Secondary menu
IHRP external news feeds
Saudi Arabia: Grand Mufti Should Back Religious Tolerance
(Beirut) – Saudi authorities on October 22, 2025, appointed a new Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia who has demonized the country’s Shia Muslim minority in past public written statements and comments, Human Rights Watch said today. Sheikh Saleh bin Abdullah bin Fawzan al-Fawzan was appointed Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, the country’s highest religious official, and the chairman of the Council of Senior Scholars, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body, by royal decree based on a proposal by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Saudi authorities have previously permitted government-appointed religious scholars and clerics to use hate speech to refer to religious minorities, particularly the country’s Shia Muslim minority. Al-Fawzan has repeatedly referred to Shia Muslims in derogatory and discriminatory terms.
“While Sheikh Saleh al-Fawzan has previously promoted hate speech against Saudi Arabia’s Shia Muslim minority, there is ample opportunity for him to change his tone in his new role as Grand Mufti and instead promote tolerance,” said Joey Shea, Saudi Arabia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Saudi authorities should follow through with their purported reforms by ending discrimination against religious minorities.”
Saudi Arabia’s Shia Muslim minority have long suffered systemic discrimination and violence by the government, and Saudi religious scholars’ anti-Shia rhetoric has sometimes risen to the level of hate speech or incitement to hatred or discrimination, Human Rights Watch said. Given the influence and reach of these scholars, public anti-Shia statements are instrumental in Saudi Arabia’s enforcement of a system of discrimination against Shia citizens.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented al-Fawzan demonizing Shia people, including while he was a member of the Council of Senior Scholars.
Many Sunni Saudi religious clerics have referred to Shia using derogatory terms such as rafidha or rawafidh, meaning “rejectionists,” and stigmatize their beliefs and practices.
In one recorded question and answer session with al-Fawzan, a man asked whether it is permissible to call rafidha or Shia “our brothers.” The sheikh responded, “They are not our brothers … rather they are brothers of Satan…. Whoever says they are our brothers must repent.”
A Salafi website provides links to at least 11 anti-Shia statements that is says al-Fawzan has made over the years, in most of which he derides Shia as “unbelievers.” In one, al-Fawzan states that Shia “lie about God, his prophet, and the consensus of Muslims … there is no doubt about the unbelief of these [people].”
Al-Fawzan’s hate speech has not abated. In September 2023, he said that Jews, Christians, Shia, and rawafidh “are all enemies of Muslims.” He has also derided women, apparently as recently as earlier in October, saying that “women are not independent” and that they are “weak and cannot manage [themselves].”
Saudi authorities have been carrying out executions at an unprecedented rate in 2025 without apparent due process, including many from the country’s Shia minority. Abdullah al-Derazi and Jalal al-Labbad, both Shia, were executed this year after having been sentenced to death on terrorism charges related to participating in protests when they were children. The charges relate to protests in 2011 and 2012 against the treatment of Saudi Arabia’s Shia population. Al-Derazi was 17 and al-Labbad just 15 at the time of their alleged offenses.
International human rights law requires governments to prohibit “[a]ny advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”
“As the new Grand Mufti, al-Fawzan should publicly apologize for his previous discriminatory statements and herald a new era of religious tolerance for Shia Muslims in Saudi Arabia,” Shea said.
Education in Mali Shuttered Amid Islamist Armed Group’s Siege
Mali’s military junta has temporarily shut down all schools and universities after an Islamist armed group laid siege to the nation’s capital, Bamako, and cut off fuel supplies, deepening the suffering of children and youth whose education has been disrupted by years of conflict.
Click to expand Image A shuttered school in Bamako, Mali, October 27, 2025. © 2025 PrivateMali’s education minister announced on October 26 that classes would be suspended nationwide “due to disruptions in [the] fuel supply,” affecting transportation for students and education staff.
Since early September, the Al Qaeda-linked Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wa al-Muslimeen, or JNIM) has attacked hundreds of fuel tankers and abducted or assaulted fuel truck drivers. The siege has paralyzed Bamako, choking its supply routes and disrupting public and private transportation and access to electricity.
The education minister said classes will resume November 10. However, as some teachers and other educators told me, even short interruptions might affect students’ education in a country grappling with armed conflict, violence, and displacement. “A short break can have huge consequences,” said a deputy school director in Bamako district. “Shutting down schools might address immediate challenges but could further exacerbate the harm caused by JNIM.”
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) reported that as of June 2025, more than 2,000 schools remained shut across Mali due to insecurity, affecting more than 600,000 students.
In 2011, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution urging parties to armed conflict “to refrain from actions that impede children’s access to education.”
The laws of war do not prohibit sieges, but warring parties must comply with principles such as distinction and proportionality and take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm. Sieges may not include tactics that prevent civilians’ access to items essential for their survival.
JNIM should immediately cease all attacks targeting civilians or civilian objects and facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the population.
Mali’s authorities should uphold their obligations under international human rights law to ensure everyone’s right to education, even during emergencies. That means only closing schools and universities when necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim, keeping these closures limited in time, and reopening schools as soon as conditions permit. At a minimum, they should ensure that children’s right to compulsory primary education takes urgent priority.
Both sides in Mali’s conflict need to do more to protect the country’s children.
Measure of Justice for Windrush Victims
On October 24, the UK government announced long-awaited reforms to the Windrush Compensation Scheme that address some—but not all—long-standing concerns related to older claimants who had lost their private pensions due to government wrongdoing. Many died before receiving owed compensation.
The government launched the scheme in 2019 to compensate members and relatives of immigrants, mostly from Caribbean and other Commonwealth countries, known as the Windrush generation for wrongfully treating them like illegal immigrants. Tens of thousands lost their jobs, pensions, access to health care, and other basic rights—some even faced deportation and detention—because the government hadn’t provided them with papers to prove their legal status in the UK.
The changes include paying Windrush claimants, who challenge a compensation offer, up to 75 percent of the award in advance, pending the review of their offer. The scheme also now compensates people for private and occupational pension losses, reflecting the fact that claimants were forced to withdraw money from their pension to support themselves. Priority will be given to applications from claimants 75 and older and those with serious health conditions.
These changes partially address recommendations from civil society, the Windrush commissioner, and the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman including in a recent case ruling.
Thomas Tobierre, a Windrush claimant affected by pension losses, told Human Rights Watch that he first found out about the changes through the media.
Since publishing research in 2023 on rights abuses arising from the compensation scheme. Human Rights Watch has continued to work closely alongside campaigners, civil society, and lawyers.
Human Rights Watch remains deeply concerned about the government’s continued denial of free legal representation for Windrush claimants. Lawyers showed that claimants needed legal support to meet the complex requirements to provide evidence to substantiate their claims.
The Windrush commissioner said that members of the Windrush generation are concerned about anti-immigrant polarization in the UK. He said that officials need to consider the human impacts of immigration policy changes to avoid future Windrush scandals.
If the Labour government is serious about righting wrongs of the past and honoring the contributions of the Windrush generation, it should grant free legal representation to Windrush claimants to give them the best shot at full and fair compensation.
Cameroon: Biya Declared the Winner Amid Post-Election Violence
Cameroon’s post-election period has been marred with violence, with at least four people killed allegedly by security forces, dozens injured, and hundreds more arrested across the country since the October 12, 2025 presidential election, Human Rights Watch said today. The authorities should immediately rein in their security forces, promptly and impartially investigate the excessive use of force, and release all those wrongfully held.
The Constitutional Council announced on October 27 that the incumbent President Paul Biya, 92, had won the election with a 53.66 percent share of the vote. His main challenger, Issa Tchiroma Bakary, former transport and communication minister, had declared himself the winner on October 12.
“Tensions are running high given the contested reelection of Paul Biya,” said Ilaria Allegrozzi, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Security forces should be protecting people, not fueling the violence.”
The days after the vote were violent. Opposition-led protests erupted in major cities including the economic capital, Douala; the capital, Yaoundé; and the northern cities of Garoua and Maroua. Security forces responded to protests with tear gas, water cannons, and in some cases, live ammunition. After the announcement of the election results, protests also broke out across the country. Tchiroma said on Facebook that snipers stationed around his home in Garoua were “firing at point-blank range at the people,” and that two people had been killed.
According to local and international media and local sources consulted by Human Rights Watch, at least four people were killed during protests in Douala’s New Bell neighborhood on October 26. In a statement released the same day, Samuel Dieudonné Ivaha Diboua, the governor of the Littoral region where Douala is located, said youth, high on drugs, attacked a gendarmerie brigade and two police stations in the city with the aim of burning them and seizing weapons. Diboua also said “in the confrontation that followed, several members of the security forces were injured, and four people unfortunately lost their lives” and “investigations were opened to shed light on the unfortunate incidents.”
Diboua also issued a decree on October 26, announcing that 105 people had been detained for taking part in demonstrations sparked by an online call to protest from Tchiroma. However, Augustin Nguefack, Tchiroma’s legal counsel, told Human Rights Watch that he believes more people were detained in Douala on October 26 and that since the vote, security forces had detained at least 250 opposition protesters in the city.
Among those arrested in Douala are Anicet Ekane, Florence Titcho and Djeukam Tchameni, three leaders of the African Movement for New Independence and Democracy party (MANIDEM), which supported Tchiroma.
Supporters of Tchiroma and protesters were also arrested in other cities. On October 25, gendarmes arrested Aba'a Oyono, a public law scholar and Tchiroma’s adviser, at his home in Yaoundé. His whereabouts have not yet been revealed. The refusal to acknowledge detention or to provide information on the whereabouts of the detainee can constitute an enforced disappearance, a crime under international law. Members of civil society consulted by Human Rights Watch reported that security forces arrested at least 52 protesters, including minors, in Maroua on October 23. Media reported that security forces arrested at least 20 protesters in Garoua on October 21.
Biya, the world’s longest-serving president, has ruled Cameroon since 1982, maintaining a firm hold on power by abolishing presidential term limits in 2008 and consistently eliminating or silencing any challengers and dissenting voices.
On August 5, Cameroon’s Constitutional Council backed the electoral commission’s decision to bar Maurice Kamto, a key opposition leader and challenger, from the presidential elections. Kamto’s removal sparked criticism among his supporters and party members, who held marches and peaceful protests across the capital. Security forces used tear gas to disperse crowds, including dozens of Kamto’s supporters, who had gathered in front of the Constitutional Council on August 4. They also have detained at least 35 of Kamto’s supporters since July 26, all of whom have been released on bail.
It is not the first time that elections in Cameroon have been tainted with violence. Biya’s 2018 election sparked a wave of political repression. After the vote, opposition-led protests erupted across the country, and the government responded with a heavy crackdown deploying the police, army, and gendarmes who used excessive force against protesters.
In January 2019, Kamto and over 200 of his supporters were arrested and detained. Kamto was charged with insurrection, hostility against the homeland, and criminal association, among other charges. He was freed on October 5, 2019, and the charges were dropped, though the assault on the opposition continued.
Cameroonian authorities have for years cracked down on the opposition, media, and dissent, jailing political opponents, journalists, and activists. In the months leading up to the vote, the political space tightened and the authorities severely restricted freedom of expression and association.
The United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials provides that police must use the minimum necessary force at all times. Firearms may only be used to disperse violent assemblies when other less harmful means are not practicable. Law enforcement officers may only intentionally engage in lethal use of firearms when strictly unavoidable to protect life.
Various regional protocols ratified by Cameroon, including the Guiding Principles for the Policing of Assemblies in Africa, similarly provide that officers may only use force when strictly necessary. When using force, law enforcement officials should exercise restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense and to the legitimate objective to be achieved.
“Cameroonian authorities should immediately instruct their security forces to not resort to violence against protesters,” Allegrozzi said. “They should promptly and impartially investigate alleged use of excessive and lethal force and hold those responsible accountable for any killings during this sensitive time.”
Saudi Arabia: Release 10 Nubian Egyptian Men Immediately
(Beirut) – Saudi authorities should immediately release 10 Nubian Egyptians who have been unjustly detained for over 5 years, Human Rights Watch said today. On September 6, 2025, the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) in Riyadh reduced the sentences of the prisoners on appeal, yet all 10 remain unjustly detained.
Saudi authorities arrested the 10 men in July 2020 and held them without charge or trial for over a year. The SCC initially sentenced the men to prison terms ranging from between 10 and 18 years on October 10, 2022. The sentences now range from 7 to 9 years.
“As Saudi authorities invest billions into hosting high-profile entertainment and cultural events, they apparently arrested these Nubian men for expressing their cultural heritage,” said Joey Shea, Saudi Arabia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Saudi government needs to release them immediately and unconditionally.”
The Saudi appeal session in the men’s case was originally scheduled for September 22, but Saudi authorities unexpectedly requested the appearance of the prisoners on September 6 and held the session that day. Families learned of the reduced sentences on September 11 as the prisoners are granted only one phone call every two weeks.
All 10 prisoners should be immediately and unconditionally released, regardless of their initial sentence, as these men have been held arbitrarily and seemingly in reprisal for merely expressing their cultural heritage, Human Rights Watch said.
Nubians are a minority ethnic group in Egypt and Sudan. The Egyptian government has subjected Nubians in Egypt to repression, and continues to prevent them from going back to their lands after multiple forced displacements in recent decades.
Saudi authorities arrested the men, community leaders of the Egyptian Nubian diaspora in Riyadh, after their community group organized an event in October 2019 commemorating the contributions of Nubian soldiers in the October 1973 war with Israel. The event was cancelled after Saudi police interrogated some of the men about the perceived political messages of the event.
The SCC brought charges against the Nubians in September 2021, more than a year after their initial arrest, charging them with spreading false and malicious rumors on social media, establishing an unlicensed association, and supporting a terrorist group.
The initial decisions issued by the SCC on October 10, 2022, included sentencing Wael Ahmed Hassan Ishaq, Ali Jumaa Ali Bahr, and Abdullah Jumaa Ali Bahr to 10 years in prison; Jamal Abdullah Masri, Saleh Jumaa Ahmed, and Abdulsalam Gomaa Ali to 12 years; Adel Sayed Ibrahim Fakir to 14 years; Dr. Farajallah Ahmed Yousif and Sayyed Hashem Shater to 16 years; and Mohamed Fathallah Shater to 18 years.
Before the October 2022 ruling, the men struggled to hire a non-court appointed lawyer. Many lawyers and firms approached by relatives were fearful to take up the case because it was perceived as political. The Saudi sponsor of one of the men was finally able to hire a lawyer for the session before the ruling was handed down. The men were also represented by a court-appointed lawyer.
The Dahmit Nubian Village Association, a Nubian cultural society in Riyadh that organized the event, is registered with the Egyptian consulate in Riyadh, a relative said, adding that the association and other Nubian cultural societies are nonpolitical groups established to preserve Nubian cultural heritage, traditions, and language.
On October 29, 2019, the Egyptian consulate in Riyadh released a statement calling on Egyptian citizens in Saudi Arabia to “respect the laws and regulations of the Kingdom.” The statement said that it is illegal for non-Saudi nationals to “establish groups or bodies” and called for existing entities to be abolished.
“By continuing to detain peaceful cultural leaders, Saudi authorities are demonstrating that the spate of prisoner releases earlier in 2025 does not indicate a policy shift towards ending the unlawful crackdown on dissent,” Shea said. “Saudi authorities should demonstrate their commitment to reform and cultural promotion by releasing these Nubian men immediately.”
Pakistan: Drop Charges Against Outspoken Journalist
(Bangkok) – An anti-terrorism court in Islamabad, Pakistan, is scheduled to indict Matiullah Jan, a journalist who has long reported on police abuse, on October 31, 2025, on apparent politically motivated charges, Human Rights Watch said today. The Pakistani authorities should immediately drop the baseless charges against Jan under several sections of the 1997 Anti-Terrorism Act and for narcotics’ possession.
Pakistani journalists have in recent years increasingly faced serious obstacles to their work, including harassment, threats, assault, arbitrary arrest and detention, enforced disappearance, and killings. The authorities have increasingly pressured editors and media owners to stifle critical reporting. So far in 2025, the authorities have filed about 689 cases under the draconian and overbroad 2016 Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, often targeting journalists, as well as under the Anti-Terrorism Act. Television channels critical of the government have experienced signal disruptions during broadcasts of opposition rallies.
“The Pakistani authorities’ prosecution of Matiullah Jan appears to be a heavy-handed attempt to silence critical journalism,” said Patricia Gossman, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The government should drop the charges and stop using the criminal justice system to punish journalists for doing their jobs.”
The police claim that they stopped Jan at a checkpoint in Islamabad’s E-9 area on November 27, 2024, and that he allegedly possessed 246 grams of methamphetamine and committed acts of terrorism by resisting arrest and escaping. He contends that the authorities are retaliating against him because of his reporting on the police’s excessive use of force against political protesters. The authorities have also accused Jan of spreading “fake news for dollars,” but these allegations do not appear in the criminal charges filed against him.
Jan has denied that the police attempted to arrest him at the checkpoint. He said that instead, on November 27, 2024, after the authorities registered a criminal case against him, unidentified men in black uniforms abducted him and another journalist, Saqib Bashir, from a parking lot, blindfolded them, and forced them into a vehicle. Bashir was released three hours later; the Islamabad High Court granted Jan bail on November 30.
The authorities have targeted Jan, a journalist who has covered legal and political issues, for three decades. On July 21, 2020, unidentified assailants abducted Jan in Islamabad, a day before he was to appear before the Supreme Court to face accusations of “using derogatory/contemptuous language and maligning the institution of the judiciary.” He was released after 12 hours. Jan filed a criminal case against his abductors, but no one was ever arrested.
Domestic and international journalist and civil society organizations including the Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Federation of Journalists, Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, and the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan have called on the authorities to drop the charges against Jan.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Pakistan ratified in 2010, prohibits restrictions on freedom of expression on national security grounds unless they are provided by law, strictly construed, and necessary and proportionate to address a legitimate threat. Laws that impose criminal penalties for peaceful expression are of particular concern because of the chilling effects they have on free speech.
The United Nations Human Rights Committee, the independent expert body that monitors compliance with the ICCPR, has stated in its General Comment No. 34 on freedom of expression that: “[T]he mere fact that forms of expression are considered to be insulting to a public figure is not sufficient to justify the imposition of penalties.… Moreover, all public figures … are legitimately subject to criticism and political opposition.”
Pakistani authorities should conduct prompt, impartial, and effective investigations into recent attacks and dubious prosecutions of journalists, Human Rights Watch said. The government should amend or annul laws and rescind official policies that violate the right to freedom of expression and media freedom, and instead promote space for public debate and free expression in the face of threats from extremist groups and government officials.
“The Pakistani government needs to stop harassing and unjustly prosecuting journalists and ensure they can report freely without fear of retaliation,” Gossman said. “The authorities should recognize the value to Pakistani society of those reporting on human rights issues rather than trying to muzzle them.”
UN: Momentum Builds for Crimes Against Humanity Treaty
(New York) – Developing an effective International Convention to Prevent and Punish Crimes against Humanity will require ambitious and forward-looking diplomacy, Human Rights Watch and Columbia Law School’s Prevention of Crimes Against Humanity Project said today in a new briefing paper outlining 25 recommendations for delegations at the United Nations to consider as they prepare for the formal treaty negotiations.
Recommendations for the International Convention on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against HumanityCrimes against humanity, which include extermination, enslavement, rape, forced pregnancy, persecution, enforced disappearance, and apartheid, among others, when committed as a part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population, are among the gravest offenses under international law. Their prohibition is already considered a preemptory norm, something no state can opt out of. A new treaty would bring important coherence and consistency to how these crimes are treated in each jurisdiction and enable cooperation among states to prevent these crimes.
“It’s been 80 years since Nazi leaders were charged with crimes against humanity in Nuremberg, but we are still waiting for a treaty exclusively dedicated to addressing them,” said Akshaya Kumar, crisis advocacy director at Human Rights Watch and author of the brief. “Diplomats meeting in New York to address this gap should commit to a process that intentionally challenges the exclusion and inequities that too often defined international lawmaking in the past, so that this treaty better anticipates the next 80 years.”
In December 2024, UN member states agreed in General Assembly Resolution 79/122 to move ahead with formal work on this treaty. This process, which will begin with a preparatory committee in January 2026, is a landmark opportunity to consolidate global commitments to prevent and punish these grave crimes. Meetings in New York should be supplemented by regional meetings and consultations to boost participation and accessibility, especially considering growing visa restrictions in the United States.
Organizers should also commit to webcast proceedings with simultaneous translation to allow the broadest possible participation in the process. This would include victims’ and survivors’ groups, women’s rights defenders, Indigenous communities, academics, people with disabilities who may require reasonable accommodations to participate, and children and young people.
The months ahead will test countries’ resolve to maintain unity and vision against political headwinds, the groups said. To achieve the strongest possible outcome, delegates must be willing to vote when consensus-based decision making, which requires unanimous agreement, creates inevitable roadblocks and delays.
UN member states in the General Assembly Sixth Committee, the UN’s legal forum, met earlier in October 2025 to discuss the road toward formal negotiations. Country after country reaffirmed support for the process outlined in the December 2024 resolution and expressed their intention to participate in negotiations to develop a convention that would better protect civilians from these atrocity crimes. Led by Costa Rica, dozens of delegations from Africa, Latin America, Europe, and Asia on October 13 vocally called for the inclusion of civil society organizations in every stage. They even urged the inclusion of organizations that do not have formal “consultative” status at the UN’s Economic and Social Council, recognizing that this accreditation is difficult to obtain and can be challenging to maintain for grassroots groups. In comments at the same meeting, Germany specifically noted the importance of allowing civil society organizations to participate in the “working group” sessions planned for January 2026.
The January meetings will also include a working group in which each delegation will have a chance to share its views on possible amendments to the text of a set of draft articles, which were prepared by the International Law Commission and originally published in 2019. These draft articles have already been the subject of discussions at two “resumed” sessions of the Sixth Committee in 2023 and 2024, and in a round of written comments, and are addressed in the briefing paper released today. By April 30, 2026, states will have to submit proposals for amendments to the 2019 draft articles. These proposals, together with the draft articles, will be included in a compilation for states to consider at the planned 2028 and 2029 meetings of the plenipotentiary conference negotiations.
The treaty could anchor justice for crimes against humanity more solidly in international law, spurring states to adopt national laws and bolstering the efforts of domestic courts through mutual legal assistance. Ideally, negotiators will use the multi-year process to refine the terms of the treaty so that it better recognizes the unique harms faced by women, people with disabilities, children, and other groups. The final text should also include procedural protections for the accused, limit safe havens for suspects, and recognize victims’ rights, particularly to reparations, while maintaining maximum scope for jurisdiction.
“It’s more important than ever for governments to reaffirm their commitment to the rule of law and resist any effort to dilute the convention’s core principles, including on prevention,” said Christine Ryan, director of Columbia Law School’s Prevention of Crimes Against Humanity Project.
The groups, in the briefing paper, spotlighted key elements of the draft articles that are especially important to maintain. They are also advancing 13 possible amendments to the draft articles that they hope the countries will adopt as their own and submit as proposals before the April 30, 2026, deadline.
The growing momentum around the formal process toward a treaty stands out at a time when, more than ever, and over the opposition of big powers, the world needs to bolster multilateralism. The leadership of The Gambia, Mexico, Costa Rica, and Sierra Leone has been essential.
“The collective will of supportive states, especially with leadership from the Global South and the determination of civil society, will be necessary to ensure an effective treaty becomes reality,” said Richard Dicker, senior legal adviser at Human Rights Watch, who has been working for years to move the treaty process forward. “From El Fasher to Gaza City, Cox’s Bazaar to Mariupol, victims and survivors should be the moral compass of this process. Their courage reminds us why accountability matters.”
Alleged Sexual Harassment by Vietnamese Officials Ignored—Again
The Vietnamese government has a poor record of dealing with allegations of sexual harassment by senior officials. In the latest reported incident, a South Korean civil servant accused Deputy Defense Minister Hoang Xuan Chien of “inappropriate touching” at a banquet on September 11 during the Vietnam–Republic of Korea Defense Dialogue in Seoul.
South Korea’s defense ministry summoned the Vietnamese defense attaché on September 19 and lodged a formal complaint. Vietnamese authorities reportedly resolved not to allow such incidents to happen again.
That very day, Vietnam’s prime minister extended Hoang Xuan Chien’s term as deputy minister of defense.
There is no indication that the Vietnamese authorities intend to hold Hoang Xuan Chien accountable for his actions. He continues to officiate at domestic and international events. Nor is this incident an isolated one for Vietnamese officials abroad.
In November 2024, during Vietnamese President Luong Cuong’s visit to Chile, a member of his security detail was arrested on accusations of sexually assaulting a hotel worker. A Chilean judge ordered him to leave the country and not return for two years. There was never any reporting in Vietnam of any disciplinary or legal action being taken against the security officer.
In March 2024, two restaurant servers in New Zealand accused two Vietnamese policemen of indecent assault when they were in the country to prepare for the prime minister’s official visit. The accused fled New Zealand before they could be arrested. In December, following questions from the media, New Zealand police confirmed that they believed the men had assaulted the two women and that, had the men remained in New Zealand, they “would have pursued criminal charges.” In October 2025, New Zealand authorities said their efforts to have the policemen extradited had failed.
Vietnamese authorities have not publicly condemned the alleged crime or taken action to hold those responsible accountable. Nor has state media covered these cases despite international coverage appearing on Vietnamese social media. When officials or government-affiliated personnel allegedly harass and assault others with total impunity, the government demonstrates a systemic disregard for women’s rights, in contravention of Vietnam's international legal obligations.
Vietnamese officials need to start taking sexual harassment and assault charges seriously. Governments engaging with Vietnam should demand impartial investigations into these incidents and appropriate measures taken against those responsible.
France Failing Unaccompanied Migrant Children
In a damning report published last week, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child concluded France is responsible for grave and systematic violations of the rights of unaccompanied migrant children. The committee noted that due to flawed and arbitrary age assessment procedures many unaccompanied children find themselves homeless, deprived of healthcare, and forced to live in degrading and undignified conditions, instead of being protected, cared for, and supported.
The committee’s findings are consistent, in many respects, with the findings of Human Rights Watch’s investigations carried out in Paris, Calais, Marseille, at the French-Italian border, and in the Hautes-Alpes region in recent years.
These children often find themselves on the streets, without access to education or medical care, while they appeal their flawed assessments, which can last months or even years, placing children in extreme precarity and depriving them of their fundamental rights. Between 50 and 80% of these appeals overturn the assessments, but decisions can sometimes be delivered after the child has reached the age of majority, permanently depriving them of rights they should have been granted as children.
In addition, many of these children may also be subjected to degrading treatment by the police, denied their freedom and arbitrarily detained. This issue is especially prevalent, at the French-Italian border between Menton and Ventimiglia, where migrant children have been summarily deported to Italy, in violation of European and international law.
Warnings from Human Rights Watch and numerous nongovernmental organizations and institutions have multiplied in recent years, and France was recently condemned, in January 2025, by the European Court of Human Rights for “failing to protect” a Guinean child.
The committee is clear in its recommendations to France: all children—or anyone claiming to be a child—should benefit from the presumption of minority throughout the assessment and appeal process and be guaranteed their fundamental rights, including housing, food, water, and education. The French authorities need to listen to the committee and urgently ensure these vulnerable kids get the protection and care they are entitled to.
World Court: Israel Needs to Allow UN Aid into Gaza
(The Hague) – Israel should comply with its obligation to cooperate with the United Nations by ensuring the unhindered provision of essential aid to Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in an October 22, 2025 advisory opinion, Human Rights Watch said today.
The court concluded that Israel’s allegations that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) lacks impartiality is unfounded and that Israel’s obstruction of the agency’s critical work is at odds with international law.
“The International Court of Justice made clear that Israel should end its campaign to dismantle UNRWA and stop using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war,” said Balkees Jarrah, acting Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Palestinians will continue to suffer and die unless Israel lifts its unlawful blockade and restores electricity, water, and health care. It’s critical for Israel’s allies to press the government to immediately permit unhindered UNRWA aid.”
The ICJ advisory opinion stems from an urgent request by the UN General Assembly in December 2024 asking the court to clarify Israel’s obligations in relation to the activities of the UN, third states, and other international organizations in the occupied territory. The request was submitted amid Israel’s campaign to dismantle UNRWA, and the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza resulting from Israel’s use of starvation as a weapon of war, a war crime, and intentional deprivation of aid and basic services. Human Rights Watch concluded that these Israeli policies amount to the crime against humanity of extermination and acts of genocide.
On January 30, two bills approved in the Israeli Knesset went into effect, shutting down UNRWA operations in the occupied territory. Israeli authorities have blocked UNRWA’s aid distribution in Gaza, prevented its international staff from entering Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and issued closure orders for UNRWA operated schools in East Jerusalem.
The ICJ, in its opinion, asserts Israel’s “unconditional” obligation as an occupying power under international humanitarian law to ensure the unhindered provision of humanitarian relief, such as food, medical supplies and clothing, to the civilian population of Gaza. The court said this obligation applies to “relief schemes provided by the United Nations and its entities, including UNRWA.” The court said that the US-backed aid distribution system operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) “has not significantly alleviated the situation.” Israeli authorities have not only repeatedly violated their obligations relating to providing aid to Palestinian civilians, but also gunned down hundreds of Palestinians seeking food aid at or near GHF sites, in acts that amount to war crimes, Human Rights Watch said.
The ICJ, in its opinion, underscored that Israel “may not obstruct the functions of the United Nations and must provide every assistance in any action taken by the Organization,” in particular through UNRWA. The court concluded that the Knesset’s two laws “have directly resulted in obstructions to the operations of UNRWA in and in relation to the [OPT].” The court also found Israel’s allegations that UNRWA lacks impartiality and has ties to Hamas to be unfounded.
The court also outlined Israel’s obligations toward impartial humanitarian organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Despite mounting reports, including by Human Rights Watch, of abuses of Palestinians in detention, Israeli authorities have denied the ICRC access to detention facilities since October 2023.
By restricting or blocking aid from reaching Palestinians in Gaza, Israel continues to flout the ICJ’s binding orders in a separate case brought by South Africa under the UN Genocide Convention, Human Rights Watch said.
In July 2024, the ICJ issued a separate advisory opinion concluding that Israel’s decades-long occupation is unlawful and contravenes Palestinians’ right to self-determination. In that opinion, the court also found that Israel was responsible for apartheid and other serious abuses against Palestinians.
Governments should publicly support the ICJ findings and ensure that obligations laid out in its advisory opinion are fulfilled, Human Rights Watch said. The UN secretary-general and UNRWA’s commissioner general have welcomed the opinion.
“The suffering of millions of Palestinians won’t be alleviated if the ceasefire is not followed by Israel’s ending its obstruction of UNRWA’s operations,” Jarrah said. “Governments should strongly and publicly push back against the Israeli government’s efforts to restrict UNRWA and they should fund its irreplaceable work.”
ASEAN: Reject Myanmar Junta’s Sham Elections
(New York) – Governments attending upcoming regional summits in Malaysia should reject the Myanmar military junta’s plans to hold “elections” in December 2025, Human Rights Watch said in a letter to all countries sending delegates. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and ASEAN partner summits will take place in Kuala Lumpur on October 26-28, with the Myanmar crisis on the agenda.
The Myanmar junta has continued its repression of pro-democracy forces, carried out arbitrary arrests, torture, and abusive conscription, and increased military attacks on civilians. The junta has intensified its crackdown ahead of the planned elections, which the authorities scheduled to begin December 28. ASEAN members and partner countries should strengthen efforts to address Myanmar’s human rights and humanitarian crisis and the plight of millions of its people displaced since the February 2021 military coup.
“Myanmar’s junta has demonstrated neither the intention nor the capacity to organize and hold elections that would even remotely meet international standards,” said John Sifton, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “The junta’s repression and unlawful attacks have created a climate of fear in which no genuine polls can take place, let alone voting that will be free and fair.”
The military’s widespread atrocities in recent years have included crimes against humanity and war crimes, arbitrary detention of opposition politicians, and the dissolution and criminalization of opposition political parties. On July 30, the junta issued a draconian law that criminalizes criticism of the election by prohibiting speaking, organizing, or protesting that “disrupt[s] any part of the electoral process.”
Since large parts of Myanmar are not under military control but instead held by opposition armed groups, the junta would not be able to hold polls in most of the country’s townships.
Senior United Nations officials, international election monitoring groups, and several foreign governments have issued warnings about the planned elections. The UN secretary-general’s special envoy for Myanmar, Julie Bishop, said: “There is a significant risk that the election planned for December, under current circumstances, will increase resistance, protest, and violence and further undermine the fragile state of the country.”
Several former ASEAN foreign ministers issued a joint statement on October 11 calling on ASEAN to “unequivocally reject” the planned “sham election” and initiate a “complete strategic reset on Myanmar.”
“ASEAN and ASEAN partners should categorically reject the idea that free and fair elections can currently be held in Myanmar and refuse to support the elections in any way,” Sifton said. “Other governments should also signal that if elections are held, any supposed results will not be considered credible.”
New German Guidelines on Colonial Returns Fail Rights Test
Last week, German federal, state, and local authorities adopted Common Guidelines on the handling of cultural assets and human remains from colonial contexts. Despite the welcome efforts to regulate the returns cultural belongings and ancestral remains from colonial contexts, the guidelines appear to go out of the way to distance such returns from international human rights standards on colonial reparation.
Germany, like other European governments, has generally considered such returns as voluntary gestures of goodwill, and “interstate (political) affairs,” rather than part of a duty to repair historic and ongoing colonial harm affecting communities. Affected communities are included in processes set out in the new guidelines, but their role is minimized by the requirement of the consent of the country of origin for any returns, and a necessary determination that cultural assets were “illegally” or “unethically” acquired. Many Indigenous peoples or minorities affected by colonial injustices are marginalized by their own governments, leaving them effectively unrepresented.
Human Rights Watch recently recommended that the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights scrutinize Germany’s compliance with its obligation to protect the right of everyone to take part in cultural life, which includes access to colonial-era cultural belongings and ancestral remains. Protecting cultural heritage and identity is particularly important for Indigenous peoples. The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples specifically addresses this.
In 2023, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination recommended that Germany adopt a comprehensive rights-based approach to “restitution of colonial objects and cultural artifacts, in particular the restitution of the human remains of ancestors,” with meaningful participation for affected communities.
During consultations, Human Rights Watch and civil society partners called on German authorities to ground returns in international human rights standards. Yet these new guidelines explicitly negate the applicability of international law, describing the basis for returns as an “ethical and moral” obligation rather than a legal one.
Returns of colonial belongings and ancestral remains should be acknowledged for what they are: a form of reparation based on legal obligations. Returns should therefore be rights-based to ensure the restoration of communities’ dignity and to heal intergenerational trauma.
At a time of global and regional momentum of calls for reparatory justice to address lasting impacts of colonial atrocities, the guidelines in their current form are a missed opportunity. The German government should look at them again with rights and justice in mind.
United States: Federal Agents Use Excessive Force in Illinois
(Chicago, October 23, 2025) – Federal law enforcement agents have since mid-September 2025 used excessive force against peaceful protesters, legal observers, volunteer street medics, and journalists during demonstrations outside a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility in suburban Chicago, Human Rights Watch said today. Protests at the Broadview, Illinois facility escalated following the start of ICE’s “Operation Midway Blitz” on September 8 and an increase in immigration raids and seizures throughout the Chicago area.
Based on accounts by witnesses and videos that Human Rights Watch analyzed, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents—sometimes in the presence of state and local police, and other federal agents—repeatedly used excessive force against small groups of protesters who appeared to pose no threat to the agents or to public security, and against clearly identifiable journalists, legal observers, and volunteer street medics. They detained dozens of protesters, and at least one journalist and one volunteer street medic. The violent response comes on the heels of law enforcement’s use of excessive force against protesters opposing immigration raids in June in Los Angeles.
“This is not crowd control, but a campaign of intimidation,” said Belkis Wille, associate crisis and conflict director at Human Rights Watch. “Federal agents are using chemical irritants and firing projectiles at peaceful protesters, volunteer street medics, and journalists in broad daylight. The message is clear that dissent will be punished.”
Human Rights Watch interviewed 18 people who were present during the Broadview protests: 7 protesters, 4 journalists, 1 volunteer street medic, 2 immigration rights advocates, and a religious leader. Researchers also analyzed 17 videos recorded during the protests that were posted to social media or provided to researchers. On October 17, Human Rights Watch sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem summarizing these findings, posing questions, and offering the opportunity to comment, but has not received a response.
Witnesses and video confirm that DHS agents used tear gas and fired projectiles directly into groups of protesters, including from the detention facility roof, often without warning, and without protesters appearing to pose any risk to agents. Witnesses and verified footage show there were sometimes as few as 10 protesters and never more than 250.
Raven Geary, a journalist who attended over two dozen protests at the detention facility and was shot in the face with a pepper spray projectile on September 26, said she has been to many protests over the years but that, “I have never seen anything like this response in my life. There is no rhyme or reason to the violence agents are resorting to.”
Two volunteer street medics described attending to dozens of people, most of whom needed treatment for exposure to chemical irritants, and some for projectile impact injuries.
Ashley Vaughan, a protester who uses a cane, said that on September 12, agents shot them with pepper balls, causing them to momentarily “black out.” On September 19, agents shot Reverend David Black in the head with a pepper ball while he was peacefully praying near the facility, in an incident captured on video. According to the National Lawyers Guild of Chicago, at least 10 legal observers have been injured.
The lawyers guild said that from September 19 to October 14, federal agents and state and local officers detained at least 78 people at the protests. Two people interviewed, and the colleague of a third, said they were held for 6 to 12 hours and denied access to their attorneys despite numerous requests.
DHS issued a statement on September 19 saying, “rioters assaulted law enforcement, threw tear gas cans, slashed tires of cars, blocked the entrance of the building, and trespassed on private property.” It also posted photographs on X of what it said were two “pyrotechnic smoke bombs,” two guns, and two pen knives that it had confiscated from protesters. Human Rights Watch could not independently confirm these claims. All those interviewed said they never saw protesters attack law enforcement in any way, or attempt to damage property, consistent with the content Human Rights Watch reviewed.
A coalition of media organizations and individual plaintiffs, including journalists and protesters, filed a class action lawsuit in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against President Donald Trump and senior officials from DHS, ICE, Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Justice, and other federal agencies, citing the use of excessive force, suppression of free speech and religious expression, and unlawful arrests. In response, on October 9, a US district court issued a temporary restraining order, placing limits on protest policing tactics by federal law enforcement deployed throughout northern Illinois. Photographs apparently show federal agents on October 14 deploying chemical irritants against protesters on the south side of Chicago in an incident that could potentially violate the restraining order.
During the protests, federal agents have repeatedly used excessive and unnecessary force, and in many cases have simply attacked protestors and others without provocation. These findings also implicate civil rights protections under the US Constitution, as well as DHS policies, which include restrictions on when and how law enforcement agents may use force to disperse protests.
The congressional DHS oversight committees should hold public hearings to examine agents’ excessive use of force in the Chicago area, Human Rights Watch said. They should subpoena internal ICE records related to enforcement planning, as well as arrest and use-of-force protocols. Committees should engage independent civil and human rights organizations to provide testimony and evidence and consider legislative remedies to strengthen oversight and accountability of immigration enforcement operations.
“The federal government is not just violating the human rights of protestors here,” Wille said. “These violent abuses are part of a broader assault on US democratic norms and institutions.”
For more details on the Broadview protests and applicable legal standards, please see below.
Operation Midway BlitzOperation Midway Blitz resulted in the arrest of over 1,000 immigrants in the Chicago area from September 8 to October 3, 2025, according to DHS. DHS agents took many of them to the Broadview detention facility, where demonstrations have taken place since August.
In one fatal incident, an ICE officer shot at a Mexican migrant near Chicago on September 12. On September 30, federal agents raided a South Shore apartment complex using aggressive and violent tactics, detaining 37 people—many without warrants—including US citizens. On October 4, federal agents shot and injured a woman in Brighton Park during an immigration operation, claiming her vehicle hit a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) vehicle.
Excessive Use of ForceAfter the federal government initiated Operation Midway Blitz on September 8, protesters who had already been gathering outside the detention facility began to appear in larger groups and more often. On September 23, ICE put up a reinforced perimeter fence around the detention facility, pushing the protesters away and onto side streets, witnesses said.
A volunteer street medic present outside the detention facility every Friday since August 8 said that agents’ actions against anyone standing outside the detention facility began to escalate over the course of September: “Initially you could be on the sidewalk, but if you took a step onto the driveway, agents would yell at you. Then as the days passed, it became that anyone stepping on the driveway would get shot with pepper balls. Then, anyone just on the street was getting hit by pepper balls. Then, they put up the fence, and now it’s anyone who gets near the fence gets hit with pepper balls.”
The medic also said that, early on, agents sometimes issued “get back” warnings on an intercom system and on occasion warned they were about to fire tear gas, but that they had completely stopped doing so by mid-September.
Reverend David Black, who began attending the protests on August 29, said agents escalated their use of force over September and that while the number of protesters increased, they remained peaceful.
Photographs and videos analyzed show DHS agents repeatedly deployed a range of what is called “less lethal force” against protesters, including tear gas, pepper balls, and foam projectile rounds, a type of kinetic impact projectile designed to some degree incapacitate or deter a target through blunt force trauma rather than penetration.
All witnesses said that agents used less-lethal force without warning and against people who posed no threat to them. Those interviewed also said they did not see protesters using force against agents. They said they saw some protesters trying to block ICE vehicles by standing in front of them.Two witnesses said that on some occasions, protesters kicked tear gas cannisters away from them, apparently to protect themselves. One video uploaded to X on September 27 shows at least two tear gas canisters being thrown back in the direction of agents. A journalist said that some protesters threw soft toys at agents. Some protesters wore gas masks and held plastic shields to protect themselves.
Law Enforcement Agencies at the Broadview ProtestsAccording to those interviewed and the media content reviewed, almost all DHS agents at the protests had their faces covered, obscuring their identities, and many were not wearing badges or uniforms that otherwise clearly identified their positions within their agencies, undermining accountability as well as basic protections from arbitrary detention or abuse.
Based on witness accounts and analyzed footage, Human Rights Watch identified the following agencies and units from the DHS at the protests in various configurations at different times: ICE, including Enforcement and Removal Operations and Homeland Security Investigations; CBP, including the Border Patrol Tactical Unit; and the Federal Protective Service.
Agents were also often present from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, as were local and state law enforcement officials.
Senior leaders of agencies have appeared at the protest site, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and the US Border Patrol’s commander-at-large Gregory K. Bovino. On October 3, Noem told a group of agents from various federal agencies: “We are going to go hard. We are going to hammer these guys … we are going to prosecute them … we are not taking this anymore … We are going to give you guys all the authority that you need to go out there and arrest these individuals who are advocating for violence against you.”
After that, Bovino, a Border Patrol chief from California appointed to lead operations in Chicago, said: “That crowd there is an unsafe crowd ... we are going to roll them all the way out of here. And when they resist, what happens? They get arrested. So, it’s now going to be a free arrest zone.” Noem then added that the agents’ role was to “make sure that these individuals aren’t allowed to conduct this activity anymore.”
Three witnesses said state troopers, Broadview local police, and members of the Cook County Sheriff’s Office and Northern Illinois Police Alarm System were there. At times, they helped push protesters away from the area around the detention facility and made arrests, witnesses said. According to the lawyers guild, during protests on the weekend of October 10, state troopers clubbed protesters with long wooden batons, throwing people to the ground and in one instance, dragging a woman across a concrete barrier and through the street. One video uploaded to YouTube on October 5 shows state troopers pushing and arresting protesters near the detention facility.
Firing Kinetic Impact Projectiles and Tear Gas Directly at ProtestersIn the cases Human Rights Watch documented outside the detention facility, agents appeared most often to have used chemical irritants, including CS (a type of tear gas), CN (mace), and OC (pepper spray), as well as foam projectile rounds. The chemical irritants were dispersed by grenades, sprayed from large cylinders, and contained in pepper balls, which are small, circular projectiles filled with a chemical irritant fired from a compressed air launcher resembling a paintball gun. Under international human rights standards, the use of less-lethal force and riot control agents such as tear gas is appropriate only when nonviolent means are not effective and even then, should be used with restraint and according to criteria of proportionality.
Ashley Vaughan, who carries a cane, said that, at around 6 p.m. on September 12, agents standing on the detention facility’s roof shot them in the face and body with pepper balls while they were livestreaming. Vaughan said they briefly lost consciousness. When they came to, they saw approximately 15 to 20 agents leaving the detention facility and attempting to push protesters back.
“I was trying to get up,” they said. “[The agents] were probably about a foot in front of me as they were shooting at me.” Vaughan said a few protesters tried to help them up and that agents shot at all of them at least 10 more times. “I couldn’t see for a few days due to the swelling. I had two black eyes. I’m lucky I didn’t lose my vision,” Vaughan said. Vaughan’s wounds took several weeks to heal.
A video verified by researchers shows Vaughan on the ground outside the detention facility. One agent points his pepper ball launcher toward Vaughan and fires. At least six pepper ball impact points can be seen on the sidewalk. Agents continue to fire pepper balls at Vaughan and other protesters as Vaughan gets up and is helped away.
At around 6 p.m. on September 19, Reverend Black, of the First Presbyterian Church of Chicago, said he was praying with his hands outstretched with a small group of protesters outside the detention facility. Agents positioned on the roof started firing pepper balls at the group. “They seemed to be targeting my head, because the first couple of rounds hit my head and face ... I was praying; there was no justification for them to open fire on us.”
Human Rights Watch verified two videos uploaded to Facebook and Instagram on the same day that show Reverend Black standing with his hands outstretched, with three agents positioned directly above him on the roof of the detention facility. All three appear to shoot several projectiles in the direction of Black, with at least two hitting him, one in the torso and a second in the head.
As protesters rinsed his eyes with water, 15 to 20 agents left the detention facility and began pushing protesters into a street opposite the detention facility. Then, Black said, agents indiscriminately sprayed the protesters with mace, “soaking” him in the chemical agent. A video Human Rights Watch verified shows agents pushing Black and other protesters away from the detention facility and one of the agents spraying Black in the face with a chemical irritant from less than a meter away. Black had to leave the protests for around an hour to be treated but was not seriously injured.
Also on September 19, a protester who asked not to be named said he saw agents firing from the roof of the detention facility, and that multiple projectiles hit him in the head and left hip.
A volunteer street medic said that on September 26, he mostly helped people flush out their eyes that day, he remembered his colleague treating someone with a forehead laceration caused by a pepper ball fired at close range. The medic also treated someone who had a severe nosebleed after being hit in the face and the back of the head. Another volunteer street medic said he saw an officer yell, “Hey, bitch,” at a protester before shooting at her with pepper balls.
Stuart Hall, 66, a protester and army veteran, said that on September 26 at around 8 a.m., he was standing near the detention facility when agents fired on him: “I hadn’t been advancing [towards the facility], but the pepper balls hit me—two in the legs, two in the torso, and one in my arm.”
Also on September 26, a volunteer street medic said an agent on the roof started firing foam projectile rounds, but that the medic himself “could not see any provoking action from the crowd.” He said the agent also fired at someone playing guitar, and that the round went through the wooden body of the guitar. Another protester described the same incident.
Another volunteer street medic said that on September 26, agents fired on protesters who were reading letters of solidarity pinned to the detention facility’s fence: “I treated one older woman who had just walked up to the fence to read a note and got shot with pepper balls.”
Human Rights Watch analyzed a video posted to Instagram on September 26 of a protester covered in wounds consistent with being shot at close range with kinetic impact projectiles such as pepper balls.
Witnesses said that agents frequently deployed tear gas directly at protesters, rather than above their heads or in front of a crowd. One video posted to X the evening of September 27 that Human Rights Watch analyzed shows agents deploying tear gas canisters directly at protesters. Firing tear gas canisters directly at individuals, particularly if aimed at the head, rather than above their heads or in front of crowds, can prove fatal.
Hitting and Other Physical ViolenceAgents also resorted to using physical violence with their hands against protesters for no justifiable reason, protesters and other witnesses said.
On September 19, a volunteer street medic said he saw an officer grab and hold someone in a headlock unprovoked.
On September 26, a protester said he was trying to ask agents a question, when they started kicking and kneeing him in the face and back. At one point, he said, agents had him pinned to the ground, with someone shoving his left cheek and jaw into the ground with their knee, while he felt pressure to his back and spine. A friend who had been standing next to him was violently tackled to the ground by multiple agents, he said. The protestor shared a video of the incident with Human Rights Watch.
A protester said that on the morning of October 3, DHS agents came out of the detention facility to disperse the crowds:
The agents seemed aggravated that people were not moving. An officer wearing a black gaiter mask and baseball cap ripped off my gas mask and upper cut my lip and nose with his palm. Soon after that, agents went from pushing to grabbing bodies. I counted four agents who grabbed onto my breasts. The same officer who tore off my gas mask grabbed and pushed my left breast so hard, it left a bruise where his thumb was under my breast.
Violence Against Journalists, Observers, MedicsRaven Geary, a journalist, said she saw agents fire in the direction of journalists on at least 12 occasions from the beginning of September to early October. She said journalists were wearing lanyards around their necks with their media affiliations, and many had “Press” markings on their bags and helmets.
She said agents firing at people followed journalists as they were dispersing and ducking for cover. In one case, she said, agents sneaked up on two journalists hiding behind a vehicle and fired a pepper spray projectile directly at one, causing a bloody nose.
On the morning of September 26, Geary said she and about six other journalists hid behind a vehicle when agents opened fire on a group of protesters without warning. Agents pursued the journalists from the gate of the detention facility, firing at them. Geary raised her head to look above the hood of the vehicle and an officer wearing a skull motif face mask fired a pepper spray projectile directly at the camera Geary was holding up to her face. “I felt a tremendous pain on the side of my face,” she said. She was left with bruising and a swollen face for days. Geary said she saw patches on the officer’s uniform including one indicating he worked at an ICE field office in Pheonix and one indicating an Arizona border county.
Also on September 26, Paul Goyette, a journalist who been covering the protests since August 29, said multiple agents shot pepper balls directly at his chest. Goyette said agents fired a projectile at his friend that day and his friend had to go to the hospital with a concussion. Goyette said his friend, a former marine, identified the projectile that hit him as a baton round (a type of kinetic impact projectile).
The class action lawsuit says that Charles Thrush, a journalism student and reporter for Block Club Chicago, was reporting on the protests on September 26 when agents shot him in the left hand with pepper balls with no dispersal warnings. Thrush was wearing clearly identifiable press credentials around his neck, standing apart from protesters, and videotaping federal agents as they fired pepper balls at two protesters attempting to shelter behind a collapsible umbrella. Thrush said in a sworn declaration, that on several occasions that day, agents deployed tear gas at him at close range though his press pass was visible. Thrush continued to experience chemical burning from the pepper balls and tear gas for 12 hours.
An agent targeted and shot a CBS reporter, Asal Rezaei, with pepper balls as she drove past the detention facility on September 28, when there was no protest. “A masked ICE agent pointed his weapon and shot directly at my car. He saw that my window was open,” Rezaei said in a CBS News report. “I was sitting right there with my window open. A lot of it went inside my car and on my face. I immediately felt it burning, and I started throwing up.” CBS news reported that the Broadview Police department is investigating the incident.
Human Rights Watch also analyzed a video posted to Instagram at 8:40 p.m. on September 27, according to the timestamp. The video shows agents firing tear gas at journalists standing on the opposite side of an intersection near the detention facility. Many start coughing. No evidence of a warning can be seen or heard in the video.
The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker cited other incidents of agents shooting at journalists with pepper balls and tear gas cannisters outside the detention facility.
Adriano Kalin, a photojournalist, said that on the morning of September 26, he saw agents open fire on a group of legal observers who were sitting on the ground with their backs to the detention facility, while wearing identifiable green hats. According to a lawyers guild spokesperson, on September 19, an agent shot a legal observer with a pepper ball in the neck and on September 27, an agent shot a legal observer directly in the face. The lawyers guild said that during protests on the weekend of October 10, state troopers clubbed multiple legal observers.
One of the volunteer street medics said that agents regularly impeded him and his colleagues from treating injured protesters by shooting pepper balls at them, ordering them to move, or pushing them while they treated victims. He said an agent fired directly at him, “while I was on my knees trying to help this guy who was hit.”
Both volunteer street medics said on September 27, at around 8:30 p.m., agents fired chemical irritants into and then dismantled two medical tents that the medics were using to triage and treat injured protesters.
Vaughan said that agents in front of the detention facility fired projectiles at volunteer street medics, preventing the medics from evacuating Vaughan after they were injured by pepper balls on September 19. Instead, Broadview police agents later evacuated Vaughan to an ambulance, which then took them to the hospital along with other injured protesters.
ArrestsOf those arrested between September 19 and October 14, at least 20 individuals were released without charge, while about 58 were charged with offenses under federal, state, or local law, according to the lawyers guild.
One protester said that on September 26, agents assaulted and then detained him while he was trying to speak to them. DHS agents detained him for over 12 hours inside the detention facility, repeatedly interrogated him about the contents of his bag, and why he had attended the protest, and denied him medical treatment though he was in pain from being kicked, kneed, and slammed to the ground when detained. He was also denied access to his lawyer, despite his lawyer’s efforts to gain access. He was eventually released without charge.
A journalist, Steve Held, was detained and held for over six hours before being released without charge, during which time his attorney was denied access to him, Geary said.
Applicable Legal StandardsInternational LawThe International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the United States is a party, protects the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. US obligations under the covenant extend to authorities at every level of government: federal, state, and local. The Unites States is thus obliged to ensure that all law enforcement personnel respect human rights.
The ICCPR allows only for limited restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly that are “necessary in a democratic society” to protect a narrow range of important interests including public order, public safety, and the rights of others. Restrictions on the right should be carefully tailored. More specifically, they should both be necessary for and proportionate to a permissible ground for restriction. Restrictions justified on grounds of public safety require the authorities to demonstrate “a real and significant risk to the safety of persons (to life and security of person) or a similar risk of serious damage to property.”
Under international human rights standards, law enforcement should only use force if other means to address a genuine threat have proved ineffective or have no likelihood of achieving the intended result. When using force, law enforcement should provide clear warnings, exercise restraint, and act proportionately, taking into account both the seriousness of the offense and the legitimate objective to be achieved.
Federal LawThe First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to free speech and peaceful assembly. These rights are a core pillar of the country’s system of governance. US courts have evolved a deep jurisprudence governing permissible regulation of, and limitations on, the exercise of these rights. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizures by law enforcement, including the use of excessive force during an arrest or other seizure.
DHS Use of Force PoliciesEvents at the detention facility demonstrate that DHS agencies have not followed their own written policies, which are substantially aligned with international human rights standards on the use of force by law enforcement.
DHS written policy allows law enforcement agents to use force only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative exists, and only the level of force that is objectively reasonable under the circumstances. An updated 2023 DHS policy prohibits the use of deadly force against individuals who pose a threat only to themselves or property, and bans chokeholds unless deadly force is otherwise authorized.
Within DHS, ICE has written standards that authorize force only after all reasonable efforts to resolve a situation have failed. ICE agents must use only the amount of force necessary to gain control of a detainee, protect safety, prevent serious property damage, or maintain facility order. Force must never be used as punishment, and restraints must not be applied to the neck or in ways that restrict breathing or cause pain. While ICE does not have a protest-specific policy document, its enforcement actions during protests are subject to DHS oversight.
CBP has its own use-of-force policy, which outlines strict guidelines for the use of less-lethal force by agents, including that such force must be both objectively reasonable and necessary based on the totality of circumstances. Less-lethal devices and techniques—such as batons, chemical agents, and electronic control weapons—may be used to gain control of a subject, protect safety, or prevent serious property damage, but only when lesser means are ineffective or pose greater risk.
Agents are required to issue verbal warnings when feasible and must discontinue force once resistance ceases or the situation is under control. The policy mandates de-escalation tactics and prohibits firing weapons in response to thrown objects unless there is an imminent threat of serious injury or death. The National Use of Force Review Board, which includes representatives from the Department of Justice, DHS, and CBP, provides CBP oversight.
Afghanistan: Taliban Tramples Media Freedom
(New York) – The Taliban have gutted Afghanistan’s media since taking control of the country in August 2021, Human Rights Watch said today. They have subjected the remaining news outlets to surveillance and censorship, and punished journalists and other media workers for any perceived criticism. Afghan journalists in exile who fled Taliban persecution now face increasing threats of forced return to Afghanistan, where they fear retaliation.
Media freedom has declined throughout Afghanistan over the past four years under Taliban rule. News outlets report that the Taliban’s intelligence agency monitors all content and the “morality police” ensure adherence by staff to prescribed dress codes and other regulations. Local officials enforce official rules arbitrarily, leading to varying degrees of censorship across provinces. The Taliban’s severe restrictions on women have caused a sharp decline in the number of female journalists in the country.
“Taliban officials increasingly compel Afghan journalists to produce ‘safe,’ pre-approved stories, and they punish those who step out of line with arbitrary detention and torture,” said Fereshta Abbasi, Afghanistan researcher at Human Rights Watch. “While all Afghan journalists have been affected and many have fled the country, women journalists have been among the hardest hit.”
Human Rights Watch conducted 18 remote interviews with Afghan journalists in Afghanistan and 13 in-person interviews with Afghan journalists living in Türkiye as well as with Afghan refugee organizations. These interviews were conducted primarily in August 2025. Journalists described both the harsh conditions in Afghanistan and growing challenges facing those living in exile in European Union countries, Türkiye, and the United States.
Reporters whom the Taliban accuse of working with media in exile or having contacts with opposition groups face detention, severe beatings, and death threats. One journalist who had been detained said that Taliban officials told him: “We can kill you, and no one can even ask us why.”
The Taliban’s Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (PVPV) regularly inspects media offices. Officials have detained media workers for violating the ministry’s law on the separation of workspaces for men and women, prohibitions on broadcasting women’s voices, and playing music on television and radio.
Shortly after August 2021, the Taliban Media and Information Center announced “11 rules” for media, which include prohibitions on broadcasting or publishing anything that is “contrary to Islam,” “insults national figures,” or “violates privacy.” Journalists are required to ensure “balanced” reporting and “only publish the truth,” but the rules provide no criteria for interpreting the terms. The open-ended wording allows for arbitrary interventions by officials at all levels.
Taliban authorities review reports prior to publication, censoring anything they decide has “a negative impact on the public’s attitude or … morale.” “They tell us: ‘Make sure you don’t harm us with your reports,’” a journalist said. “If you do, you’ll be in trouble.”
The Taliban have curtailed women’s representation in the media, instructing the media not to air soap operas and dramas featuring women. They have required women employed in the media to wear hijabs.
Under the Law on the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice enacted in August 2024, inspectors check to ensure that media content complies with Sharia (Islamic law) and does not contain images of living beings.
Because of the restrictions, journalists routinely self-censor and may limit their reporting to official events, such as award ceremonies, diplomatic visits, and development projects. Failure to report on official events can lead to reprimands, threats, and in some cases, detention. A Kabul-based journalist said he had been detained twice for not reporting on such events.
Another journalist said that the spokesperson for the provincial authorities called to tell him to attend the police graduation day. “I didn’t go because it wasn’t newsworthy,” he said. “The next day, they told me: ‘You aren’t allowed to report anymore.’”
Media workers who fled Afghanistan to other countries have been living precarious lives in exile in fear of being forcibly returned to Afghanistan and facing persecution.
Countries hosting Afghan refugees should maintain the position that Afghanistan is unsafe for returns and ensure respect at all times for the principle of nonrefoulement, the prohibition on returning people to situations of danger. The human rights situation in Afghanistan has continued to deteriorate since the Taliban takeover.
“The Taliban’s oppression of the media has increased as the need for independent news outlets in Afghanistan becomes ever greater,” Abbasi said. “The US, UK, Germany, and other governments that promised to resettle Afghans should extend their support to Afghan journalists at risk and cease all deportations to Afghanistan.”
Afghanistan’s Vastly Diminished Media Landscape
Before August 2021, Afghanistan had hundreds of private and independent media outlets, including television, radio, and online news sources, most supported by foreign assistance, which played an active role in public life. While journalists faced violence from government officials and warlord-backed militias, as well as from the Taliban, they largely operated openly and published diverse content that was at times critical of the authorities and the government.
Since retaking power, Taliban authorities have imposed severe restrictions on many aspects of Afghan society. Repression of the media appears designed to control access to information and stifle criticism. Many journalists have also fled the country. Reporters Without Borders reported that within the first few months of Taliban rule, 40 to 60 percent of Afghan news outlets stopped operating. The number of men working in media declined from roughly 4,000 to about 2,000 in 2022. For women, the numbers dropped from up to 1400 before 2021 to 600 in 2024. Taliban policies and foreign funding cuts have forced many outlets to reduce staff or close altogether.
Torture, Mistreatment and Unfair Trials of Journalists, Media Workers
The General Directorate of Intelligence (GDI) and the Ministry of Virtue and Vice are the main entities responsible for inspecting media outlets and apprehending media workers who do not abide by the Taliban’s standards.
Prominent reasons for intelligence detention include accusations of spying, being in contact with opposition groups and international or exiled media, and reporting on the Islamic State of Khorasan Province opposition armed group or internal disputes within the Taliban leadership. Both the Ministry of Virtue and Vice and the intelligence agency raid media offices and journalists’ homes, during which they may confiscate phones and computers and access journalists’ contacts. Journalists said that the agency has arrested people for speaking to the media.
Contact with Afghan media in exile is particularly dangerous because the Taliban view these journalists as linked to the opposition and a threat to their control. A Herat-based journalist said that when outside media publish a critical report, the authorities investigate journalists inside Afghanistan: “They suspect us of sending those reports.” The intelligence agency has detained journalists working for Afghan media outlets based outside the country. A colleague of two people who were detained said that “GDI checked their phones and found out that they were working with exiled media. After release, they no longer work in media at all.”
Reporting that is critical of the authorities can lead to accusations of spying. One journalist said:
“In 2023, I was accused, along with [two other journalists] of spying and speaking against the Emirate [the Taliban]. We had to sign a letter that we would never do so again. Two weeks later they called us back and took us directly to prison.… [A senior intelligence official] tortured me. He put plastic on my head so I couldn’t breathe. He slapped my face.… My hands and feet were tied. I was choked many times.… I was tortured for more than an hour every night. They called us “American kids” and accused us of working with exiled media.”
The Taliban commonly committed torture by slapping and punching victims, with some journalists saying they were hit so hard they suffered broken teeth and facial bones. Some journalists reported being lashed on the back. Their release sometimes depended on signing a statement that they would not work as journalists again. “Those released have had ongoing mental health concerns,” one journalist said.
Being a journalist from an ethnic minority, particularly the Hazara—who were frequent targets of Taliban attacks during the armed conflict—can result in worse treatment. One Hazara journalist said that while he was in custody, intelligence personnel taunted him saying, “A Hazara kid dared to speak against us? We won the war with the Americans, who do you think you are? You are nothing to us! We can kill you whenever we want.”
Hazara journalists may face additional restrictions, with intelligence agents more active in Hazara areas. “They accuse Hazara journalists of being the Taliban’s enemy,” said a journalist from Kabul. Another Kabul journalist said that an intelligence official told him: “If you were speaking Pashto [the language of the Pashtun community], your crimes would have been less.”
In some cases, Taliban courts have put journalists on trial. Even those acquitted for insufficient evidence may still face torture and mistreatment. A Hazara journalist tried for propaganda and spying for foreign organizations said: “I didn’t have a defense lawyer. No one dares to become a defense lawyer for a journalist. I was convicted of propaganda against the Taliban and threatened that even if I was acquitted, I could be killed.”
A journalist who posted a video of Taliban security forces destroying a landmark statue was severely beaten in custody, leaving him with a badly bruised face and swollen hands. His father was allowed to visit him only after the journalist spent four months in detention. He was sentenced to one year but released after six months.
A journalist in western Afghanistan was prosecuted on charges of propaganda and having contacts with foreign media in late 2024. Although he was ultimately acquitted, the judge asked him why he had reported on topics that were against Taliban media policy.
Journalists cannot report on detentions or court proceedings. Several said that while they are aware of incidents of torture and extrajudicial killings, as well as crimes like murder and domestic violence, they cannot report on them.
Reporting on disagreements within the Taliban is also prohibited. While some media have reported critical views of the Taliban’s ban on girls’ and women’s secondary and higher education in a general way, they cannot discuss divisions within the Taliban on the subject. In January 2025, after the Taliban’s former deputy foreign minister, Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, publicly called for senior Taliban leaders to end the ban and then abruptly left the country, journalists said they received a letter from Taliban officials announcing a prohibition on asking questions about the policy on women’s education.
A journalist based in Kabul said he was reprimanded for interviewing a religious figure who said that the government should open girls’ secondary schools, contrary to official policy. Taliban authorities use threats of detention to shut down reporting on prohibited taboo subjects.
Journalists outside Kabul face threats if they report on issues outside their province. A journalist in a central province said he and his colleagues were detained after an official accused them of citing the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and being paid from outside Afghanistan: “They told me, ‘This is [name of province]—you should report only from [here].’”
Journalists have also been the victims of enforced disappearances in which the authorities refuse to acknowledge or reveal a detained person’s situation or whereabouts. A journalist in western Afghanistan who was detained for almost a month in 2024 for writing about the ban on girls’ secondary education said his family was unaware of where he was detained for the first week, during which he was slapped and humiliated.
Other journalists also reported that their families were not informed where they were held until days after their arrest, and not allowed to visit them in intelligence agency custody.
Harsh Restrictions on Women Working in Media
In urban areas such as Kabul and Herat, a few women are news anchors, though limited to major outlets like Tolo News. In some provinces, no women are working in media at all, while in others, women journalists must abide by onerous Taliban restrictions and often cannot work from offices, but only from home.
Particularly outside urban areas, women journalists report having to travel with a male guardian while working. Harsh restrictions on where they can go and to whom they can speak has made the job extremely difficult. An editor in western Herat said that while his office has female staff, they cannot speak with Taliban officials or interview people in the street.
Media outlets have reported frequent visits by Virtue and Vice Ministry personnel to monitor compliance with the law, particularly the required segregated workspaces for women and men and to ensure that women are wearing the hijab. Officials who determine that media staff have violated these requirements may issue a warning or detain them.
Male journalists also reported varying restrictions on interviewing women. “In Bamiyan we can speak with women for our reports,” one journalist said. “In Badakhshan we can speak to women but not related to human rights issues. If a woman has opened a new business, we can speak with her. This is not allowed in Takhar and Faryab.”
Another said: “I tried to speak with two female doctors. Neither of them wanted to speak with me. They are scared of PVPV because they could be detained.”
Women journalists are frequently blocked from covering even official events. “There was an opening ceremony at the Public Health Directorate, and they stopped me at the gate and told me that women aren’t allowed,” a female journalist said. “That was the last time I tried to produce a report for local media.”
Under the Virtue and Vice Law, women’s voices are considered private and should be concealed. On October 26, 2024, the Virtue and Vice Ministry announced that women should not recite the Quran or sing in public. Radio stations in some provinces have stopped broadcasting women’s voices as a result. Even where women’s voices are not officially banned, women are afraid to speak: “Women’s voices are not banned in Badghis yet, but PVPV is warning every day,” a woman journalist in western Afghanistan said.
Journalists at some media outlets said they have tried to expand their programming on women’s health, including mental health, and educational programs for girls beyond sixth grade, because the ongoing ban has increased the need for such programs.
Varying and Arbitrary Enforcement of Regulations
Most journalists interviewed said that Ministry of Virtue and Vice officials have told them not to take videos of people, which the ministry views as prohibited under Islamic law. The only videos allowed in most cases are produced by the state-run broadcaster, Radio-Television Afghanistan, and sent to media outlets. In some provinces, the authorities ban photos altogether. A journalist in a western province said that following an official cultural event, the authorities allowed only a picture of an empty room to be published. The authorities use WhatsApp groups to relay news and send pictures and recordings that officials prepare after events.
Journalists are also required to use or avoid certain terms, such as “Emirate” but not Taliban, and to report most content in Pashto. There are virtually no media in minority languages like Uzbek. The Sunni Muslim authorities have also banned programs on Shia religious teachings. A journalist who was preparing a report on a Shia religious leader asked the authorities for a comment. He said he received threatening messages saying that if he published the article, he “would die under torture.”
All the journalists interviewed said there was a lack of clarity about media policy and arbitrary enforcement of regulations. Local authorities have considerable autonomy to interpret policies in their provinces and implement restrictions accordingly. A journalist in western Afghanistan said: “The Taliban are not unified; each of them determines how they want to deal with the media. Rules differ from one province to another. If you go to GDI and say that the director of culture allowed you to work on this report, they say they don’t care.”
A journalist working in southern Afghanistan said, “Sometimes we don’t really know what’s allowed and what isn’t. For example, GDI allows pictures, but the Department of Culture doesn’t.” There are also regional variations: journalists said Kandahar has more restrictions than other provinces because the Taliban leader, Haibatullah Akhundzada, is based there.
The need to get permission for a report depends on the inclinations of regional authorities. A journalist based in eastern Afghanistan said that even reporting on the sport of cricket caused him problems with the local culture department: “I went to Kunar with the Afghanistan cricket team captain and reported on that. The authorities accused me of not getting permission and banned me from working. I had to sign a guarantee letter to be able to resume working.”
The authorities typically require prior permission for travel to some provinces and districts, including Panjshir, where opposition armed groups have attacked Taliban forces. “Journalists can go to Panjshir, but you will be followed,” said one journalist. “You need to coordinate with local authorities beforehand. If you don’t get permission, you can’t report.”
Reporting from the Iranian border also requires advance approval, and local officials try to control the content: “A few weeks ago, I went to the Iran border to cover the situation of Afghans who are being deported. We wanted to speak with Afghans about the deportations, but Taliban officials said, ‘Ask positive questions, don’t take pictures, and don’t record videos of women.’”
Officials routinely demand “positive” reporting and shut down content perceived as negative. A journalist who attempted to report on a spike in gas prices during the hostilities between Israel and Iran said, “They said it’s negative news, and you aren’t allowed to cover it.” He added, “If people use the word ‘complain,’ I replace it… so as not to get in trouble.”
We can’t report on people’s problems and complaints,” he said. “They consider it propaganda against the regime…and [label] critical reporting as “destroying the system.”
Afghan Media in Exile
More than 1,000 Afghan journalists reportedly fled Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover in August 2021. Some were evacuated to the US, Canada, and various countries in Europe. Others who had no sponsoring countries went to Türkiye and Pakistan. Many operating in exile are under financial strain due to cuts in foreign assistance.
Journalists who fled Afghanistan after criticizing the Taliban or criticized them while in exile fear retaliation.
Türkiye rarely grants Afghans the Turkish version of international protection leading to conditional refugee status and instead deports large numbers of them. Afghans in Türkiye without residency permits and those who have been unable to apply for international protection live a precarious existence, avoiding the authorities and lacking access to services like health care and education.
They cannot easily travel inside the country because they risk being picked up by police and immigration authorities and transferred to a deportation center. Internal travel is limited for those who are registered as applicants for international protection. “I am not allowed to travel without a permit…or risk deportation if caught,” a journalist who has lived in Istanbul said.
Since February 2025, the Afghan embassy in Ankara and consulate in Istanbul, which had been staffed by officials from the former Afghan government, have come under Türkiye’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This unusual arrangement has allowed Taliban consular officials access, adding to fears among Afghans in Türkiye that they are being watched. “Many of us have family members in Afghanistan, and don’t want to put their safety at risk,” one journalist said.
Journalists working for Afghan media in exile said the Taliban were aware of their presence in Türkiye. One said that when she renewed her Afghan passport, the consular authorities accused her of biased reporting. Another said he had received a call from a Taliban official warning him to stop reporting.
As part of its campaign to expel Afghan refugees, Pakistan stopped issuing and renewing visas for Afghans in late 2023. As of mid-2025, over 150 Afghan journalists in Pakistan were believed to be at risk of refoulement.
In the US, most major media outlets evacuated their employees in Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover, and these journalists received Temporary Protected Status (TPS) until they could obtain asylum. However, the expiration of TPS in mid-2025 under the Donald Trump administration has left Afghans with pending asylum applications in the US vulnerable to detention by immigration authorities and possible forced return to Afghanistan, where they are at risk of persecution.
A journalist with a major US media outlet said that his former employer—a major US media outlet—told him they could not support his claim out of fear of repercussions from the Trump administration.
Recommendations
To the Taliban:
To Countries Hosting Afghan Refugees:
End the forced return of Afghans to Afghanistan and the deportation of Afghans to countries where they are at risk of being forcibly returned. Adhere to commitments not to forcibly return any refugee to Afghanistan because of the risk of refoulement.Investigate allegations of ill-treatment of Afghans, including in detention centers, and appropriately discipline or prosecute officials responsible for abuses.Increase resettlement of Afghan refugees from Pakistan to third countries and expedite the emergency resettlement of at-risk Afghans.Ensure that full and fair consideration is given to all claims by Afghans for international protection.Support Afghan media in exile, particularly women journalists, with capacity building and training programs, funding, and mental health resources.To the Turkish Government:
Ensure that Afghan journalists and other at-risk Afghans can apply for international protection or humanitarian residency permits.Ensure that exiled Afghan journalists in Türkiye can apply for and obtain work permits.Burkina Faso: Judicial Officers Feared Forcibly Disappeared
(Nairobi) – Burkina Faso authorities should urgently investigate and publicly report on the whereabouts of six judges and prosecutors as well as one lawyer who are feared to have been forcibly disappeared, Human Rights Watch said today.
The abductions of the judicial officers and lawyer since October 10, 2025, could amount to enforced disappearances and possible unlawful conscriptions into the armed forces. Their cases, as well as those of four journalists who were detained and later released between October 13 and 18, appear linked to a wave of repression by the Burkinabè military junta against the judiciary and the media.
“Burkina Faso’s human rights situation has become increasingly defined by abductions, arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and unlawful conscriptions of junta critics and activists,” said Ilaria Allegrozzi, senior Sahel researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The military junta should urgently locate and report on the seven missing people and release them if they have not been credibly charged with an offense.”
Several media and knowledgeable sources consulted by Human Rights Watch reported that between October 10 and 15, men in civilian clothes abducted the judicial officers, Urbain Meda, Seydou Sanou, Benoit Zoungrana, Moussa Dianda, and Alban Somé, from their homes in the capital, Ougadougou. On October 13, Arnaud Sempebré, a lawyer, was also reported missing.
Meda, Sanou, Zoungrana, and Dianda all worked at the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal, while Somé worked at the first instance court in Ouagadougou.
All of the judicial officers and the lawyer had been involved in a three-year case in which traders and customs officers had been charged with smuggling fuel to Islamist armed groups. A colleague of the judicial officers and other local sources said the abductions followed a July ruling by the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal that confirmed the first instance court’s verdict not to proceed with a criminal case. Sempebré, the lawyer, was representing those acquitted in the case.
The Burkinabè bar association stated on October 20 that it officially requested information about Sempebré’s whereabouts, to no avail, and had called for his immediate release.
Media and social media reported that unidentified men on October 20 abducted Jean-Jacques Wendpanga Ouedraogo, a former attorney general of the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal. Social media sources said he was released the following day. Human Rights Watch was unable to independently verify this information. In August 2023, Ouedraogo ordered into custody Amsétou Nikiéma, known as Adja, a traditional healer reportedly close to the military, who had been charged with assault and battery, among other offenses.
A member of the Burkinabè judiciary expressed concern that those abducted were being punished for the ruling in the smuggling case. “For three years, members of the notorious intelligence services have been abducting critics with impunity,” he said.
The junta has previously targeted judicial officers, Human Rights Watch said. In a July 2024 speech, the junta leader, Ibrahim Traoré, sharply criticized the justice sector, attacking judges and prosecutors whom he called “corrupt,” “crooks,” and “sellouts,” and condemned justice-sector unions that had publicly opposed a change in the judiciary’s Superior Council.
The change, initiated in 2023, grants the council the authority to appoint prosecutors but only on recommendations from the justice minister. The unions had opposed this change, saying that it would undermine the independence of the judiciary and place prosecutors under executive influence.
“We have a serious problem [with the justice sector],” Traoré said. “We have initiated reforms … some tried to boycott … but … we will go ahead with or without them. The battle [against the judicial officers] will be launched.”
In August 2024, the junta unlawfully conscripted into military service seven judges and prosecutors, misusing a 2023 emergency law. At that time, a coalition of three justice system unions reacted with a statement and condemned the requisitions as “acts of humiliation and intimidation of judicial officers.”
Since the October 2022 military coup, Burkina Faso’s junta has increasingly cracked down on peaceful dissent, political opposition, and the media, shrinking the civic space in the country. Security forces have arbitrarily arrested, detained, forcibly disappeared, and unlawfully conscripted dozens of journalists. Some of them have been released, while others remain missing, such as the investigative journalist Serge Oulon.
Local and international media and nongovernmental organizations reported that between October 13 and 16, members of the intelligence services detained Michel Wendpouiré Nana, deputy editor of the newspaper Le Pays; Ousséni Ilboudo and Alain Zongo, the editor and publisher of the newspaper l’Observateur Paalga, respectively; and Zowenmanogo Dieudonné Zoungrana, director of the newspaper Aujourd’hui au Faso.
The authorities released them between October 14 and 18. The reasons for their arrests were not revealed. In late September, Zoungrana took part in an interview with Traoré. A Burkinabè activist shared the interview transcript on social media before it was aired by national television, raising concerns that Zoungrana was detained because the interview had been leaked.
Burkina Faso is a party to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Enforced disappearances are defined under international law as the arrest or detention of a person by state officials or their agents followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty, or to reveal the person’s fate or whereabouts.
“Independent courts and a free media are essential checks on the government’s power,” Allegrozzi said. “Burkina Faso authorities need to immediately halt any interference in the judiciary, ensure that judges and prosecutors can carry out their duties without fear, and stop the harassment of journalists and media outlets.”
Brazil Resumes Key Dialogue over Equality
This week Brazil is hosting the 4th National Conference on the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People, an ambitious effort to chart new directions for public policy on equality and inclusion. Beyond its national scope, the conference underscores Brazil’s reemergence as a key voice in global equality debates. And as many countries, including in the Global North, roll back support of LGBTQIA+ rights, the conference shows how the Global South can lead in renewing commitment to equality and human rights.
The conference seeks to convene government, civil society, and grassroots actors from across Brazil and shape a new National Plan for the Promotion of Human Rights and Citizenship of LGBTQIA+ People. Discussions are organized around themes of confronting violence, promoting decent work and income generation, advancing intersectionality and internationalization, and adopting a national policy on the rights of LGBTQIA+ people. Together, they reflect a comprehensive vision that links democracy, participation, and equality, and are expected to set the stage for renewed federal commitments and stronger policy implementation in the years ahead.
The first edition of the conference, held in 2008 under the theme “Human Rights and Public Policies: The Path to Ensure the Citizenship of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Travestis, and Transexuals,” was groundbreaking in embedding the rights of LGBTQIA+ people within Brazil’s broader social policy agenda. The second and third editions followed in 2011 and 2016. Former Brazilian President Michel Temer issued a decree to hold the conference, but it never happened. His successor President Jair Bolsonaro revoked the decree and adopted openly hostile rhetoric toward LGBTQIA+ populations.
The conference’s return comes at a pivotal moment. Violence against LGBTQIA+ people remains alarmingly high in Brazil, particularly against trans and gender-diverse people. Legal protections are robust, but enforcement remains a challenge. Meanwhile, lawmakers and gender-critical social movements continue to threaten hard-won rights, including around gender and sexuality education and gender-affirming care.
The conference can also serve as a model and galvanize other Latin American countries to strengthen their own participation, partnerships, and normative frameworks on sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics.
But advancing policy frameworks is only the beginning. Ensuring effective implementation, holding institutions accountable, and translating conference resolutions into equality demand sustained political will and resourcing. Brazil’s renewed engagement offers hope that transformative, inclusive policymaking in the Global South can shape not only national futures but also support the global struggle for human rights.
Malaysia: Abducted Refugee Detained in Myanmar
(Bangkok) – The Malaysian government should press Myanmar’s junta for the immediate release of a refugee family abducted from Kuala Lumpur in July 2023, Human Rights Watch said today. More than two years after her disappearance, Myanmar junta authorities announced on October 17, 2025, that they were detaining Thuzar Maung, a Myanmar pro-democracy activist, along with her husband and three children.
The junta said that Thuzar Maung, 48, and her family members were arrested for “illegally reentering” Myanmar and that an arrest warrant had been issued for her under Myanmar’s counterterrorism law in January 2023. Malaysian authorities should urgently reopen their investigation into the abduction of Thuzar Maung and her family from their home in Kuala Lumpur, which may amount to transnational repression, a cross-border violation of human rights against a country’s nationals.
“The Malaysian authorities should publicly press Myanmar’s junta to free Thuzar Maung and her family and investigate how this prominent refugee ended up in Myanmar,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Malaysian government is failing to protect refugees at risk, including children, and the role of Myanmar’s junta and possibly other governments needs to be fully explored and brought to light.”
Maung is a longtime advocate for democracy in Myanmar and for refugee and migrant rights in Malaysia. She fled Myanmar for Malaysia in 2015 to escape growing violence against Muslims. The United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, recognized her and her family as refugees. At the time of her abduction, she had over 93,000 followers on Facebook, where she would post criticism of abuses by the Myanmar junta following the February 2021 military coup.
The junta reported that the Myittha Township Court in Mandalay Region had issued an arrest warrant for Thuzar Maung under the junta-amended section 52(a) of the Counter-Terrorism Law and section 512 of the Criminal Procedure Code for providing support to the opposition National Unity Government, which it has declared as a “terrorist organization.” Section 52(a) carries a prison sentence of three to seven years.
The announcement includes a photo allegedly of the five family members in custody with their eyes blacked out. It states that action will be taken “against those living abroad contacting terrorist groups, opposing the state, and providing financial support to terrorist groups.” No information was provided regarding the date of their arrest, any legal proceedings against the family, or where they are being held, meaning they remain forcibly disappeared.
On July 4, 2023, unidentified men abducted Thuzar Maung with her husband, Saw Than Tin Win, and her daughter and two sons from their home in Ampang Jaya, Kuala Lumpur. A friend on the phone with Maung at the time heard her yell that unknown men were entering the house, before being disconnected. CCTV footage captured a car with fake license plates entering their gated community before the call and exiting three hours later, at which point all of the family’s phones had been turned off.
On July 21, 2023, the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and other UN experts wrote to the Malaysian government, urging the authorities “to urgently advance an immediate, impartial, thorough, and transparent investigation of the alleged enforced disappearance” of the family. The working group expressed concern that Thuzar Maung had been targeted for her human rights activism and that the risk of forcible return “would put their personal safety, liberty, integrity and life in danger and expose her to the serious risk of arbitrary arrest, detention, torture, summary execution, and lack of a fair trial.”
In September, the Malaysian government responded that the police investigation had found no physical evidence or witness testimony to suggest that the family was abducted or forcibly disappeared and that there was no record of their leaving the country. Instead, Malaysia detailed the family’s alleged history of leaving rental houses without notice. It also stated that it had sought assistance from the International Criminal Police Organization, or INTERPOL, to inform Myanmar junta authorities of the family’s disappearance.
Since the 2021 coup, Malaysian authorities have summarily deported thousands of asylum seekers to Myanmar despite the risk to their lives and freedom, without assessing their asylum claims or other protection needs. Immigration raids and arrests have surged over the past year, with 34,000 between January and mid-May alone.
Malaysian authorities have forcibly returned foreign nationals, including asylum seekers and refugees, at the request of their home governments. Governments wrongfully designating nationals living abroad as “terrorists” reflect what UN experts said was their “profound concern regarding the reported rise in transnational repression” across Southeast Asia. Civil society supporting Myanmar nationals in Malaysia, including UNHCR-registered refugees, told Human Rights Watch of growing fears of arrest and forced returns.
The Myanmar junta has arrested an estimated 30,000 activists, journalists, humanitarian workers, and others since the coup, including thousands under the Counter-Terrorism Law. With millions of Myanmar nationals having fled the country, the junta has engaged in transnational repression to crack down on activists outside its borders, such as requesting deportations, revoking passports, and conducting digital surveillance.
Malaysia is this year’s chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). At the ASEAN summit and related events starting October 26 in Kuala Lumpur, ASEAN members and partners should urge Malaysia to reopen the investigation into Thuzar Maung’s disappearance and, more broadly, to end its abusive treatment of migrants and refugees. ASEAN as a bloc should ensure that regional instruments enshrine the rights of refugees, dissidents, activists, and other targets of transnational repression.
“ASEAN members and partners at the Kuala Lumpur summit should work together to bring an end to horrific crimes of transnational repression in the region,” Pearson said. “Refugees like Thuzar Maung and her family should be safe from harm, and Malaysia and other countries need to act to deter further efforts by the junta to abduct and disappear Myanmar refugees.”
Intersex Rights Advance Based on Evidence, Principle
Intersex Awareness Week is marked annually to recall a small group of protesters who picketed the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1996 for ignoring the rights of children born with sex variations. While the academy has not budged, medical institutions and governments around the world are increasingly recognizing that people born with intersex variations deserve bodily autonomy.
Intersex children are born with chromosomes, gonads, hormone function or internal or external sex organs that don’t match typical social expectations. For over half a century, doctors around the world have routinely performed surgery on newborns to standardize bodies so that they align with social gender norms. These nonconsensual surgeries are medically unnecessary to perform at such a young age. They also carry significant risk of trauma and other forms of lifelong harm, including a loss of sexual pleasure and/or function, incontinence, chronic pain, scarring, and early-onset osteoporosis.
Over 50 evaluations by United Nations human rights treaty bodies on the conduct of various countries have concluded that nonconsensual surgeries to alter the sex characteristics of children born with intersex traits are human rights violations. Countries including Malta, Greece, and Spain, as well as parts of Australia and India, have banned nonconsensual surgeries, while the UN Human Rights Council passed its first resolution on the issue last year and issued a comprehensive report this year.
In January, the US Department of Health and Human Services published a landmark report on intersex health equity that called for ending nonconsensual surgeries. In August, delegates of the Australian Medical Association unanimously supported a resolution to recognize the harm that medical professionals had inflicted on intersex people. “Recognising this harm is the first step,” a physician said in support of the resolution. “Next we must call for legislated protections, guidelines founded in lived experience and evidence.”
The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers in October urged that “Member States should enact legislation that explicitly and specifically prohibits any medical intervention on a person’s sex characteristics…without their prior, free, informed, express and documented consent.”
Intersex Awareness Week is a good reminder of how far things have come and how much further they need to go. The evidence of harm inflicted on intersex people is plentiful. Undoing it requires respecting the principle of bodily autonomy and integrity, a core human rights obligation.
EU to Sign Uzbekistan Partnership Deal Despite Rights Abuses
(Brussels, October 22, 2025) – Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev will pay a high-level visit to Brussels on October 24, 2025, to sign a partnership deal with the EU setting out a new stage of closer relations and cooperation.
While the new EU-Uzbekistan Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement specifies respect for democratic principles and human rights and fundamental freedoms as an “essential element” of the agreement, Uzbekistan’s rights record has worsened in many areas since negotiations started six years ago, Human Rights Watch said today.
“In signing this agreement without requiring specific improvements to ensure the ability of independent civic groups or media professionals to carry out their work or address the country’s history of impunity for abuses, the EU has missed an important opportunity to bring about positive change,” said Iskra Kirova, Europe and Central Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “The EU and its member states should now insist that Uzbekistan fulfil its essential obligations under the new deal and be prepared to raise tough issues in bilateral relations.”
In the last several years, Uzbek authorities have ramped up restrictions on independent human rights activism and freedom of expression, targeting activists, bloggers, and others, including with unfounded criminal charges such as “insulting the president online.” At least two bloggers have been put into forced psychiatric detention in violation of their rights to liberty and security and health.
Nongovernmental organizations are subject to excessive and burdensome registration requirements and independent groups are prevented from registering. No progress has been made on a stalled code for nongovernmental groups. In June 2024, parliament passed a law allowing the authorities to designate as “undesirable” and ban from the country any foreigner on overly broad and vague grounds of contradicting state sovereignty or discrediting Uzbekistan. Consensual same sex relations between men remains criminalized.
In July 2022, security forces in Uzbekistan used unjustified, including lethal, force to disperse mainly peaceful protesters in Karakalpakstan, Uzbekistan’s autonomous republic. Since then, the authorities have largely denied accountability for the deaths and grave injuries that occurred. However, a peaceful Karakalpak blogger and lawyer, Dauletmurat Tajimuratov, was sentenced to 16 years in prison for his alleged role in the protests. His allegations of ill-treatment and torture have been ignored.
Although Uzbekistan has eliminated state-imposed forced labor in its cotton sector, risks of forced labor and restrictions on freedom of association for agricultural workers in Uzbekistan persist.
The EU’s signing of the agreement with Uzbekistan takes place amid intensifying engagement between the EU and Central Asian countries with the first EU-Central Asia summit held in April 2025 in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The summit declaration put freedom of expression and association, an enabling environment for civil society and independent media, and the protection of human rights defenders at the core of EU-Central Asia relations.
But these commitments have not resulted in substantial human rights improvements, and neither has the preferential EU market access granted to Uzbekistan in exchange for implementation of international labor and human rights conventions. Energy, transport, access to raw materials and security cooperation have instead dominated bilateral relations at the expense of advancements on rights.
Rights protections and the rule of law are essential to secure the EU’s interests in this partnership, including for sustainable trade and security cooperation, Human Rights Watch said. The European Parliament and EU member states that need to ratify the agreement in the coming months should assert that the continued stifling of civic activism, curbs on free expression and assembly, or the risks of forced labour, imperil bilateral relations.
“Signing this agreement is an important milestone,” Kirova said. “The EU should make clear that Uzbekistan’s human rights obligations are non-negotiable and that it will monitor closely and insist on the implementation of all aspects of the deal.”
Russian Forces Deliberately Attack UN Aid Convoy
On October 14, news broke that Russian forces, using drones, had attacked a United Nations interagency convoy delivering humanitarian aid to Bilozerka in the region of Kherson, southern Ukraine. The next day, a Russian-military affiliated Telegram channel posted video evidence of the attack for the world to see.
Click to expand Image Russian forces used quadcopter drones to attack a United Nations inter-agency convoy delivering humanitarian aid to Bilozerka in Khersonska region, in southern Ukraine, October 14, 2025. © 2025 Oleksandr Prokudin, head of Kherson Regional Military AdministrationHaving spent the better part of a year investigating similar Russian drone attacks in Kherson, talking to survivors, and analyzing hundreds of videos like this one from Bilozerka, I was still shocked but not surprised.
Russia’s military is using these, quadcopter drones with cameras that enable the operator to see in real time what they are striking, to conduct a brutal, devastating campaign in the Kherson region. Killing and injuring civilians in their hundreds each month, they are attacking people in their homes, farmers harvesting crops, ambulance teams responding to emergencies, and humanitarian workers trying to aid those most in need.
In its latest monthly report, the Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine reported that short-range drones, similar to those used in the attack on the convoy, continue to be the leading cause of civilian casualties in areas near the front line, with 54 killed and 272 injured during September.
Less than 24 hours after the aid convoy was attacked, a 4-minute video taken by one of the drones was uploaded to Russian military-affiliated Telegram channels, showing in great detail how Russian operators flew at least three drones with explosives, striking two clearly marked UN aid trucks.
Based on a statement by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, no worker was injured, but both trucks were damaged and set ablaze.
Click to expand Image Two screengrabs of the live video feed showing Russian quadcopter drone's moments before impacting clearly marked UN vehicles, October 15, 2025.The Russian drone operators knew they were targeting a UN convoy. That they shared the video for all to see indicates they do not believe they will face any consequences.
They should not count on it. The International Criminal Court (ICC), Ukrainian and domestic authorities from other countries are investigating war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine. The ICC has issued arrest warrants against six senior Russian officials – including President Vladmir Putin.
As Russia, the United States, and others who fear the court’s reach try to undermine the ICC, this brazen, unlawful attack should remind governments of their responsibility to stand up for justice and the institutions that pursue it.