IRGC in carrying out assigned missions” after completing training courses.
In its first report to the UN Committee on the Rights of Child, Iran stated that the country’s laws provide that the minimum age “for the armed forces for the purpose of receiving military training is 16 and the minimum age of employment for the Police Forces is 17.”
The UN Security Council has “strongly condemned” child recruitment and established a reporting system, led by the secretary-general, that considers it a “grave violation” against children. The Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits recruitment of children under 15. An Optional Protocol to the Convention, which Iran signed but has not ratified, provides that 18 is the minimum age for direct participation in hostilities. Iran is bound by customary international law, which provides that recruitment of children under age 15 is a war crime.
“The officials involved in this reprehensible policy are putting children at risk of serious and irreversible harm and themselves at risk of criminal liability,” Van Esveld said. “Senior leaders who fail to put a stop to this can make no claim to care for Iran’s children.”
Iran: Military Stepping Up Child Recruitment
(Beirut) – Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is conducting a campaign to recruit children as young as 12 to volunteer to become “homeland defending combatants,” Human Rights Watch said today. The military recruitment and use of children is a grave violation of children’s rights and a war crime when the children are under 15.
On March 26, 2026, an official from the IRGC’s 27th Mohammad Rasulullah Division in Tehran said that a campaign to enlist civilians, called “Homeland Defending Combatants for Iran,” had set the minimum age at 12. Amid thousands of attacks by the United States and Israel across the country, children at military facilities would be at serious risk of death and injury. Iranian officials should revoke the campaign and prohibit all military and paramilitary forces in Iran from enlisting children under 18.
“There is no excuse for a military recruitment drive that targets children to sign up, much less 12-year-olds,” said Bill Van Esveld, associate children’s rights director at Human Rights Watch. “What this boils down to is that Iranian authorities are apparently willing to risk children’s lives for some extra manpower.”
The campaign aims to attract civilians to provide cooking services and medical care, distribute items, and deal with damaged homes, as well as for security activities such as staffing checkpoints, operational patrols, intelligence patrols, and vehicle convoys, said Rahim Nadali, an IRGC official, in an interview with Iran’s Defa Press News Agency. The advertising poster for the recruitment drive, published by the news agency, also lists these activities and features two children, a boy and a girl, alongside two adults, including a man in a military uniform.
In a televised interview, Nadali said that “[in relation to] intelligence and operational patrols, teenagers and the youth repeatedly have come and said that they want to take part in them. For the Basij checkpoints that you see across cities now, we have had many young people and teenagers demanding to be present in them. Given the ages that were making demands, we have set the [minimum] age at 12. Meaning now there are kids of 12 and 13 who want to be present in this space.”
Applicants can register at Tehran mosques that house Basij bases, Nadali and the recruitment poster said. The Basij force is under the IRGC’s command.
Over the past month, the United States and Israel have reportedly carried out what they say are tens of thousands of airstrikes against numerous Basij and IRGC facilities and multiple Basij checkpoints in Tehran, killing and wounding personnel.
Children in Iran have already been subject to unlawful attacks. Human Rights Watch determined that an unlawful attack on a primary school in Minab, Iran on February 28 that killed dozens of schoolchildren and other civilians should be investigated as a war crime. According to a preliminary US military report, the United States was responsible for the attack. Human Rights Watch has said that Congress should hold dedicated hearings on the US military’s targeting practices.
Iran has for years enlisted children under 18 in the Basij force, and the IRGC sent Afghan immigrant children living in Iran as child soldiers to support the Assad government during the civil war in Syria. Human Rights Watch documented that boys as young as 14 were killed in combat. According to Iranian officials, in the 1980s, authorities recruited hundreds of thousands of children to fight in the Iran-Iraq war, with tens of thousands killed.
The office of the United Nations Special Representative on Children and Armed Conflict states that “no matter their role, [children] associated with parties to conflict are exposed to acute levels of violence.”
Iran’s laws explicitly provide for the military recruitment of children as young as 15.
Under the “bylaws and regulations of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,” individuals must be at least 16 years old to be eligible for employment by the IRGC, including as permanent staff, contractual staff, and special Basiji personnel. Special Basijis are honorary IRGC guards who “possess the qualifications of an [official] guard and… commit to being available full-time to the IRGC when needed.” However, under article 94, children ages 15 and above can qualify as an “active” member, who can “collaborate with the IRGC in carrying out assigned missions” after completing training courses.
In its first report to the UN Committee on the Rights of Child, Iran stated that the country’s laws provide that the minimum age “for the armed forces for the purpose of receiving military training is 16 and the minimum age of employment for the Police Forces is 17.”
The UN Security Council has “strongly condemned” child recruitment and established a reporting system, led by the secretary-general, that considers it a “grave violation” against children. The Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits recruitment of children under 15. An Optional Protocol to the Convention, which Iran signed but has not ratified, provides that 18 is the minimum age for direct participation in hostilities. Iran is bound by customary international law, which provides that recruitment of children under age 15 is a war crime.
“The officials involved in this reprehensible policy are putting children at risk of serious and irreversible harm and themselves at risk of criminal liability,” Van Esveld said. “Senior leaders who fail to put a stop to this can make no claim to care for Iran’s children.”
Mozambique: Navy Linked to Killing of Fishermen
(Johannesburg) – Mozambican navy personnel appear to have unlawfully killed and injured fishermen in Mozambique’s embattled Cabo Delgado province on March 15, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today.
Mozambique’s Defense and Security Forces, citing security concerns linked to the ongoing armed conflict in the region, have imposed restrictions on coastal movement and fishing in parts of Mocímboa da Praia and neighboring Macomia districts. The government says the measures are intended to limit the movement of non-state armed groups along the coast, but they have also significantly affected communities that depend on fishing for their livelihoods. Mozambican authorities should urgently and impartially investigate the incident, hold those responsible for wrongdoing to account, and pay prompt and adequate compensation to the victims or their families.
“Mozambican navy personnel fired on subsistence fishermen who fish the restricted waters out of economic hardship,” said Sheila Nhancale, Mozambique researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Mozambique’s partners should press the government to ensure a credible and transparent investigation, provide accountability and reparations for the victims, and adopt measures so that such abuses never recur.”
Several residents told Human Rights Watch that despite the restrictions, many local fishermen continue to go to sea out of economic necessity.
A local journalist said that the fishermen, an unidentified number of young men from the district, set out before dawn in three small boats to fish off Calugo village. They were intercepted by the naval personnel, who fired upon them.
A relative of one of the survivors said that 13 fishermen were killed. He personally knew at least two of those killed, who were from different parts of Mocímboa da Praia district. “Among the dead are people from places known locally as Marere and Nanquidunga,” he said. “My younger brother’s son, Juma Sufo, is also among those killed, as well as Mr. Mapanga.”
Another relative said that three of the injured—ages 23, 24, and 32—were taken to the Provincial Hospital in Pemba for treatment in the orthopedics ward, but they did not receive adequate immediate health care. “The three who were injured are my family,” he said. “One bullet was removed only on March 20 from one of them, where it had been lodged in his neck.”
Residents said the naval personnel first calmly approached the fishermen, but then abruptly opened fire. “When the military arrived, they first greeted and asked the fishermen where they were coming from,” the resident said. “Then the navy left, but about 50 meters later they returned violently.”
“The situation here in the district appeared calm, but then I learned that the fishermen were shot,” said another resident. “One of them is my neighbor in Pamunda. The soldiers were stressed and angry, and instead of investigating or arresting, they just killed.”
The incident follows previous reports of the Mozambican Defense and Security Forces using lethal force against fishermen along the Mocímboa da Praia and Macomia coasts. The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), an international nongovernmental organization, estimates that about 70 fishermen have been killed since 2024 in similar incidents.
“This isn’t the first time the Mozambican navy has been accused of targeting fishermen,” said Tomás Queface, a researcher at ACLED. “We have documented multiple incidents, but there has been no serious investigation or accountability. This sends a message that such abuses are tolerated and risks further violations.”
Borges Nhamirre, a researcher at the Institute for Security Studies, a South African nonprofit group, said the killings highlight the broader risks to civilians in Cabo Delgado. “Civilians have been subjected to abuses from both non-state armed groups and the Mozambican Defense and Security Forces, which should protect them,” he said. “These frequent incidents fuel frustration and may facilitate recruitment by violent extremist groups.”
Local communities also face severe economic impacts due to the coastal restrictions. “Without access to the sea, communities lose essential means of subsistence,” Nhamirre said. “They are caught between the conflict and hunger.”
Since 2017, Cabo Delgado has been the site of violent conflict that has killed about 6,500 people and forced more than 1.3 million people to flee their homes.
Under international humanitarian law, applicable to the non-international armed conflict in Cabo Delgado, warring parties must always distinguish between civilians and combatants and take feasible precautions to protect civilians. Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its Second Additional Protocol provide minimum protections for civilians and others not taking part in hostilities. Complementary human rights obligations, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, further require governments to investigate potentially unlawful deaths and ensure accountability.
“To prevent such attacks against civilians from happening again, it’s essential to provide justice for the victims,” Nhancale said. “The authorities need to adopt measures to ensure that those dependent on the sea for their livelihoods do not become targets of either side.”
Landmark UN Resolution on the Slave Trade
Commemorating the International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade, the United Nations General Assembly passed a landmark resolution, introduced by Ghana, on March 25 that seeks to advance reparatory justice for the trafficking of enslaved Africans and the racialized chattel enslavement of Africans.
African, Caribbean, and Latin American states delivered powerful speeches at this year’s observance. Ghana’s president, speaking on behalf of the African group, described the initiative as “a route to healing and reparative justice” for enslavement legacies “beyond symbolic acknowledgment and toward institutional accountability.” It reflects longstanding advocacy by African and Caribbean states and civil society.
The resolution calls for restitution of looted cultural property, formal apologies, and consideration of compensation and other reparatory measures, framing these as necessary steps to address contemporary inequalities linked to slavery, colonialism, and systemic racism. It describes the trafficking of enslaved Africans and the racialized chattel enslavement of Africans as the “gravest crime against humanity.”
The resolution passed with 123 votes in favor. The United States, Israel, and Argentina voted no and 52 states abstained, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and all European Union member states, including Spain.
The US delegation’s justifications for its vote against the resolution included claims that the resolution narrowly focused on Western states’ responsibility and suggested that the claims of compensation were “an attempt to reallocate modern resources to people and nations who are distantly related to the historical victims.”
Historically, states like the UK chose to compensate former owners of enslaved people—not the enslaved people themselves—based on allegations that they had “lost” property after the abolition of chattel enslavement.
The abstentions from the UK and EU member states were expected, even if unjustified, given European states’ role in colonial-era atrocities and their lasting impacts. While calling the slave trade an “unparalleled tragedy,” they, like the US, question the legal basis for reparations, contending that colonial-era atrocities predated modern international law.
There is growing recognition of reparations for historical and ongoing injustices, including reports of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, a comprehensive UN blueprint to combat systemic racism, which explicitly acknowledges slavery and the slave trade as crimes against humanity and calls for remedies and reparatory justice.
The vote underscores a continuing divide between Global South countries experiencing enduring consequences of colonial atrocities, enslavement, and the slave trade, and many Global North countries unwilling to take responsibility and to take actions.
The legacy of enslavement remains a living structural injustice, with a global majority, including civil society in Europe and US, increasingly calling for meaningful repair rather than symbolic recognition alone.
US/Iran/Israel: Officials Should Uphold Laws of War
(Washington, DC) – Top officials from the United States, Iran, and Israel should stop using rhetoric that shows dangerous disregard for international humanitarian law in the ongoing Middle East conflict, Human Rights Watch said today in four letters to officials of the three countries.
Letter to Iranian Ambassador Ali Bahreini - 30 March 2026 Letter to Prime Minister Katz - 30 March 2026The letters detail inflammatory statements made by US, Israeli, and Iranian officials. All three governments should publicly commit to their obligations under the laws of war, especially with regard to the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure, Human Rights Watch said.
SAVE Americas Act Would Harm Women, Trans People
The US Senate is currently debating the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a bill claiming to address voter fraud but that would in fact create unnecessary barriers to voting for millions of people. The bill would require proof of citizenship when registering to vote, such as a passport or driver’s license paired with a birth certificate, documentation that many lack. The bill would disproportionately affect women and trans people, particularly those from marginalized groups.
Women who changed their legal names after marriage are among those most affected. A 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that around 85 percent of women change their surname in some way after marriage, and an estimated 69 million women in the US have legal names that do not match their birth certificates. To vote, they would need a passport reflecting their current legal name, or they would have to provide additional documentation, such as marriage certificates, divorce decrees, or court documents reflecting the name change, though the exact requirements remain unclear.
Transgender people could also face barriers as many lack consistent identification due to varying state and federal policies, some of which prohibit transgender people from updating gender markers, while others impose burdensome requirements. Requiring multiple forms of ID, including a birth certificate, could create problems for transgender voters whose documents have inconsistent markers of gender.
Financial barriers compound the other barriers. The SAVE America Act introduces logistical and economic hurdles that fall hardest on those with low income and marginalized communities. Many lack documents like passports, driver’s licenses or birth certificates and obtaining them requires fees, transportation and time off work, costs not equally manageable for everyone. As a result, the bill risks disproportionally excluding those with fever resources, echoing concerns historically associated with poll taxes.
Women and transgender people with low incomes will face overlapping barriers that make voting even more difficult. Based on 2024 data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 19.9 million women live in poverty in the US with women of color disproportionally represented.
The bill also raises serious concerns under international law, including the US obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to ensure the right to vote without discrimination and unreasonable restrictions. The Senate should reject the bill.
Mexico City: Flaws in Proposed Care System Law
(Mexico City) – A draft bill to establish a care system in Mexico City risks undermining the rights of people with disabilities and older people due to structural shortcomings and a restrictive budget provision, Human Rights Watch said today.
The bill has been framed as an effort to align Mexico City with international human rights law, including the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. While the current proposal recognizes care as a human right and includes key principles such as autonomy, inclusion, and deinstitutionalization, it falls short on support for independent living and has significant gaps that may limit its alignment with human rights in practice. It relies on care centers and service-driven models, and lacks safeguards to ensure autonomy, informed choice, and control by people with disabilities and older people over their support systems.
“The bill has important positive elements, but its structure and financing restrictions risk limiting people’s ability to exercise their rights in practice,” said Carlos Ríos Espinosa, associate disability rights director at Human Rights Watch. “Without adequate funding, the system cannot move beyond formal recognition of rights to ensuring real support in people’s daily lives.”
The bill’s funding provisions are a particular concern, Human Rights Watch said. While article 78 requires a progressive budget that does not decrease in real terms, an interim provision that bars any spending increases means that the budget to carry out this law’s provisions can only increase if those allocations are taken away from other spending priorities.
This could make increases practically impossible, eviscerating the intent of article 78 and undermining a crucial pillar of the bill’s attempt to align with international human rights law. Adequate funding support will be essential to any serious effort to ensure respect for the right to live independently and be included in the community under article 19 of the international treaty, for example.
The bill includes provisions for services for people with disabilities and older people, as well as the creation of care centers and certain social assistance programs, such as day care centers for older people. However, its overall design remains focused on providing services, and it does not do enough to establish a comprehensive system of individualized support that would enable people to live independently and participate in the community.
The budget restriction seems incompatible with any meaningful effort to realize key components of the right to independent living, including personal assistance, community-based support, and efforts to transition away from institutional care. Without sustained investment, these elements are unlikely to be developed at the scale required, limiting people’s ability to choose where and with whom they live.
The bill’s approach to the critical issue of financial support for people with disabilities also raises substantive concerns. While it would provide cash transfers to caregivers, it does not clearly allocate direct resources for people with disabilities to secure personal assistance or ensure social security coverage for those workers, as proposed by the Care Yes, Supports Too coalition of organizations of people with disabilities. This risks reinforcing dependence on families, contrary to the goal of autonomy.
Human Rights Watch has documented cases in Mexico City in which a lack of independent living support exposes people with disabilities to domestic violence and entrenches dependency, increasing the risks of neglect and abandonment. These situations often arise when people must rely on unstable, insufficient, or abusive family or informal arrangements.
“A provision that bars budget expansion in future fiscal years raises serious concerns about whether the government can meet its obligation to take steps commensurate with maximum available resources to realize economic, social, and cultural rights,” Ríos Espinosa said. “It also creates a real risk that the system will be implemented in a limited or fragmented way, leaving many people without the support they are entitled to.”
There are also concerns about other aspects of the bill, Human Rights Watch said, including the lack of a clear strategy for deinstitutionalization and the use of eligibility criteria that may exclude people who need support but do not meet the threshold of “intensive” needs, as described in the bill.
Lawmakers should remove the budget cap to ensure that funding can expand in line with needs and prioritize investment in community-based support and personal assistance consistent with article 19 of the international treaty, Human Rights Watch said.
“This law could be transformative but only if it is backed by adequate resources and a rights-aligned framework,” Ríos Espinosa said. “A care system without adequate funding risks becoming an empty promise rather than a tool for advancing rights and independence.”
For Immediate Release Mexico City: Flaws in Proposed Care System Law
(Mexico City, March 30, 2026) – A draft bill to establish a care system in Mexico City risks undermining the rights of people with disabilities and older people due to structural shortcomings and a restrictive budget provision, Human Rights Watch said today.
The bill has been framed as an effort to align Mexico City with international human rights law, including the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. While the current proposal recognizes care as a human right and includes key principles such as autonomy, inclusion, and deinstitutionalization, it falls short on support for independent living and has significant gaps that may limit its alignment with human rights in practice. It relies on care centers and service-driven models, and lacks safeguards to ensure autonomy, informed choice, and control by people with disabilities and older people over their support systems.
“The bill has important positive elements, but its structure and financing restrictions risk limiting people’s ability to exercise their rights in practice,” said Carlos Ríos Espinosa, associate disability rights director at Human Rights Watch. “Without adequate funding, the system cannot move beyond formal recognition of rights to ensuring real support in people’s daily lives.”
The bill’s funding provisions are a particular concern, Human Rights Watch said. While article 78 requires a progressive budget that does not decrease in real terms, an interim provision that bars any spending increases means that the budget to carry out this law’s provisions can only increase if those allocations are taken away from other spending priorities.
This could make increases practically impossible, eviscerating the intent of article 78 and undermining a crucial pillar of the bill’s attempt to align with international human rights law. Adequate funding support will be essential to any serious effort to ensure respect for the right to live independently and be included in the community under article 19 of the international treaty, for example.
The bill includes provisions for services for people with disabilities and older people, as well as the creation of care centers and certain social assistance programs, such as day care centers for older people. However, its overall design remains focused on providing services, and it does not do enough to establish a comprehensive system of individualized support that would enable people to live independently and participate in the community.
The budget restriction seems incompatible with any meaningful effort to realize key components of the right to independent living, including personal assistance, community-based support, and efforts to transition away from institutional care. Without sustained investment, these elements are unlikely to be developed at the scale required, limiting people’s ability to choose where and with whom they live.
The bill’s approach to the critical issue of financial support for people with disabilities also raises substantive concerns. While it would provide cash transfers to caregivers, it does not clearly allocate direct resources for people with disabilities to secure personal assistance or ensure social security coverage for those workers, as proposed by the Care Yes, Supports Too coalition of organizations of people with disabilities. This risks reinforcing dependence on families, contrary to the goal of autonomy.
Human Rights Watch has documented cases in Mexico City in which a lack of independent living support exposes people with disabilities to domestic violence and entrenches dependency, increasing the risks of neglect and abandonment. These situations often arise when people must rely on unstable, insufficient, or abusive family or informal arrangements.
“A provision that bars budget expansion in future fiscal years raises serious concerns about whether the government can meet its obligation to take steps commensurate with maximum available resources to realize economic, social, and cultural rights,” Ríos Espinosa said. “It also creates a real risk that the system will be implemented in a limited or fragmented way, leaving many people without the support they are entitled to.”
There are also concerns about other aspects of the bill, Human Rights Watch said, including the lack of a clear strategy for deinstitutionalization and the use of eligibility criteria that may exclude people who need support but do not meet the threshold of “intensive” needs, as described in the bill.
Lawmakers should remove the budget cap to ensure that funding can expand in line with needs and prioritize investment in community-based support and personal assistance consistent with article 19 of the international treaty, Human Rights Watch said.
“This law could be transformative but only if it is backed by adequate resources and a rights-aligned framework,” Ríos Espinosa said. “A care system without adequate funding risks becoming an empty promise rather than a tool for advancing rights and independence.”
US: Rights-Respecting Approaches to Mental Health Crisis
(New York) – Communities throughout the country are developing alternative models of mental health crisis response Human Rights Watch, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, and the Center for Racial and Disability Justice at UCLA Law School said in a report released today. These approaches are desperately needed as US police kill hundreds of people each year, many of whom had documented mental health conditions, and as federal, state, and local jurisdictions seek to implement increasingly coercive approaches to mental health crisis response and treatment.
The 66-page report, “‘Self-Determination is the Pathway to Liberation’: Alternative Mental Health Crisis Response in the United States,” identifies key elements of rights-respecting responses to mental health crises and explores how alternative mental health crisis response programs have carried out these approaches in practice. Many of these models share core elements, including promoting individual autonomy, providing voluntary support rather than mandating compliance, and avoiding unnecessary law enforcement involvement.
“Having police as the primary or default responders to people experiencing mental health crises is ineffective and sometimes lethal, given their orientation toward force and compliance,” said Tanya Greene, US program director at Human Rights Watch. “Fortunately, there are alternate approaches that emphasize personal autonomy and consent to treatment.”
Researchers studied over 150 crisis response programs from across the United States and feature eight that have committed to implement key aspects of supportive, rights-based mental health crisis response without police as primary or default responders. The researchers interviewed program administrators and, where possible, community members and advocates for unaffiliated perspectives on the programs. Researchers used international human rights law and standards as a tool for identifying key elements of rights-respecting programs.
In many cases, police presence escalates mental health crises and results in coercion and violence. People with mental health conditions are particularly at risk to police violence and are much more likely to be killed during police encounters than people without a disability. This risk is especially true for Black people and other people of color with mental health conditions. Police often tend to approach people in crisis with commands and calls for compliance in situations when a more nuanced and supportive interaction that peers—those with lived mental health experience—and mental health workers can provide is needed.
The eight programs featured in the report are based in communities around the United States. Some are connected to local government, while others operate independently. Their response teams differ in composition, though most include peers, social workers, emergency medical technicians or paramedics, and crisis intervention specialists. They typically respond on-site to the person experiencing a crisis, and provide a variety of services, including assessments, de-escalation, safety planning, crisis counseling, education, transportation, referrals to community resources, and follow-ups.
The programs were developed with the recognition that police-centered mental health crisis responses have often led to violence and harm to the person in need of support. Black people and other people of color have been especially exposed to that violence and harm, due in part to existing structural racism in policing, mental health care, and more generally throughout society.
Programs that emphasize non-coercive models and non-police responses seek to avoid that violence and provide more effective support for people experiencing crises by mobilizing and training peers and other professionals, steeped in the culture and communities they serve.
The metrics by which the programs were evaluated include eliminating police as primary or default responders, avoiding involuntary treatment, implementing a consent-centered approach to treatment, promoting participation of peers, providing trauma-informed and culturally responsive training, and maintaining a deep connection to the communities they serve. Researchers evaluated the programs’ commitment to providing accessible services, response times comparable with other emergency services, follow-up care, and minimization of power imbalances between service providers and those they support.
“These programs serve as examples for how we can truly serve individuals and communities to make their own decisions through support and care,” said William Juhn, senior staff attorney of the Disability Justice Program at New York Lawyers for the Public Interest.
While no one program purports to embrace or implement all these rights-respecting criteria, each program is oriented around at least some of them. Researchers did not evaluate outcomes and did not endorse any program’s particular model or approach to crisis response.
“As federal, state, and local governments move toward more coercive approaches to mental health crisis response, like involuntary commitments, hospitalizations, and forced medication, it is important to understand that programs honoring human rights do exist,” said Jordyn Jensen, community engagement and communications manager at the Center for Racial and Disability Justice.
African Court Should Protect People Displaced by Climate Change
The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights is poised to issue an advisory opinion on states’ human rights obligations in the climate crisis. This is an opportunity to strengthen protections for people displaced by climate change and to call for a rights-respecting approach.
A petition filed in May 2025 by the Pan African Lawyers Union and the African Climate Platform asked the court to interpret states’ obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights in light of climate change. This comes amid a surge in such legal clarifications by international and regional tribunals.
Human Rights Watch Submission for the African Court Advisory Opinion on State Obligations Related to the Climate Crisis August 18, 2025 “Waiting for God”Human Rights Watch submitted an amicus brief to the court drawing on our August 2025 report, “‘Waiting for God’: Flood Displacement and Planned Relocation of Fisherfolk in Saint-Louis, Senegal.” Coastal flooding in 2015 and 2016 displaced fishing families from the Langue de Barbarie peninsula in Saint-Louis to Khar Yalla, a site that government and World Bank officials acknowledge is unsuitable for permanent habitation.
We found that nearly a decade after the floods, families experienced severe overcrowding, most houses lacked electricity, there was no waste collection, and seasonal flooding sent septic water into homes. These families are excluded from a World Bank-funded planned relocation of others displaced by coastal floods, and are desperate for the kind of protections this advisory opinion could make clear are state obligations.
Based on data from the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, the number of people internally displaced by floods and other natural hazards has risen nearly sixfold across African continent in the last 15 years, to 6.3 million in 2023. Planned relocations are already happening across Africa with 39 cases identified in a global mapping.
The 2025 decisions by the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights cemented the notion that climate policy must respect human rights, be guided by the best available science, and reflect a state’s highest level of ambition. But no international tribunal has comprehensively clarified how national policies can protect the rights of climate displaced communities awaiting planned relocations.
The court should address this critical gap for communities like Khar Yalla by clarifying that states parties to the African Charter have binding obligations to protect people displaced by climate change including through rights-respecting planned relocation as a last resort.
Iran: Unlawful Cluster Munition Strikes on Israel
(Beirut, March 30, 2026) – The Iranian government has repeatedly used inherently indiscriminate cluster munitions delivered by ballistic missiles in attacks on Israel since February 28, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today. At least four civilians have been killed in the strikes, which violate the laws of war and may amount to war crimes.
Human Rights Watch confirmed three separate Iranian attacks involving cluster munitions that affected population centers in Israel, including two separate incidents that resulted in civilian deaths near Tel Aviv, two men in Yehud on March 9 and an older man and woman in Ramat Gan on March 18.
“Iran’s use of cluster munitions in populated areas in Israel pose a foreseeable and long-lasting danger to civilians,” said Patrick Thompson, crisis, conflict and arms researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Cluster munition bomblets are dispersed over a wide area, making them unlawfully indiscriminate in violation of the laws of war.”
Cluster munitions are fired in rockets, missiles, and projectiles or dropped from aircraft. They typically disperse in the air, spreading dozens of explosive submunitions, or bomblets, indiscriminately over a large area. Many fail to explode on initial impact, leaving duds that can kill and maim, like landmines, for years or even decades, unless cleared and destroyed.
Human Rights Watch analyzed 50 videos and 5 photographs posted online of suspected cluster munition use by Iran between March 1 and 20, as well as 6 photographs of unexploded submunitions apparently located in Israel and the West Bank. Human Rights Watch also interviewed witnesses to suspected cluster munition attacks. Human Rights Watch wrote to the Iranian government on March 25 concerning the use of cluster munitions. No response had been received at the time of publication.
Israel: Confirmed Submonition Imapcts Apologies, if you see this message instead of an interactive map, then your browser does not support WebGL - a technology used by this mapping tool. Try loading this page in a supported browser like Chrome or contact webteam@hrw.org Confirmed Submonition ImpactsFor privacy and security reasons, Human Rights Watch has anonymized the locations by rounding the coordinates and restricting the zoom level for readers.
Graphics © 2026 Human Rights Watch.
Since the United States and Israel launched their assault on Iran on February 28, Iranian forces have responded with drone and missile attacks against Israel, as well as other countries in the region, particularly in the Gulf. Media reports and the Israeli government said at least 16 civilians have been killed in Israel and 4 in the West Bank as a result of missile fire. Nine of the victims in Israel were killed in a single ballistic missile strike on the town of Beit Shemesh on March 1, including 3 children. As of March 27, the Iranian Red Crescent had reported 1,900 deaths in Iran since the start of the conflict.
Although Iran has not joined the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, which comprehensively bans all production and use of these weapons, international humanitarian law prohibits indiscriminate attacks. The widespread impact of submunitions across a populated area is indicative of attacks that cannot discriminate between civilians and combatants and may amount to war crimes. Unexploded submunitions pose continued danger to civilians long after attacks.
Iran is known to possess ballistic missiles capable of delivering submunitions. The Israeli military spokesperson accused Iran of using cluster munitions in a post on X on February 28, the first reported use of these weapons during the current hostilities. Human Rights Watch was unable to verify this claim, but on March 1, multiple sources began posting videos and photographs on social media of what appear to be cluster munitions dispersed by an Iranian ballistic missile. It is unclear if these images are from the same or separate attacks.
Human Rights Watch reviewed 30 similar videos showing descending ballistic missiles surrounded by numerous suspected submunitions falling toward the ground. These most likely show eight separate incidents between March 1 and 20. Most show ballistic missiles with between 21 and 25 objects falling along their paths. Two of the videos show at least 65 objects. Human Rights Watch could not corroborate where these videos were taken, but researchers could not find them posted online before March. There is no visible evidence in videos reviewed that suggest these missiles were intercepted. The Israeli military has reportedly said that it does not attempt to intercept cluster munitions to conserve interceptors.
Click to expand Image Two images of unexploded submunitions posted by South Sharon Regional Council in central Israel on March 5, 2026. © 2026 Human Rights WatchThe first incident involving cluster munitions that Human Rights Watch confirmed occurred in the city of Or Yehuda, in central Israel. On March 6, Emanuel Fabian, a military correspondent for the Times of Israel, posted CCTV footage on X showing a clearly identifiable submunition affecting a civilian area that Human Rights Watch geolocated to a commercial area in Or Yehuda. The video, timestamped March 4 at 2:38 p.m., shows a submunition hitting the middle of a wide, empty street, causing an explosion.
The second attack took place on March 9, killing the two men and injuring at least one other person. Human Rights Watch verified near simultaneous impacts in Or Yehuda, Yehud, Bat Yam and Holon, all nearby cities in the broader metropolitan area of Tel Aviv. This area is Israel’s most densely populated, accounting for up to 45 percent of its population. The apparent submunitions were likely from one ballistic missile, affecting sites up to 13 kilometers apart, demonstrating the inherently indiscriminate nature of these weapons.
The attack in Yehud killed two construction workers at a building site. A video posted to Telegram on March 9 just before midday and verified by Human Rights Watch, shows two bodies several meters apart, one in a pool of blood, at a construction site. A witness to the attack said: “I work here on the construction site where the men were killed. I was pulling [my car] onto the street, on my way to work, and the sirens came on, and I heard the explosion.”
An apparent submunition impact approximately five kilometers away, in Or Yehuda, severely injured a man at the same time. Human Rights Watch verified CCTV footage posted to Telegram and geolocated it to Or Yehuda that shows a suspected submunition detonating on a road between newly constructed apartment complexes and a pedestrian falling injured to the ground a few meters away.
At 11:30 a.m. on March 9, Magen David Adom, Israel’s national emergency medical service, posted on Telegram that it was responding to multiple incidents in central Israel that had caused serious casualties. Fabian, the reporter for The Times of Israel, reported that the impacts were caused by submunitions, quoting first responders.
Human Rights Watch analysis of the detonations and the damage to residential areas in Yehud, Or Yehuda, Bat Yam, and Holon also suggests the use of submunitions, which have a relatively small explosive payload and cause significantly less damage than medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, which have high explosive payloads many times larger than a single submunition. The damage was also inconsistent with kinetic damage caused by falling debris.
In the third incident Human Rights Watch verified, suspected submunitions struck multiple locations between midnight and 1 a.m. on March 18. At 12:12 a.m., the Israeli military announced the detection of ballistic missile launches from Iran and at around 12:20 a.m., sirens began sounding throughout central Israel. From 12:22 a.m., multiple sources began posting videos on Telegram of suspected cluster munitions, with the captions saying they were falling over central Israel. Researchers could not determine the locations of these videos, as they were taken at night, but it appears that they were not posted online before March 18.
These videos were followed by reports on social media of impacts in Bnei Brak, Petah Tikva, and Ramat Gan, all within the Tel Aviv metropolitan area.
Shortly after reports of strikes surfaced, Magen David Adom reported that a man and a woman had died of severe fragmentation injuries in Ramat Gan. Videos and photographs of the impact site verified by Human Rights Watch show damage to a three-story residential building. A top-floor apartment where the couple were killed sustained damage to at least one interior room and its façade, with only light structural damage to the rest of the building, including a collapsed awning. The apartment damage is consistent with a submunition, as a large unitary warhead from a ballistic missile would most likely have caused significantly more damage.
A witness in Ramat Gan said: “We were huddled inside our shelter––me, my mother, father, and brother––when suddenly, after the alarm, we heard an explosion. It sounded close. We opened the window, looked outside, and saw that the apartment across the street from us was hit. A [munition] went through the roof and hit two older people, in their 70s, before they had reached the shelter.”
Human Rights Watch confirmed near simultaneous impacts in Petah Tikva on March 18 that were also most likely caused by submunitions. A photograph geolocated by Human Rights Watch shows an impact crater next to an upturned vehicle consistent with the size and depth of craters in other videos of submunition impacts. A video verified by Human Rights Watch and time-stamped 12:21 a.m. on March 18, shows an explosion consistent with a submunition impact approximately 815 meters to the northeast.
On March 19, four Palestinian women were killed in the West Bank town of Beit Awa. The Israeli military asserted they were killed by a submunition, while the Palestinian Red Crescent Society reported that they were killed by shrapnel falling from a missile. Human Rights Watch has not been able to independently verify the type of munition that killed them. Palestinians in the West Bank are more vulnerable to missiles and falling interception fragments due to a lack of protective infrastructure such as warning sirens and bomb shelters.
Human Rights Watch also reviewed six photographs showing unexploded submunitions posted online between March 1 and 15, that reportedly struck Israel and the West Bank. Human Rights Watch could not establish the locations of these submunitions due to the lack of geographic detail in the photographs, but researchers could not find them online before March. These submunitions are consistent with munitions used by Iran during the 12-Day War in June 2025, and their use has not been documented in other conflicts.
Publicly available technical information on the exact weapons used in these strikes is limited. Iran has, however, previously published information on ballistic missiles that have the capability to dispense submunitions. Iranian media published information on the “Zelzal” ballistic missile, which can carry up to 30 unguided submunitions weighing 17 kilograms that resemble those identified by Human Rights Watch. The number of submunitions is also consistent with most videos of suspected submunition use reviewed by Human Rights Watch.
Following an apparent failed missile test in Iran in 2023, submunitions resembling those Human Rights Watch identified in Israel struck the city of Gorgan in northeastern Iran. These submunitions are equipped with a heat shield that protects them as they descend through the atmosphere, causing a glow visible in videos of their descent. Additionally, Iran is also known to possess multiple other ballistic missiles reportedly capable of delivering submunitions, including variants of the “Ghadr,” “Khorramshar,” and “Fateh” missiles.
“The Iranian government should immediately stop firing cluster munitions,” Thompson said. “These munitions are not only inherently indiscriminate at the time of use, but unexploded submunitions pose a risk long afterwards, until cleared or destroyed.”
Iran: Unlawful Cluster Munition Strikes on Israel
(Beirut, March 30, 2026) – The Iranian government has repeatedly used inherently indiscriminate cluster munitions delivered by ballistic missiles in attacks on Israel since February 28, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today. At least four civilians have been killed in the strikes, which violate the laws of war and may amount to war crimes.
Human Rights Watch confirmed three separate Iranian attacks involving cluster munitions that affected population centers in Israel, including two separate incidents that resulted in civilian deaths near Tel Aviv, two men in Yehud on March 9 and an older man and woman in Ramat Gan on March 18.
“Iran’s use of cluster munitions in populated areas in Israel pose a foreseeable and long-lasting danger to civilians,” said Patrick Thompson, crisis, conflict and arms researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Cluster munition bomblets are dispersed over a wide area, making them unlawfully indiscriminate in violation of the laws of war.”
Cluster munitions are fired in rockets, missiles, and projectiles or dropped from aircraft. They typically disperse in the air, spreading dozens of explosive submunitions, or bomblets, indiscriminately over a large area. Many fail to explode on initial impact, leaving duds that can kill and maim, like landmines, for years or even decades, unless cleared and destroyed.
Human Rights Watch analyzed 50 videos and 5 photographs posted online of suspected cluster munition use by Iran between March 1 and 20, as well as 6 photographs of unexploded submunitions apparently located in Israel and the West Bank. Human Rights Watch also interviewed witnesses to suspected cluster munition attacks. Human Rights Watch wrote to the Iranian government on March 25 concerning the use of cluster munitions. No response had been received at the time of publication.
Israel: Confirmed Submonition Imapcts Confirmed Submonition ImpactsFor privacy and security reasons, Human Rights Watch has anonymized the locations by rounding the coordinates and restricting the zoom level for readers.
Graphics © 2026 Human Rights Watch.
Since the United States and Israel launched their assault on Iran on February 28, Iranian forces have responded with drone and missile attacks against Israel, as well as other countries in the region, particularly in the Gulf. Media reports and the Israeli government said at least 16 civilians have been killed in Israel and 4 in the West Bank as a result of missile fire. Nine of the victims in Israel were killed in a single ballistic missile strike on the town of Beit Shemesh on March 1, including 3 children. As of March 27, the Iranian Red Crescent had reported 1,900 deaths in Iran since the start of the conflict.
Although Iran has not joined the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, which comprehensively bans all production and use of these weapons, international humanitarian law prohibits indiscriminate attacks. The widespread impact of submunitions across a populated area is indicative of attacks that cannot discriminate between civilians and combatants and may amount to war crimes. Unexploded submunitions pose continued danger to civilians long after attacks.
Iran is known to possess ballistic missiles capable of delivering submunitions. The Israeli military spokesperson accused Iran of using cluster munitions in a post on X on February 28, the first reported use of these weapons during the current hostilities. Human Rights Watch was unable to verify this claim, but on March 1, multiple sources began posting videos and photographs on social media of what appear to be cluster munitions dispersed by an Iranian ballistic missile. It is unclear if these images are from the same or separate attacks.
Human Rights Watch reviewed 30 similar videos showing descending ballistic missiles surrounded by numerous suspected submunitions falling toward the ground. These most likely show eight separate incidents between March 1 and 20. Most show ballistic missiles with between 21 and 25 objects falling along their paths. Two of the videos show at least 65 objects. Human Rights Watch could not corroborate where these videos were taken, but researchers could not find them posted online before March. There is no visible evidence in videos reviewed that suggest these missiles were intercepted. The Israeli military has reportedly said that it does not attempt to intercept cluster munitions to conserve interceptors.
Click to expand Image Two images of unexploded submunitions posted by South Sharon Regional Council in central Israel on March 5, 2026. © 2026 Human Rights WatchThe first incident involving cluster munitions that Human Rights Watch confirmed occurred in the city of Or Yehuda, in central Israel. On March 6, Emanuel Fabian, a military correspondent for the Times of Israel, posted CCTV footage on X showing a clearly identifiable submunition affecting a civilian area that Human Rights Watch geolocated to a commercial area in Or Yehuda. The video, timestamped March 4 at 2:38 p.m., shows a submunition hitting the middle of a wide, empty street, causing an explosion.
The second attack took place on March 9, killing the two men and injuring at least one other person. Human Rights Watch verified near simultaneous impacts in Or Yehuda, Yehud, Bat Yam and Holon, all nearby cities in the broader metropolitan area of Tel Aviv. This area is Israel’s most densely populated, accounting for up to 45 percent of its population. The apparent submunitions were likely from one ballistic missile, affecting sites up to 13 kilometers apart, demonstrating the inherently indiscriminate nature of these weapons.
The attack in Yehud killed two construction workers at a building site. A video posted to Telegram on March 9 just before midday and verified by Human Rights Watch, shows two bodies several meters apart, one in a pool of blood, at a construction site. A witness to the attack said: “I work here on the construction site where the men were killed. I was pulling [my car] onto the street, on my way to work, and the sirens came on, and I heard the explosion.”
An apparent submunition impact approximately five kilometers away, in Or Yehuda, severely injured a man at the same time. Human Rights Watch verified CCTV footage posted to Telegram and geolocated it to Or Yehuda that shows a suspected submunition detonating on a road between newly constructed apartment complexes and a pedestrian falling injured to the ground a few meters away.
At 11:30 a.m. on March 9, Magen David Adom, Israel’s national emergency medical service, posted on Telegram that it was responding to multiple incidents in central Israel that had caused serious casualties. Fabian, the reporter for The Times of Israel, reported that the impacts were caused by submunitions, quoting first responders.
Human Rights Watch analysis of the detonations and the damage to residential areas in Yehud, Or Yehuda, Bat Yam, and Holon also suggests the use of submunitions, which have a relatively small explosive payload and cause significantly less damage than medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, which have high explosive payloads many times larger than a single submunition. The damage was also inconsistent with kinetic damage caused by falling debris.
In the third incident Human Rights Watch verified, suspected submunitions struck multiple locations between midnight and 1 a.m. on March 18. At 12:12 a.m., the Israeli military announced the detection of ballistic missile launches from Iran and at around 12:20 a.m., sirens began sounding throughout central Israel. From 12:22 a.m., multiple sources began posting videos on Telegram of suspected cluster munitions, with the captions saying they were falling over central Israel. Researchers could not determine the locations of these videos, as they were taken at night, but it appears that they were not posted online before March 18.
These videos were followed by reports on social media of impacts in Bnei Brak, Petah Tikva, and Ramat Gan, all within the Tel Aviv metropolitan area.
Shortly after reports of strikes surfaced, Magen David Adom reported that a man and a woman had died of severe fragmentation injuries in Ramat Gan. Videos and photographs of the impact site verified by Human Rights Watch show damage to a three-story residential building. A top-floor apartment where the couple were killed sustained damage to at least one interior room and its façade, with only light structural damage to the rest of the building, including a collapsed awning. The apartment damage is consistent with a submunition, as a large unitary warhead from a ballistic missile would most likely have caused significantly more damage.
A witness in Ramat Gan said: “We were huddled inside our shelter––me, my mother, father, and brother––when suddenly, after the alarm, we heard an explosion. It sounded close. We opened the window, looked outside, and saw that the apartment across the street from us was hit. A [munition] went through the roof and hit two older people, in their 70s, before they had reached the shelter.”
Human Rights Watch confirmed near simultaneous impacts in Petah Tikva on March 18 that were also most likely caused by submunitions. A photograph geolocated by Human Rights Watch shows an impact crater next to an upturned vehicle consistent with the size and depth of craters in other videos of submunition impacts. A video verified by Human Rights Watch and time-stamped 12:21 a.m. on March 18, shows an explosion consistent with a submunition impact approximately 815 meters to the northeast.
On March 19, four Palestinian women were killed in the West Bank town of Beit Awa. The Israeli military asserted they were killed by a submunition, while the Palestinian Red Crescent Society reported that they were killed by shrapnel falling from a missile. Human Rights Watch has not been able to independently verify the type of munition that killed them. Palestinians in the West Bank are more vulnerable to missiles and falling interception fragments due to a lack of protective infrastructure such as warning sirens and bomb shelters.
Human Rights Watch also reviewed six photographs showing unexploded submunitions posted online between March 1 and 15, that reportedly struck Israel and the West Bank. Human Rights Watch could not establish the locations of these submunitions due to the lack of geographic detail in the photographs, but researchers could not find them online before March. These submunitions are consistent with munitions used by Iran during the 12-Day War in June 2025, and their use has not been documented in other conflicts.
Publicly available technical information on the exact weapons used in these strikes is limited. Iran has, however, previously published information on ballistic missiles that have the capability to dispense submunitions. Iranian media published information on the “Zelzal” ballistic missile, which can carry up to 30 unguided submunitions weighing 17 kilograms that resemble those identified by Human Rights Watch. The number of submunitions is also consistent with most videos of suspected submunition use reviewed by Human Rights Watch.
Following an apparent failed missile test in Iran in 2023, submunitions resembling those Human Rights Watch identified in Israel struck the city of Gorgan in northeastern Iran. These submunitions are equipped with a heat shield that protects them as they descend through the atmosphere, causing a glow visible in videos of their descent. Additionally, Iran is also known to possess multiple other ballistic missiles reportedly capable of delivering submunitions, including variants of the “Ghadr,” “Khorramshar,” and “Fateh” missiles.
“The Iranian government should immediately stop firing cluster munitions,” Thompson said. “These munitions are not only inherently indiscriminate at the time of use, but unexploded submunitions pose a risk long afterwards, until cleared or destroyed.”
The Loss of a Journalist in Burundi
Human Rights Watch mourns the passing of Burundian journalist Jackson Bahati, who died suddenly at age 55 on March 16, 2026.
Click to expand Image Jackson Bahati. © PrivateBahati was a pillar among journalists in Burundi. A skilled writer and presenter, he was led by an innate curiosity and love for his country. Throughout his career spanning decades, Bahati interviewed many victims and witnesses of human rights abuses with care and compassion, empowering them while giving voice to their experiences.
Bahati worked for a variety of outlets across Burundi over the course of his career and was regarded as a mentor for younger journalists, ready to support the next generation. He was deeply committed to those who looked to him as a teacher and wanted, above all else, a strong media in Burundi to be part of his legacy.
When Burundi experienced tumultuous political and security upheaval in 2015, Bahati remained in the country, committed to continuing his work. He was attuned to the challenging and at times dangerous security situation for journalists working in that environment but never allowed these to discourage him or those around him.
In 2015, during violence around his home in Cibitoke, Bahati was out in front of the reporting, leading with his eloquence and a deep personal commitment to both journalism and the human rights cause.
Bahati’s death is a shock to the Great Lakes media community and his colleagues and partners around the world, including Human Rights Watch. We express our deepest condolences to his family and all those close to him. Burundi has lost a committed journalist, fierce advocate, friend, and a kind, generous soul. He will be dearly missed and always remembered.
A Year on from Myanmar’s Earthquake
On March 28, 2025, a 7.7-magnitude earthquake struck central Myanmar, killing thousands and devastating communities already affected by armed conflict, displacement, and economic collapse.
The quake and its aftershock toppled buildings and collapsed roads and bridges across several of the country’s states and regions. Essential services were brought to the “verge of collapse,” according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, impacting millions of people. But rather than receiving support, most were left to contend with the junta’s misuse of aid for military purposes.
Junta officials denied and delayed visas for international emergency response teams, confiscated medicine, extorted and harassed aid workers, and blocked internet access. Areas under the opposition’s control—large swathes of the affected regions—were left “largely devoid of external assistance,” according to an internal UN report. Hundreds of thousands were displaced and exposed to extreme heat without access to clean water or medical care.
The junta took advantage of this catastrophe to ruthlessly attack civilians in affected areas, despite its announcement of a ceasefire to allow for relief. In the two months after the earthquake, the military carried out more than 550 aerial and artillery attacks, killing hundreds of civilians. More airstrikes were launched in April 2025 than in any prior month since the 2021 military coup.
Over the past year, the military has benefitted from increased support from China and Russia. Military operations to retake territory from opposition forces ahead of the junta’s recent sham national elections involved numerous airstrikes killing and wounding civilians that amounted to war crimes.
Earlier this month, the junta convened its new proxy parliament, a military body in all but name. Army chief Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, who has overseen the military’s war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal acts for 15 years, is seeking the role of president.
After the earthquake, the UN Security Council released a statement calling for timely and effective assistance, echoing its December 2022 resolution. But the council has remained largely deadlocked and ineffectual on Myanmar and the junta’s frequent violations of the resolution.
Waves of overlapping crises—humanitarian, man-made, and natural—continue to threaten the lives and well-being of people across Myanmar. The junta has driven these conditions. Governments should increase pressure on the military to protect the rights of everyone in Myanmar, now and in future disasters.
Hungary Orders Investigation of Journalist on Espionage Accusation
The decision by Hungary’s minister of justice to order an investigation into Szabolcs Panyi, a prominent Hungarian journalist, on dubious accusations of espionage, marks a dangerous escalation in the state’s crackdown on independent media.
The government accuses Panyi, who writes for Direkt36 and VSquare, of spying “in cooperation with a foreign state,”suggesting his journalism serves as a “cover activity.” He has not yet been charged with any offence. Conviction for espionage carries a sentence of up to 15 years. Panyi has denied the accusations, calling them an attack on journalism.
The allegations stem from his reporting on ties between the Hungarian and Russian governments, including communications between officials that could be politically embarrassing to the Hungarian government.
The investigation started after a Hungarian pro-government newspaper published a covertly recorded conversation between Panyi and a source. The recording raises fresh concerns about surveillance of journalists in Hungary, especially as Panyi was previously targeted by Pegasus spyware, which allows users unfettered access to a targets device and is only supplied to governments. A 2023 European Parliament investigation found that Hungary’s government uses Pegasus.
Hungary’s media environment has been systematically eroded over the past decade with an estimated 80 percent of the media now directly or indirectly controlled by the government. Some independent outlets have been taken over by government-linked actors and turned into pro-government mouthpieces, while others have been shut down completely.
Hundreds of pro-government outlets have been consolidated under the umbrella of a single private foundation, the Central European Press and Media Foundation, or KESMA, while independent media face sustained economic pressure through the selective allocation of state advertising. Journalists face smear campaigns, obstruction, and surveillance, while regulators lack independence, creating an increasingly hostile environment for independent reporting.
Investigating a journalist for espionage in retaliation for reporting on issues of public interest risks criminalizing journalism itself. It sends the chilling message that reporters who look too closely may face criminal proceedings.
Hungarian authorities should immediately drop their investigation into Panyi and end their intimidation of independent journalists.
The European Commission should closely monitor Panyi’s case and ensure it is reflected in its ongoing assessment of Hungary’s compliance with the rule of law and funding conditionality, while EU member states should use the article 7 process, designed to address serious rule of law breaches including by suspending a member state’s voting rights, to pressure Hungary to end its crackdown on independent media.
Pakistan: Airstrike on Afghan Medical Facility Unlawful
(New York) – A Pakistani airstrike on a drug treatment center in Afghanistan on March 16, 2026, was an unlawful attack and a possible war crime, Human Rights Watch said today. International agencies reported that at least 143 people were killed and more than 250 injured, most of them patients. Pakistani authorities should promptly and impartially investigate the incident and hold all those responsible for wrongdoing to account.
The Pakistan air force attack struck the Omid Drug Rehabilitation Center, a 2,000-bed treatment complex in eastern Kabul that has operated since 2016 on the premises of a former NATO base known as Camp Phoenix. A center employee told Human Rights Watch that three buildings were hit: a large building used as a dining area, a building that accommodates 450 patients, and a guard room where eight men were working. On March 17, Pakistan’s federal minister of information and broadcasting, Attaullah Tarar, posted on X that Pakistan had carried out “precision airstrikes” on “technical support infrastructure and ammunition storage facilities,” but did not mention the Omid facility.
“The available evidence indicates that the Pakistani airstrike against a well-known Kabul medical facility killing dozens of patients was unlawful,” said Patricia Gossman, senior associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Pakistani authorities need to carry out an impartial investigation to determine why it hit a drug treatment center filled with civilians and who should be held to account.”
The center employee said that over 1,000 patients were at the facility at the time of the attack, but the actual number is uncertain. An official with an international agency said that many patients were in the dining area to break the Ramadan fast. The United Nations describedthe “complete destruction of one block that housed adolescents receiving drug treatment.”
Afghanistan’s poor health infrastructure and lack of DNA testing capacity have hampered identification of the dead. An Afghan forensic doctor at the Public Health Ministry said that medical personnel could not identify some bodies. The father of one victim said: “We searched all hospitals in Kabul…[but] we couldn’t find him. Then we went to forensic medicine, and his body was there. … They showed us many bodies before we could identify him.”
Afghan officials have read out their names to families searching for their relatives. Omid center patients also included detainees and prisoners from Pul-e Charkhi prison, 16 kilometers east, and people picked up during anti-drug sweeps in Kabul. Former employees and aid officials said that the missing may include prisoners and other patients who escaped in the chaos.
Satellite imagery from March 23, analyzed by Human Rights Watch, shows widespread destruction across the Omid center. The largest building in the compound and two smaller buildings are destroyed. Other buildings around the main building sustained heavy damage, as well as a group of buildings in a corner of the compound that appear completely burned.
Human Rights Watch verified a video that the Pakistan information minister posted on social media on March 17 showing a missile hitting the largest building in the compound, closely followed by explosions at two other buildings. Humanitarian agency officials told researchers that the large building was used as a dining area and for accommodation, which Human Rights Watch corroborated by matching earlier photographs and video of the building’s interior. A 2023 Al Jazeera documentary about the Omid center shows dozens of patients gathering in the courtyard outside the building. Humanitarian agency officials said the other two buildings were living facilities and a guard room that a center employee said was used to store food and cooking oil.
Human Rights Watch verified three videos posted on social media showing the immediate aftermath of the attack and photographs from search-and-rescue operations showing destruction across the camp. Videos show the group of buildings in the center’s corner engulfed in flames. In a verified video, a sign on a burning building reads “Directorate of 2000-bed Support and Treatment Center (2000), Omid.” A photograph of the same building’s destroyed interior posted online on March 17 shows charred remains of a bunk bed.
The former NATO complex also houses the 1,000-bed Ibn Sina Addiction Treatment Hospital, run by the Public Health Ministry. The two medical facilities occupied only part of the former military base, and the purpose of other structures in the complex is unclear. However, in the videos reviewed, Human Rights Watch saw no indication of secondary detonations caused by bulk explosives, propellants, or ammunition with tracer elements typically associated with ammunition depots. In addition, the facility had insufficient space to safely segregate and store bulk ammunition or propellants given the quantity and distance needed.
International humanitarian law applicable to the armed conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan obligates all warring parties to take “constant care” to protect civilians during military operations. This includes taking all feasible precautions to avoid locating military objectives near densely populated areas and doing everything feasible to ensure that targets of attack are lawful military objectives.
Hospitals and clinics have special protections under the laws of war. While other presumptively civilian structures become military objectives when being used for a military purpose, medical facilities lose their protection from attack only if being used to commit “acts harmful to the enemy.” Even then, a warning with a reasonable time limit is required. The laws of war also prohibit attacks on military objectives if the anticipated harm to civilians is disproportionate compared to the expected military gain.
On the basis of available information, Human Rights Watch found no evidence that the Omid center was being used for military purposes, making the attack unlawfully indiscriminate. In any case, the attack would appear to violate the prohibition against disproportionate attacks. Serious violations of the laws of war committed with criminal intent—that is, deliberately or recklessly—are war crimes. Pakistan has an obligation under international law to investigate alleged war crimes by its forces and bring those responsible for serious abuses to account.
The Pakistani government in recent years has accused Taliban authorities in Afghanistan of harboring and providing material support to the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. The Islamist armed group’s attacks in Pakistan killed over 600 Pakistani security force personnel and over 500 civilians in 2024 and prompted a surge in cross-border attacks between Afghan and Pakistani forces. In February, the UN documented at least 76 civilian deaths and 213 injuries from Pakistani airstrikes across Afghanistan. On March 13, Pakistan’s president said that Afghanistan “had crossed a red line” after a spate of drone attacks on Pakistani cities injured civilians.
“Concerned countries should press Pakistan to provide genuine accountability and ensure that failures in intelligence, target verification, and decision-making are identified and fixed so such strikes never happen again,” Gossman said.
India’s Transgender Rights Bill a Huge Setback
India’s parliament passed a bill this week that changes how transgender people are legally recognized and removes their right to self-identification. If the bill becomes law, it will be a major reversal of the hard-won rights of transgender people in India.
“These politicians are making laws for us when they don’t even have basic concepts of gender, sex, and sexuality,” said Akkai Padmashali, a trans rights activist. “This new bill criminalizes us and disrespects our right to exist.”
The 2026 Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill amends the 2019 law that laid out an inclusive definition of transgender persons. Instead, it limits legal recognition to historically accepted socio-cultural groups such as hijra and kinner, as well as intersex individuals. This removes legal recognition for those who self-identify as trans men, trans women, or gender non-binary people.
The bill also mandates medical certification for identity recognition, effectively removing the gains of the landmark 2014 Supreme Court judgment in NALSA v. India. International human rights standards provide for self-declared identity to form the basis for access to all social security measures, benefits, and entitlements.
India’s last census recorded 487,803 transgender persons, but so far only about 32,500 have identity cards, essential for accessing various social security measures.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government hastily pushed the bill through both houses of parliament in the face of protests from transgender communities. Opposition members of parliament criticized the bill and sought a parliamentary committee to review the proposed law.
The social justice and empowerment minister told parliament that the bill aims to protect only those who face severe discrimination due to biological reasons. However, the bill puts transgender persons at further risk by introducing additional offenses and up to life in prison for “coercing or alluring” people to be transgender. These are reminiscent of the colonial-era laws that criminalized transgender persons for appearing dressed as women and could be used to criminalize support systems of transgender persons, said the People’s Union for Civil Liberties.
India’s president should not sign the adopted bill into law. Instead of adopting a regressive law, the government should have broad consultations with transgender communities and work toward expanding and enforcing their rights.