Human Rights Watch

Subscribe by RSS
Updated: 57 min 5 sec ago

World Cup: A Year Out, Growing Attacks on Rights

Wednesday, June 11, 2025
Click to expand Image US President Donald Trump holds up an executive order alongside President of Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) Gianni Infantino in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC, March 7, 2025. © 2025 Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

(Amsterdam) – The Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) should take immediate and demonstrable steps to safeguard human rights for all people involved in the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup, the Sport & Rights Alliance said today. With just one year until the monumental event kicks off across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and only days until the Club World Cup kicks off on June 14, 2025, escalating attacks on human rights and civil freedoms threaten to undermine FIFA’s human rights commitments and responsibilities.

“In 2018, the US, Mexico, and Canada provided clear human rights commitments in their bid documents to host the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup,” said Andrea Florence, executive director of the Sport & Rights Alliance. “Despite FIFA’s mantra that ‘football unites the world,’ a World Cup held under discriminatory and exclusionary policies risks deepening social divides rather than bridging them. FIFA should exert its leverage and demand concrete, legally binding guarantees that human rights won’t be further sacrificed for the sake of the game.”

In its statutes, Human Rights Policy, and 2026 Bidding Process Guide, FIFA accepts its responsibility to respect human rights in line with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The Bidding Process Guide specifically requires would-be hosts to document their commitment to “ensur[ing] that the hosting and staging of the Competition do[es] not involve adverse impacts on internationally recognized human rights.” The guide gives particular attention to “labor rights, the rights of children, gender equality, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, and protecting all individuals from all forms of discrimination.”

The Sport & Rights Alliance has identified several critical areas where government policies in the 2026 host countries, particularly the United States under President Donald Trump, pose significant and immediate risks to the human rights of immigrants; freedom of the press and free expression; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) rights; safety for children; and the right to be free from discrimination, requiring urgent and transparent intervention.

Discriminatory Immigration Policies

FIFA anticipates that as many as 6.5 million people could attend the 2026 tournament across the host countries. The current US administration’s abusive immigration policies, including enforced disappearances under the Alien Enemies Act, travel bans, increased detention, and visa restrictions, threaten the inclusivity and global nature of the World Cup.

Despite President Trump’s executive order stating that teams qualifying for the 2026 Men’s World Cup will be exempt from travel bans, as of now fans and extended family members from banned countries will not be allowed to enter the United States. Delays, denials, and the real prospect of detention for fans, media, and other participants from specific countries could severely disrupt the tournament.

“FIFA should publicly acknowledge the threat US immigration and other anti-human rights policies pose to the tournament’s integrity and use its leverage with the US government to ensure that the rights of all qualified teams, support staff, media, and fans are respected as they seek to enter the United States regardless of nationality, gender identity, religion, or opinion,” said Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch. “FIFA should establish clear benchmarks and timelines for the US policy changes needed to ensure respect for immigrants’ rights during the 2026 World Cup and beyond.”

Human Rights Watch wrote to FIFA on May 5 to say that it should use its leverage to push the Trump administration to roll back discriminatory immigration policies in the United States. FIFA responded on June 3, stating that it “expects ... host countries take measures to ensure that any eligible persons who are involved in the Competition are able to enter the respective countries,” and “is actively working on this matter with relevant authorities.” FIFA also said it would engage with relevant authorities if it becomes aware of human rights concerns.

“Fans travel to the World Cup to celebrate and express their passion, and any attempt to curtail our fundamental rights, including the right to free speech, is a betrayal of the spirit of football,” said Ronan Evain, executive director of Football Supporters Europe. “We’re particularly concerned about the potential for selective enforcement and discrimination against fans based on our perceived political views or national origin. FIFA must obtain the necessary guarantees to ensure fans from all over the world are able to safely travel and attend the games.”

Right to Protest; Freedom of Expression

With the 2026 Men’s World Cup potentially serving as a spotlight for public criticism and controversy, the escalating crackdowns on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, particularly for people engaged in speech and protest related to Palestinian rights, is deeply troubling, the alliance said. Students and activists have been detained and their visas revoked for speaking out about their views. The Trump administration has also deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles following protests against immigration arrests, claiming they constitute an act of “rebellion” against the government.

FIFA’s stated commitments to free expression have also previously been contradicted when it has imposed rules prohibiting players and fans from making political or religious statements. At the 2022 Men’s World Cup in Qatar, for example, Iranian fans displaying “Woman, Life, Freedom” banners were removed from stadiums, while rainbow flags were confiscated at a number of matches.

“The ability to peacefully protest without fear of retribution is a cornerstone of a free society, yet is increasingly under threat in the United States,” said Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director at Amnesty International USA. “There is a long history of peaceful protest in global football. FIFA and the US authorities must ensure that the World Cup does not become a pretext for stifling dissent or expanding mass surveillance, and every player, fan, journalist, and resident can participate and protest without fear of sanction, arbitrary detention or discriminatory treatment.”

Discrimination, Violence against LGBTI People

The increasing legislative and rhetorical attacks on the rights of LGBTI people, particularly transgender people in the United States, underscore the current administration’s intention to erase transgender people from public life and dismantle crucial human rights protections. Discriminatory laws and the hostile political climate around LGBTI rights in the United States could directly threaten the security, bodily autonomy, dignity, and inclusion of LGBTI fans, players, and workers at the 2026 Men’s World Cup.

In Mexico, LGBTI people, and especially trans and gender-diverse people, face violence across the country, which affects their daily lives and participation in public events. Federal and state authorities should take urgent steps to prevent and punish violence against LGBTI people, with particular attention to the specific risks faced by trans and gender-diverse communities.

“The alarming discrimination and violence against LGBTI individuals in the United States and Mexico cast a chilling shadow over the promise of an inclusive World Cup,” said Gurchaten Sandhu, director of programs at ILGA World. “As organizer of the event, FIFA should demand that all host cities and states uphold universal human rights, ensuring no fan, worker, or athlete faces discrimination based on their sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, or sex characteristics, and that any discriminatory laws are actively challenged and nullified.”

Press Freedom

Journalists covering the 2026 Men’s World Cup face distinct and alarming risks in both Mexico and the United States. Mexico consistently ranks among one of world’s most dangerous and deadly countries for media professionals, who face threats, harassment, and violence from both organized crime and public officials. The pervasive impunity for these crimes creates a chilling effect and zones of silence in which critical information is suppressed. In the United States, journalists could face intrusive screening, social media monitoring, and be denied entry based on perceived political views, undermining their ability to report independently.

“Journalists covering the World Cup must be granted unimpeded access, free from arbitrary restrictions, detention, or violence,” said Antoine Bernard, advocacy and assistance director at Reporters Without Borders (RSF). “FIFA and the local authorities must implement exceptional measures to protect all media workers – not only ensuring smooth entry for foreign press but actively safeguarding all journalists who will be covering large crowds, excited spectators, and potential protests, and addressing the systemic impunity that allows violence against them to persist. Local law enforcement’s policies need to be strengthened to ensure the distinction of journalists from demonstrators, bystanders, and fans, and they must clearly communicate the policies they intend to follow in ensuring this distinction, in full respect of journalists’ freedom and independence.”

Labor Rights

The immense scale of the 2026 Men’s World Cup will necessitate a massive workforce in host cities to staff stadiums, hospitality, transport, and more. The Trump administration’s dismantling of federal programs and anti-union sentiment increase the risk of exploitation and child labor, wage theft, and unsafe working conditions for these critical workers.

“The extensive network of contracts for stadium construction, hospitality, and event services in the host cities must be built on a foundation of respect for workers’ rights,” said Luc Triangle, general secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). “We are gravely concerned that without strong, enforceable labor protections, this tournament will inadvertently fuel precarious work and child labor, suppress wages, and deny workers their fundamental rights to organize and bargain collectively. FIFA must demand robust social dialogue and binding agreements to protect every worker contributing to this World Cup.”

Transparency and Anti-Corruption

The Sport & Rights Alliance also harbors significant concerns related to low governmental transparency and weak anti-corruption regulations in and around the 2026 Men’s World Cup, particularly given recent policy shifts in the United States and Mexico. As the tournament approaches, robust oversight and unwavering commitment to ethical principles are needed to prevent the exploitation of this global event for private gain at the expense of human rights and public trust.

“The 2026 FIFA World Cup will take place in a global context where anti-corruption efforts are increasingly under strain,” said Tor Dølvik, special adviser at Transparency International. “All host countries and FIFA must uphold their anti-corruption responsibilities by establishing comprehensive risk management mechanisms that close potential loopholes for corruption, and reliable systems for detecting and reporting irregularities. Full transparency regarding all expenditures related to the World Cup—before, during, and after the events—will be vital in building trust and ensuring integrity throughout the process.”

FIFA’s Responsibility

FIFA, as the chief actor responsible for an event that will leave a tremendous footprint, needs to conduct an updated human rights due diligence assessment and unequivocally leverage its influence to ensure that the 2026 Men’s World Cup is a rights-respecting and rights-advancing event.

A new human rights due diligence assessment should consider the need for tangible commitments to reverse discriminatory policies, strengthen protections for historically marginalized groups, ensure substantial accountability for human rights abuses, and establish truly effective, transparent, and independent grievance mechanisms for people to seek support and a remedy. Failure to act decisively risks irrevocably tarnishing the legacy of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup and setting a dangerous precedent for future mega-sporting events.

***

The Sport & Rights Alliance’s mission is to promote the rights and well-being of those most affected by human rights risks associated with the delivery of sport. Its partners include Amnesty International, The Army of Survivors, Football Supporters Europe, Human Rights Watch, ILGA World (The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association), the International Trade Union Confederation, Reporters Without Borders, Transparency International, and World Players Association, UNI Global Union. As a global coalition of leading nongovernmental organizations and trade unions, the Sport & Rights Alliance works together to ensure sports bodies, governments, and other relevant stakeholders give rise to a world of sport that protects, respects, and fulfills international standards for human rights, labor rights, child wellbeing and safeguarding, and anti-corruption.

Brazil Should Reject Bill Gutting Environmental Licensing

Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Click to expand Image Cattle walk along an illegally deforested area in an extractive reserve near Jaci-Parana, Rondonia state, Brazil, July 12, 2023. © 2023 Andre Penner/AP Photo

Legislators in Brazil are currently deliberating the General Environmental Licensing Law (LGLA), a new bill which dismantles environmental licensing requirements and, if approved, could accelerate oil and gas extraction, cattle ranching, and deforestation in the Amazon. The Chamber of Deputies should reject the bill. If it does not, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva should veto it.

Backed by Brazil’s agribusiness and oil and gas sectors, Bill 2.159/21 creates a “special environmental license” that allows speedy approval for projects the government deems strategic, such as oil exploration in the Amazon rainforest, despite their potential environmental impacts. The bill would exempt a broad range of high-impact industries, like agroforestry and livestock farming, from an obligation to obtain licenses for projects simply by filling out an environmental adherence form, without any need for environmental impact assessments.

Oil and gas projects will still require prior assessment, but these will be confined to the activity’s “directly affected area,” ignoring the catastrophic climate impacts of burning oil and gas after extraction (scope 3 emissions). Some legislators expect the move will “enable oil exploration in the Amazon”, which President Lula has openly supported. Last month, Brazil’s main environmental agency, IBAMA, authorized Petrobras, the state oil company, to carry out an oil spill response exercise in the Amazon. This may clear the path for potential oil drilling despite opposition from IBAMA staff.

Thousands of Brazilians have gathered in state capitals nationwide to demand legislators scrap what they call the “devastation bill”. Environmental and human rights defenders in Brazil warn that the bill, if approved, would dismantle the country’s environmental protections. Indigenous peoples and United Nations experts have also warned that the bill would exclude participation of competent authorities in projects on wide swaths of Indigenous and Quilombola lands yet to be formally titled by the state but long inhabited and stewarded by their peoples. They call upon Brazil to respect the right to development and the right of Indigenous people to give their free, prior, and informed consent to development on their lands. 

Brazil’s environmental minister, Marina Silva, is anticipating an “avalanche of litigation” due to the bill’s “clear unconstitutionality,” calling it a “demolition of environmental legislation.” In Senate hearings, legislators eager to advance oil, mining, and highway projects across the Amazon clashed with Silva, leveling sexist and other derogatory remarks at her. 

With the UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) looming, Brazil’s credibility as a climate leader hangs by a thread. Protecting rights in face of the climate emergency demands the Brazilian government and legislature unequivocally reject this bill.

Damaging Denial of DR Congo’s Ex-President’s Media Coverage

Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Click to expand Image Former Democratic Republic of Congo President Joseph Kabila arrives in Goma, May 29, 2025. © 2025 Moses Sawasawa/AP Photo

Last week authorities in the Democratic Republic of Congo imposed a 90-day ban on any media coverage of former President Joseph Kabila or his party in response to his recent statements and visit to the country’s embattled east after he returned to Congo from exile.

Kabila led the Congo for 18 years after succeeding his father, Laurent-Desiré Kabila, who was assassinated in 2001. Joseph Kabila’s presidency achieved some important progress, but was marred by serious human rights abuses. As he clung to power past the constitutional two-term limit, Kabila increasingly resorted to violence and repression.

Before returning to Congo in late May, Kabila broadcast a speech on YouTube criticizing current President Félix Tshisekedi and proposing peace plans in the east. He has since been holding consultations in Goma, which is controlled by the Rwandan-backed M23 armed group. After he finally stepped down in 2019, Kabila was given the title of “senator for life,” a constitutional provision granting him broad immunities. But last month, the Senate stripped him of immunity for treason charges, paving the way for his prosecution for allegedly backing the rebels.

Congo is facing its most acute crisis in years. The M23 occupies the eastern provincial capitals Goma and Bukavu, and has committed numerous war crimes. In response, the Congolese government has provided financial and military support to a coalition of abusive militias, and risks being complicit in their war crimes. 

But what Congo desperately needs during this difficult time is greater respect for human rights, not less.

Since the conflict escalated in late 2024, the government has threatened action against journalists covering it. The authorities suspended international journalists for reporting on “alleged advances of terrorists” and authorities have warned that journalists who share information about the M23 and Rwandan forces could face severe legal consequences, including the death penalty.

Congolese authorities once tolerated public criticism, if often unhappily. Now the restrictions on the media are tightening. Journalists have a free expression right to cover Kabila’s return, and the Congolese people have every right to debate his role in the country. The authorities should recognize that banning his media coverage will surely backfire: after all, one way to draw people’s attention to Kabila is to forbid them from hearing about him.

Colombia: Presidential Candidate Attacked, Severely Injured

Tuesday, June 10, 2025

(Bogota) – The June 7, 2025, attack against the Colombian congressman and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay is a blow to democracy, Human Rights Watch said today.

A 15-year-old boy shot and severely injured Uribe Turbay during a campaign event in Bogota, the country’s capital. Uribe Turbay, a congressman for the right-wing party Centro Democrático, was speaking to supporters in Bogota in the lead-up to the party’s internal process for selecting its presidential candidate for the May 2026 elections. Uribe Turbay remains in critical condition.

“The attack against Miguel Uribe Turbay is a chilling reminder of the darkest chapters of political violence in Colombia,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “Colombian authorities should investigate this heinous crime, avoid incendiary political rhetoric, and strengthen protections for all political candidates.”

Colombia will hold presidential elections in May 2026 to choose the successor to President Gustavo Petro, whose administration was elected on a left-wing platform. These elections come at a time when the country is facing an increased presence of illegal armed groups in many remote areas.

Violence has increased in recent years. Since 2016, homicides have increased by 20.9 percent, and kidnappings by 34.8 percent; mass forced displacements have reportedly quadrupled. Confinements – where communities are unable to move freely because of violent clashes in the area – increased more than tenfold. Colombia is the country with the highest number of human rights defenders killed worldwide, according to Frontline Defenders.

Colombia has a long history of political assassinations, which have been closely linked to waves of violence. Ahead of the 1990 elections, within less than eight months, three presidential candidates were assassinated by drug cartels and paramilitary groups: Luis Carlos Galán, Bernardo Jaramillo Ossa, and Carlos Pizarro Leongómez. Uribe Turbay’s own mother, the journalist Diana Turbay, was kidnapped in 1990 by Pablo Escobar, a Colombian drug lord, and killed in 1991 during a failed rescue operation.

In the latest local elections, in 2023, the Electoral Observation Mission documented 176 acts of violence against candidates, including 6 assassinations.

The boy accused of shooting Uribe Turbay was apprehended a few blocks from the attack thanks to the swift response of Uribe Turbay’s bodyguard. The Attorney General’s Office and the police said at a news conference, that the Glock-type firearm used by the shooter was purchased in United States. Authorities are trying to trace how the weapon entered the country.

The Attorney General’s Office announced that its investigators and the police are gathering evidence and other elements that will help build the case and identify and prosecute both the attackers and anyone who may have ordered the attack.

Colombian authorities should urgently investigate, prosecute, and hold accountable all those involved in the attack against Uribe Turbay, Human Rights Watch said. To do so effectively, they should ensure the protection of the suspect and his family. The government and leaders from opposition political parties should abstain from sharing theories about the attack that could compromise the independence and impartiality of the investigation.

The minister of interior had convened state institutions and political parties to a national commission to guarantee security and protection of candidates. Uribe Turbay’s lawyer told media that they repeatedly requested that the National Protection Unit, the state entity in charge of security details, strengthen the candidate’s security details, but that those requests were denied. Political leaders and other potential candidates have called on the government to guarantee protection for all candidates as the campaign proceeds.

Authorities should take effective steps to guarantee the safety of all presidential candidates ahead of the 2026 elections, Human Rights Watch said. This includes reassessing the risk levels and protection plans for every candidate, strengthening intelligence capabilities of security forces, improving coordination between institutions, and ensuring that rapid response mechanisms are in place.

Creating a safe and democratic electoral process will also require commitment to lower inflammatory rhetoric and reject hate speech that fuels polarization. This responsibility lies with the highest levels of the Colombian government, starting with President Gustavo Petro himself, and with all political parties and presidential candidates.

“Ensuring that every candidate can campaign free from fear or violence is essential to safeguarding Colombia’s democracy,” Goebertus said. “Colombia’s political leaders need to defend peaceful political participation and refrain from using hate speech that can incite political violence and put lives at risk.”

Germany-Sri Lanka Summit Should Address Rights, Accountability

Tuesday, June 10, 2025
Click to expand Image Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (C) during a ceremony to commemorate the 16th anniversary of National War Heroes Day, marking the end of the country’s civil war, in Colombo, May 19, 2025. © 2025 Ishara S. Kodikara/AFP via Getty Images

Both Sri Lanka and Germany have newly elected leaders, but key human rights concerns that Chancellor Friedrich Merz should raise with visiting President Anura Kumar Dissanayake in Berlin on June 11 have lingered for decades.  

The Sri Lankan government and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) fought a brutal civil war from 1983 to 2009 in which both sides committed widespread abuses, including killings, torture, and sexual violence. During the conflict’s final months in particular, government forces attacked civilians and forcibly disappeared suspected combatants.

Since the LTTE’s defeat, the United Nations Human Rights Council has passed several resolutions highlighting the need for accountability and established an evidence-gathering process. But Dissanayake’s government so far seems no different from its predecessors, protecting former senior officials implicated in war crimes and rejecting the council’s resolutions.

Dissanayake was elected in September on a platform intended to unite Sri Lankans and respond to an economic crisis. But despite a large parliamentary majority, his government has not addressed ongoing human rights violations, much less advance justice for past atrocities.

Sri Lankan government agencies continue to discriminate against Tamil and Muslim minorities, for instance seizing their land on various pretexts. In war-affected areas, hardline Buddhist monks and security forces have seized numerous Hindu temples and turned them into Buddhist monasteries.

Since 2017, Sri Lanka has benefitted from a trading relationship with the European Union known as GSP+, which gives tariff-free market access in exchange for ratifying and implementing 27 conventions on human rights, labor rights, and environmental standards. Sri Lanka is still failing to keep its end of the bargain. A notable issue is the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), a notoriously abusive law that has long enabled torture and arbitrary detention, mostly targeting Tamils and Muslims. Before the election, Dissanayake promised to repeal the PTA, a pledge successive governments have made to the EU since 2017. Instead, his government has repeatedly used it to detain people without any evidence of terrorism.

Germany was previously a leading state on the Human Rights Council’s resolution on Sri Lanka but stepped away from that role in around 2022. To maintain pressure for accountability and ensure evidence gathering, it is vital the resolution is renewed later this year.

Merz should build on UN efforts and GSP+ ties to urge Dissanayake at their Berlin meeting to deliver on his pledges and obligations for accountability and human rights reforms. Such opportunities should not go to waste.

Trump Takes Advantage of Anti-ICE Protests in California

Monday, June 9, 2025
Click to expand Image Thousands of protesters gather to demand an immediate end to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ramped-up raids at worksites, schools, stores and courthouses in California, Los Angeles, US, June 8, 2025. © 2025 Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

On Saturday, US President Donald Trump wrested control of 2,000 California National Guard forces from the state’s Governor Gavin Newsom and deployed them in Los Angeles where police and protestors clashed in the streets.

President Trump claims that the move is necessary to protect federal workers and buildings, but this is dubious. Neither Newsom nor Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass believes this deployment is needed, with Newsom arguing that the “move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.” 

Almost as though aiming to prove Newsom’s point, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth threatened to send active-duty troops if the protests continue; a threat that became reality when 700 marines were deployed from Twentynine Palms to Los Angeles.

The protests, which are happening nationwide, including in Los Angeles, New York City, and Phoenix, Arizona, are against ramped-up raids conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

As a candidate, Trump said he would conduct “mass deportations” of people who are not authorized to be in the United States and vowed to start with the “worst of the worst.” Now, however, the administration has instructed ICE to do everything possible to deport 3,000 people a day.

To meet this goal, immigration officials are carrying out harrowing raids at stores, such as the Home Depot in Westlake, California, as well as at hotels, elementary school graduation ceremonies, and construction sites.

In other words, ICE is going after families and people who are working.

Additionally, weeks ago, ICE agents started showing up outside immigration courts, where asylum and other immigration cases proceed. After court hearings, people walking out of the courtroom have been handcuffed by ICE enforcement agents, often in front of their family members and loved ones. Those left behind are devastated, many breaking down into tears.

In some instances, ICE detained people after judges had reportedly dismissed their deportation cases – normally a positive outcome for immigrants hoping to stay in the US. Even cases that were not dismissed by the judges were reportedly interrupted by ICE arrests outside of the courtroom.

Most of those apprehended are being placed in rapid deportation procedures, known as “expedited removal,” which largely deny individuals the chance to make their case in immigration court. Immigrants have the right to make an asylum claim to prevent being placed in expedited removal, however, Human Rights Watch’s research on third-country nationals deported to Panama and Costa Rica puts into question whether the administration will follow the law and listen to the request for asylum.

It is these actions by ICE that are triggering protests. The Trump administration has stepped way over the line with its abusive immigration policies, and it looks poised to cross another with its threatened use of national guard and military forces to confront protests. 

Trump Takes Advantage of Anti-ICE Protests in California

Monday, June 9, 2025
Click to expand Image Thousands of protesters gather to demand an immediate end to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ramped-up raids at worksites, schools, stores and courthouses in California, Los Angeles, US, June 8, 2025. © 2025 Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

On Saturday, US President Donald Trump wrested control of 2,000 California National Guard forces from the state’s Governor Gavin Newsom and deployed them in Los Angeles where police and protestors clashed in the streets.

President Trump claims that the move is necessary to protect federal workers and buildings, but this is dubious. Neither Newsom nor Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass believes this deployment is needed, with Newsom arguing that the “move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.” 

Almost as though aiming to prove Newsom’s point, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth threatened to send active-duty troops if the protests continue; a threat that became reality when 700 marines were deployed from Twentynine Palms to Los Angeles.

The protests, which are happening nationwide, including in Los Angeles, New York City, and Phoenix, Arizona, are against ramped-up raids conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

As a candidate, Trump said he would conduct “mass deportations” of people who are not authorized to be in the United States and vowed to start with the “worst of the worst.” Now, however, the administration has instructed ICE to do everything possible to deport 3,000 people a day.

To meet this goal, immigration officials are carrying out harrowing raids at stores, such as the Home Depot in Westlake, California, as well as at hotels, elementary school graduation ceremonies, and construction sites.

In other words, ICE is going after families and people who are working.

Additionally, weeks ago, ICE agents started showing up outside immigration courts, where asylum and other immigration cases proceed. After court hearings, people walking out of the courtroom have been handcuffed by ICE enforcement agents, often in front of their family members and loved ones. Those left behind are devastated, many breaking down into tears.

In some instances, ICE detained people after judges had reportedly dismissed their deportation cases – normally a positive outcome for immigrants hoping to stay in the US. Even cases that were not dismissed by the judges were reportedly interrupted by ICE arrests outside of the courtroom.

Most of those apprehended are being placed in rapid deportation procedures, known as “expedited removal,” which largely deny individuals the chance to make their case in immigration court. Immigrants have the right to make an asylum claim to prevent being placed in expedited removal, however, Human Rights Watch’s research on third-country nationals deported to Panama and Costa Rica puts into question whether the administration will follow the law and listen to the request for asylum.

It is these actions by ICE that are triggering protests. The Trump administration has stepped way over the line with its abusive immigration policies, and it looks poised to cross another with its threatened use of national guard and military forces to confront protests. 

Pakistan: Blasphemy Laws Exploited for Blackmail, Profit

Sunday, June 8, 2025
Click to expand Image Police and residents stand amid debris outside the torched St. John Church on the outskirts of Faisalabad, Pakistan, on August 17, 2023, a day after Muslim men were incited to commit anti-Christian violence.  © 2023 AAMIR QURESHI/AFP via Getty Images

(New York) – Pakistan’s blasphemy laws perpetuate religious discrimination and are used to target the poor and minorities in unlawful evictions and land grabs, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. These accusations have had devastating consequences for those affected, while the federal and provincial governments have failed to prevent the abuse or provide justice for victims.

The 29-page report, “‘A Conspiracy to Grab the Land’: Exploiting Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws for Blackmail and Profit,” documents the use of blasphemy accusations for personal economic gain. Accusers have long used blasphemy charges to incite mob violence that has forced entire communities to flee their homes, leaving their property vulnerable to land grabs. Those seeking to exploit the law for their own profit have used blasphemy accusations as a weapon against rivals and businesses owned by religious minorities.

“The Pakistani government should urgently reform its blasphemy laws to prevent them from being weaponized to blackmail rivals, settle personal scores, and attack marginalized communities,” said Patricia Gossman, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Failure to prosecute those responsible for incitement and attacks in the past has emboldened those who use these laws to extort and blackmail in the name of religion.”

Human Rights Watch interviewed 14 people who had faced blasphemy accusations, as well as lawyers, prosecutors, judges, police officials, human rights activists, and journalists between May 2024 and January 2025 in Lahore, Gujranwala, Kasur, Sheikhupura, and Islamabad districts of Pakistan.

Blasphemy is an offense officially punishable by death in Pakistan. Although no one has been executed for blasphemy, a mere accusation can be a death sentence. In the past decade, vigilantes have killed dozens of people in mob violence following blasphemy accusations.

While the targets of blasphemy accusations and the violence they foster belong to all socio-economic and religious groups in Pakistan, most of the victims have been from marginalized groups, Human Rights Watch found. Blasphemy accusations against Christians and Ahmadis in particular have often forced entire communities to flee their homes and neighborhoods. Because many minority communities in Pakistan live in informal, low-income settlements without title to the land, their forced exodus leaves their property up for easy seizure.

Those alleging blasphemy have also benefitted financially by targeting business rivals and businesses owned by religious minorities. The exploitation of the blasphemy law, in particular the ease with which someone can make an accusation as part of a personal dispute or for economic gain, has instilled fear among those most at risk.

An entrenched bias in Pakistan’s criminal justice system results in miscarriages of justice against people accused of blasphemy. The authorities almost never hold those who commit violence in the name of blasphemy to account, while those accused under discriminatory and vague blasphemy laws—generally without evidence—suffer long pretrial detention, lack of due process, and unfair trials that may result in years in prison.

In cases of vigilante attacks, police seldom take action to protect those targeted, and those who do may themselves face threats of violence. As a result, those responsible for mob violence who are protected by politicians or religious leaders avoid arrest or are acquitted.

The government of Pakistan should repeal the blasphemy law and safely release all those held or imprisoned on blasphemy charges, Human Rights Watch said. The authorities should investigate all attacks and threats based on blasphemy accusations, with particular concern for those targeting religious minorities and other marginalized groups and those that result in forced evictions and large-scale forced displacement. The authorities should also institute safeguards to prevent the coerced transfer and sale of properties of those accused following any such incidents.

“The Pakistan government’s indifference to the abuses under the blasphemy law and the violence it provokes is discriminatory and violates the rights to fundamental freedoms,” Gossman said. “The authorities’ failure to hold those responsible for violence against religious minorities to account only encourages extremists and reinforces fear and insecurity among all minorities.”

Selected Accounts

Nadia (pseudonym)

Nadia, 52, a beautician and make-up artist in Lahore, is Christian. In July 2019, she decided to quit her job at a local salon and set up her own business. She pooled her life’s savings and obtained loans from people she knew to start her own salon. Her previous employer tried to dissuade her by offering a raise. When Nadia refused, the previous employer threatened her, saying that “the consequences of this will not be good for you.”

In November 2019, a mob led by a local cleric barged into her salon, beat her and her staff, and ransacked and vandalized the premises. They claimed that she had desecrated the Quran and that a boy in the neighborhood had found pages of the Quran in the trash. Nadia denies this. She said, “I respect all religions and didn’t even have a copy of the Bible at the salon. Why would I have a copy of the Quran? I would have to be completely mad and suicidal to even think about disrespecting it.”

Firoz (pseudonym)

Firoz, 43, is a Christian who runs a private school with both Muslim and Christian students in a low-income neighborhood of Lahore. In February 2021, Firoz received a call from an angry parent regarding “blasphemous” comments by a teacher. Firoz offered to meet the parent and also asked the teacher for an explanation. The teacher denied making any blasphemous comments. A few days later, a group of people affiliated with a local religious and sectarian organization threatened to “burn down the school” if an apology was not made. Firoz said that the teacher resigned. But that was not enough to appease the religious group. Firoz said:

It soon became clear to me that it wasn't about any remark or “blasphemy.” They asked me to donate PKR 200,000 (US$800) to their religious charity to “atone” for my sin. Of course, they realized that since I was a Christian, just a murmur of blasphemy would mean that my school and possibly I too would be set on fire by a mob. No one would ask any questions. My religion made me additionally vulnerable. However, a blasphemy accusation could also result in burning down of a school run by a Muslim. The truth of the allegation doesn’t matter. Now, I have started a cycle of blackmail, and they can extort me whenever.

Mian Yasir

Mian Yasir, a lawyer who has represented several blasphemy defendants over the past decade, said:

In my experience, almost all blasphemy accusations in Pakistan are driven by personal motives and mostly by economic reasons. The accusation is a weapon to settle all kinds of scores. Religious minorities are additionally vulnerable, but everyone is vulnerable, even Muslim religious clerics are not immune. Anyone can weaponize this against anyone at any time in Pakistan. This is the sad reality.

Sawan Masih

In March 2013, a mob of about 3,000 people attacked Joseph Colony, a Christian housing community in Badami Bagh, following an allegation of blasphemy against Sawan Masih, a resident. More than 100 houses were ransacked, burned, and looted. The entire community fled. The local government said that the police had “avoided” confronting the “religiously charged mob” because if any officers were killed “the issue might have blown out of proportion and spread all across the country.”

Instead of protecting the residents of Joseph Colony, the police arrested Masih. In 2014, a trial court sentenced him to death. His conviction was finally overturned in 2020. Local residents and rights activists maintained that the objective of the attack was to capture land in Joseph Colony. At the trial, Masih said that for years, businessmen linked to the local steel industry had pressured the Christian community to sell their property and leave because they wanted the land:

They contrived a case under the blasphemy law.… They put up banners against me alleging blasphemy against the Prophet.… They played with the religious sentiments of the people.… They involved the local police to create fear and alarm among Christian residents who were threatened and told to leave the colony to save their lives.… This was a conspiracy to grab the colony.

A number of families moved out because they knew they would remain vulnerable to such attacks in the future.

Pages