Secondary menu
Human Rights Watch
Philippine Supreme Court Grants Property Rights to Same-Sex Couples
In a watershed moment for same-sex couples in the Philippines, the Supreme Court ruled on February 5 that a cohabiting same-sex partner has co-ownership rights to property they helped acquire during the relationship.
The case involved a lesbian couple who bought property together but registered it under one partner’s name to facilitate the sale. When they separated, the partner whose name was on the title asserted full ownership, despite previously acknowledging the other partner’s co-ownership and contributions to acquiring and renovating the property.
The court found that article 148 of the Philippine family code, which governs property rights for cohabiting couples who cannot marry, can apply to same-sex couples if both parties contribute to acquiring a property. Associate Justice Amy Lazaro Javier emphasized the need to recognize same-sex couples’ co-ownership rights given the "glaring yet unjustified difference in the treatment of heterosexual couples vis-à-vis their homosexual counterparts."
Because the Philippines does not recognize marriage or civil unions for same-sex couples, recognition of joint property ownership is a crucial protection. A 2023 Human Rights Watch report found that barriers to land ownership were a particular concern for lesbian, bisexual, and queer women, and clear property rights within a relationship offer certainty and stability whether couples remain together or separate.
The decision follows growing recognition of same-sex partnerships in Asia. Thailand legalized same-sex marriage in 2024, Taiwan did so in 2019, and Nepal has begun to recognize some same-sex marriages. South Korea has also taken steps toward recognition, including a 2024 Supreme Court ruling extending health insurance benefits to same-sex partners.
Philippines lawmakers have repeatedly introduced legislation to protect LGBT couples, including a 2017 civil partnerships bill that was introduced in Congress but not enacted. If passed, it would have granted same-sex couples “[a]ll benefits and protections as are granted to spouses in a marriage.” In 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed a case asserting that excluding same-sex couples from the definition of marriage was unconstitutional. Additional legislative efforts in 2019 and 2022 were not enacted into law.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is an important step toward equality. Lawmakers should build on its recognition of the lives that same-sex couples build together by enacting legislation that ensures equal rights and protections for all couples, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Iraq: ISIS Detainees Transferred from Syria at Risk of Abuse
(Beirut) – The United States transferred 5,700 detainees held for alleged ISIS affiliation from Northeast Syria to Iraq, where they are at risk of enforced disappearance, unfair trials, torture, ill-treatment, and violations of the right to life, Human Rights Watch said today.
The United States began transferring the detainees, including Syrians, Iraqis, and third country nationals, on January 21, 2026, amid a Syrian government military offensive to claim control of Northeast Syria from the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The United States conducted transfer flights under its military’s Operation Inherent Resolve, which is responsible for counterterrorism operations in the region. Iraqi officials have said the United States agreed to cover the cost of jailing the detainees in Iraq and processing their future trials, the New York Times reported.
“Regardless of their affiliation or alleged actions, these detainees have been held for years without due process, and they are now held in another country without proper safeguards,” said Sarah Sanbar, Iraq researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Victims of ISIS crimes deserve genuine justice, and that requires fair trials for the accused.”
Given the substantial risk of torture in Iraq, these transfers appear to violate the principle of non-refoulement in international law: not returning anyone to a country where they would face abuse. In light of Iraq’s well-documented due process violations in counterterrorism proceedings, the United States’ role in detaining these people and carrying out these cross-border transfers may make it complicit in any resulting abuses, Human Rights Watch said.
Iraqi authorities are holding transferred detainees in Nasiriyah and Karkh prisons, The National reported, while awaiting the results of investigations carried out by the Supreme Judicial Council. The council said that among those transferred are senior ISIS leaders accused of genocide and the use of chemical weapons.
ISIS committed numerous atrocities in Iraq between 2014 and 2017. Transferred detainees found to have participated in such crimes should be tried and held to account in trials that are fair and that respect due process guarantees, Human Rights Watch said.
Human Rights Watch asked the US Central Command (CENTCOM) if detainees were provided with access to legal counsel, judicial review, or an opportunity to challenge their transfer. CENTCOM declined to comment.
This includes ensuring that all detainees are only held according to law and for a legal reason. All detainees should be brought promptly before a court or similar judicial authority to review the legality and necessity of their continued detention and to order their immediate release if detention is not justified. Countries whose nationals are being transferred to Iraq should repatriate their citizens and try them if there is any evidence of wrongdoing.
“This is not a thoughtful effort to bring about justice and accountability while respecting rights and norms,” Ian Moss, former deputy coordinator for counterterrorism at the US State Department responsible for ISIS detainees and associated family members, told Human Rights Watch. “This is an expedient attempt to wash one’s hands of the situation.”
The last time Iraq undertook terrorism trials on such large a scale was in 2018-2019, after Iraqi government forces retook territories held by ISIS. The authorities rounded up tens of thousands of men for trials that severely violated their rights. Many were sentenced to death after a 10-minute trial, without a lawyer present, and solely based on the testimony of an anonymous informant or a confession extracted under torture.
Human Rights Watch has extensively documented systemic issues in Iraq’s judiciary, particularly in counterterrorism trials, including the routine use of torture-tainted confessions, reliance on secret informants, denial of due process, and a lack of judicial independence.
Without credible guarantees and demonstrated reforms, including independent investigations into torture allegations, access to legal counsel, judicial review of all detention, monitoring of trials by independent observers, and fair trial safeguards, Iraq risks repeating the same rights violations, Human Rights Watch said.
Iraq’s prison system, too, is rife with enforced disappearance, torture, and ill-treatment. Iraq’s prisons are overcrowded, and reports of prison conditions are dire. A large influx of prisoners is likely to put further strain on the prison system, putting both prisoners and staff at risk.
As of February 2026, Iraq has 30 prisons housing roughly 67,000 inmates, including about 1,600 foreign nationals, according to Iraq’s Justice Ministry. However, these figures do not include prisons in the Kurdistan Region or detainees held by security forces and various armed groups elsewhere in Iraq.
On February 8, Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council announced that the suspects—who hold citizenship of 42 countries—will be prosecuted under Iraqi law, and that none will be extradited until investigations into their alleged crimes are fully completed.
Iraq extensively relies on use of the death penalty, particularly in counterterrorism cases. An estimated 8,000 prisoners are on death row. On February 10, Iraq executed six people, its first mass execution since implementation of the death penalty was paused following passage of a General Amnesty Law in January 2025.
In June 2024, a group of United Nations experts said that Iraq’s systematic executions based on torture-tainted confessions and an ambiguous counterterrorism law amount to arbitrary deprivation of life under international law and may amount to a crime against humanity.
Iraq still does not have a law criminalizing core international crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. ISIS fighters instead are tried under Iraq’s 2005 Anti-Terrorism Law, which sentences defendants to death for affiliation with a terrorist group.
In 2017, the UN mandated an investigative team, known as UNITAD, to collect, preserve, and store evidence of alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by ISIS in Iraq. Issues in Iraq’s legal system meant that this evidence was not shared with Iraqi authorities.
Iraq should enact comprehensive domestic legislation that criminalizes genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in line with international law, to deliver justice that reflects the gravity and systematic nature of ISIS-committed crimes, Human Rights Watch said. Cases concerning crimes by ISIS in Iraq and Syria have moved forward in Portugal, Germany, and other European jurisdictions.
States whose nationals are transferred from northeast Syria to Iraq remain legally bound to take steps to try to prevent torture, unfair trials, and executions against their nationals. Those who substantially and knowingly contribute to such violations including assisting in transfers without credible safeguards are likely to be complicit in them.
Iraqi government spokesperson Basem al-Awadi said on January 29, 2026, that the transfer of Islamic State detainees from Syria to Iraq is a “preemptive step to defend Iraqi national security,” given the risk of prison breaks amid hostilities.
“We appreciate Iraq’s leadership and recognition that transferring the detainees is essential to regional security,” Admiral Brad Cooper, CENTCOM commander, said on February 13.
The US announcement contained no mention of the more than 28,000 people, allegedly relatives of ISIS members, who remain unlawfully detained in life-threatening conditions in the al-Hol and Roj camps in northeast Syria. About 12,500 are foreigners from more than 60 countries.
Human Rights Watch wrote to Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council, the Justice Ministry, and the National Security Agency, but all declined to comment.
“Iraq is dealing with a problem the international community should have solved years ago,” Sanbar said. “The government needs to stop kicking the can down the road, take accountability for its citizens, and give ISIS victims genuine justice through fair trials.”
Uzbekistan: Cotton, Wheat Farmers Exploited, Abused
(Berlin, February 17, 2026) – The Uzbekistan government is violating the human and labor rights of cotton and wheat farmers through a coercive state production system, Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum for Human Rights said in a report released today. These abuses continue despite recent agricultural reforms.
The 85-page report, “Farmers Have no Freedom: Abuse and Exploitation of Cotton and Wheat Farmers in Uzbekistan,” documents abusive conditions under which these farmers work, including mandatory quotas for crops on land they lease from the government, to be sold at centralized set prices, enforced through penalties for not meeting the quotas, even though required yields may not be achievable. Authorities use threats and violence against farmers who do not meet the quotas, and penalties may include seizing the land. Farmers face non- or late payments by cotton-textile and wheat companies, while authorities have failed to enforce court orders compelling the companies to pay.
February 16, 2026 “Farmers Have No Freedom”“The Uzbekistan government needs to end the coercive and exploitative conditions in which hard-working farmers are expected to produce cotton and wheat,” said Umida Niyazova, director of the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights. “Authorities should commit to agricultural reforms that offer real protections for these farmers and heed the advice of farmers themselves as to what changes are actually needed.”
The groups interviewed 75 farmers and experts across five regions of Uzbekistan. They also reviewed court materials, legislation, and other official documentation, articles in the media and social media posts, and statements by government officials between October 2023 and December 2025.
The Uzbekistan government in recent years has ended state-imposed forced labor of cotton pickers in the cotton harvest and has committed to undertake reforms of the agricultural sector more broadly. While there have been noticeable improvements, the remaining system of strategic crop cultivation and production in Uzbekistan still creates a risk of forced labor.
Uzbekistan’s agricultural system prevents cotton and wheat farmers from operating independently or having control over their working conditions, and in practice makes them subservient to the state, the organizations found.
“It is as if we have become hired workers for someone, not landowners,” said a cotton farmer from the Khorezm region.
Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum also documented that agricultural land lease agreements do not protect farmers from illegal and arbitrary land seizure by local authorities, and that local authorities regularly threaten to seize land if farmers have not fulfilled their quotas.
Farmers who have filed lawsuits to contest land seizure by the government seldom find redress in Uzbekistan courts and on the rare occasion they do, local officials fail to enforce decisions to return the land to the farmer.
“The judge does what the governor says,” said a farmer whose land had been seized. “The court cannot help in the matter of land.”
Farmers also said that private cotton-textile and wheat production companies have delayed making payments for raw cotton and wheat or have not paid farmers in full for their products, causing them to incur tax fines. In some cases, late or non-payments put them in a dire financial situation and can force them to declare bankruptcy. The authorities have in some cases failed to enforce contracts or require companies to pay farmers, even when courts have ordered them to do so.
A hostile and dehumanizing environment persists in Uzbekistan’s agricultural sector. Farmers described being slapped or beaten, or having items thrown at them during meetings with local officials. Officials have referred to farmers as “donkeys,” “scumbags,” or “pigs,” simply because they had not yet fulfilled their cotton or wheat quota. In a limited number of more extreme cases, police have arbitrarily detained farmers for up to several days without charge for not fulfilling their quotas.
Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum also documented multiple instances in which police threatened or arrested local bloggers who reported on farmers’ rights issues, with courts then handing them short-term custodial sentences.
In correspondence with Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum, the Uzbekistan government largely rejected these findings, pointing to changes in legislation and new decrees that, on paper, provide better legal protection for farmers’ rights.
Farmers in Uzbekistan have rights to just and favorable conditions of work and to freedom of association, among others, that are guaranteed by the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which Uzbekistan ratified in 1995, and International Labour Convention 87, ratified by Uzbekistan in December 2016.
The Uzbekistan government should ensure compliance with recent laws and decrees that offer farmers better rights protections, the groups said. The government should ensure that reforms truly remedy the highly abusive and exploitative labor conditions in which cotton and wheat farmers in Uzbekistan are made to work, including by ending the quota system.
The Uzbekistan government should engage farmers in policy discussions around agricultural reforms and give serious consideration to their feedback and recommendations, Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum said.
Uzbekistan’s international partners and international financial institutions working in Uzbekistan should urge the government to end arbitrary and coercive state interference in the cotton and wheat sector. The European Union, in particular, should insist that Uzbekistan fulfill its commitments stemming from the new bilateral partnership agreement signed in 2025 and the preferential market access it grants to Uzbekistan premised on the implementation of core international human and labor rights conventions.
“It’s appalling that Uzbekistan’s cotton and wheat farmers work in such exploitative and coercive production conditions,” said Mihra Rittmann, Central Asia adviser at Human Rights Watch. “Uzbekistan’s partners, international financial institutions, and potential investors in Uzbekistan’s agricultural sector should use their leverage to ensure that the Uzbek government implements reform that genuinely protects farmers and their rights.”
Uzbekistan: Cotton, Wheat Farmers Exploited, Abused
(Berlin, February 17, 2026) – The Uzbekistan government is violating the human and labor rights of cotton and wheat farmers through a coercive state production system, Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum for Human Rights said in a report released today. These abuses continue despite recent agricultural reforms.
The 85-page report, “Farmers Have no Freedom: Abuse and Exploitation of Cotton and Wheat Farmers in Uzbekistan,” documents abusive conditions under which these farmers work, including mandatory quotas for crops on land they lease from the government, to be sold at centralized set prices, enforced through penalties for not meeting the quotas, even though required yields may not be achievable. Authorities use threats and violence against farmers who do not meet the quotas, and penalties may include seizing the land. Farmers face non- or late payments by cotton-textile and wheat companies, while authorities have failed to enforce court orders compelling the companies to pay.
February 16, 2026 “Farmers Have No Freedom”“The Uzbekistan government needs to end the coercive and exploitative conditions in which hard-working farmers are expected to produce cotton and wheat,” said Umida Niyazova, director of the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights. “Authorities should commit to agricultural reforms that offer real protections for these farmers and heed the advice of farmers themselves as to what changes are actually needed.”
The groups interviewed 75 farmers and experts across five regions of Uzbekistan. They also reviewed court materials, legislation, and other official documentation, articles in the media and social media posts, and statements by government officials between October 2023 and December 2025.
The Uzbekistan government in recent years has ended state-imposed forced labor of cotton pickers in the cotton harvest and has committed to undertake reforms of the agricultural sector more broadly. While there have been noticeable improvements, the remaining system of strategic crop cultivation and production in Uzbekistan still creates a risk of forced labor.
Uzbekistan’s agricultural system prevents cotton and wheat farmers from operating independently or having control over their working conditions, and in practice makes them subservient to the state, the organizations found.
“It is as if we have become hired workers for someone, not landowners,” said a cotton farmer from the Khorezm region.
Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum also documented that agricultural land lease agreements do not protect farmers from illegal and arbitrary land seizure by local authorities, and that local authorities regularly threaten to seize land if farmers have not fulfilled their quotas.
Farmers who have filed lawsuits to contest land seizure by the government seldom find redress in Uzbekistan courts and on the rare occasion they do, local officials fail to enforce decisions to return the land to the farmer.
“The judge does what the governor says,” said a farmer whose land had been seized. “The court cannot help in the matter of land.”
Farmers also said that private cotton-textile and wheat production companies have delayed making payments for raw cotton and wheat or have not paid farmers in full for their products, causing them to incur tax fines. In some cases, late or non-payments put them in a dire financial situation and can force them to declare bankruptcy. The authorities have in some cases failed to enforce contracts or require companies to pay farmers, even when courts have ordered them to do so.
A hostile and dehumanizing environment persists in Uzbekistan’s agricultural sector. Farmers described being slapped or beaten, or having items thrown at them during meetings with local officials. Officials have referred to farmers as “donkeys,” “scumbags,” or “pigs,” simply because they had not yet fulfilled their cotton or wheat quota. In a limited number of more extreme cases, police have arbitrarily detained farmers for up to several days without charge for not fulfilling their quotas.
Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum also documented multiple instances in which police threatened or arrested local bloggers who reported on farmers’ rights issues, with courts then handing them short-term custodial sentences.
In correspondence with Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum, the Uzbekistan government largely rejected these findings, pointing to changes in legislation and new decrees that, on paper, provide better legal protection for farmers’ rights.
Farmers in Uzbekistan have rights to just and favorable conditions of work and to freedom of association, among others, that are guaranteed by the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which Uzbekistan ratified in 1995, and International Labour Convention 87, ratified by Uzbekistan in December 2016.
The Uzbekistan government should ensure compliance with recent laws and decrees that offer farmers better rights protections, the groups said. The government should ensure that reforms truly remedy the highly abusive and exploitative labor conditions in which cotton and wheat farmers in Uzbekistan are made to work, including by ending the quota system.
The Uzbekistan government should engage farmers in policy discussions around agricultural reforms and give serious consideration to their feedback and recommendations, Human Rights Watch and Uzbek Forum said.
Uzbekistan’s international partners and international financial institutions working in Uzbekistan should urge the government to end arbitrary and coercive state interference in the cotton and wheat sector. The European Union, in particular, should insist that Uzbekistan fulfill its commitments stemming from the new bilateral partnership agreement signed in 2025 and the preferential market access it grants to Uzbekistan premised on the implementation of core international human and labor rights conventions.
“It’s appalling that Uzbekistan’s cotton and wheat farmers work in such exploitative and coercive production conditions,” said Mihra Rittmann, Central Asia adviser at Human Rights Watch. “Uzbekistan’s partners, international financial institutions, and potential investors in Uzbekistan’s agricultural sector should use their leverage to ensure that the Uzbek government implements reform that genuinely protects farmers and their rights.”
Philippines: Duterte ICC Hearing Set to Begin
(The Hague) – The International Criminal Court (ICC)’s first major hearing in the case against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is a critical step in ensuring justice for victims of the Philippines’ “war on drugs,” Human Rights Watch said today in a question-and-answer document on the upcoming proceedings.
From February 23 to 27, 2026, a panel of three ICC judges will hear evidence in order to determine whether to confirm the charges against Duterte and send his case to trial. The hearing is not a trial and is not aimed at establishing Duterte’s guilt or innocence. Following the hearing, the judges will have 60 days to issue a written decision.
“Former President Duterte wrongly thought he was untouchable, beyond the reach of the law,” said Maria Elena Vignoli, senior international justice counsel at Human Rights Watch. “The ICC case reflects the determination of victims and their families to advance justice against all odds and dangers.”
Police in the Philippines have reported that about 6,200 Filipinos died during government anti-drug operations between 2016 and 2022. Human rights groups in the Philippines contend that as many as 30,000 people were killed in the “war on drugs,” most of them impoverished people in urban areas. Many children were among those killed or who suffered from the harmful consequences of Duterte’s anti-drug campaign.
Ongoing US sanctions against the ICC and the in absentia criminal convictions of ICC officials in Russia are indicative of growing attacks on the global rule of law. Progress in the Duterte case affirms the court’s relevance and significance in ensuring accountability for grave international crimes, Human Rights Watch said.
The current Philippine president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., has never repudiated the “war on drugs” as a state policy, and has not rescinded Duterte’s orders and other policy statements. Since Marcos took office on July 1, 2022, more than 1,000 people have reportedly died as part of the anti-drug campaign.
“The ICC’s proceedings against Duterte should push Marcos to break with the past, distance himself from his predecessor’s bloody policies, and promote justice and the rule of law,” Vignoli said. “He should publicly declare an end to the ‘drug war,’ order credible investigations of those responsible for abuses, and take steps to rejoin the ICC.”
Greece Continues Its Relentless Assault on Civil Society
The recent acquittal of 24 humanitarian workersby a court in Lesbos, in what the European Parliament called the “largest case of criminalization of solidarity in Europe”, should have been a turning point in the Greek government’s assault on civil society. Instead, it has doubled down.
On February 5, Greece’s Parliament passed a government-led migration law that associates humanitarian work with criminal conduct by making membership in a nongovernmental organization an aggravating factor in migration-related offenses. The law also grants the Migration Minister unchecked authority to deregister groups at his discretion and without a court ruling, a power ripe for misuse.
The law is part of a surge in state-led intimidation of civil society following the February 3 collision between a Coast Guard vessel and a migrant boat off Chios, which left 15 dead. While survivors claim reckless maneuvers by the coast guard caused the shipwreck, the government has launched a smear campaign against those seeking accountability.
On February 9, Migration Minister Thanos Plevris accused human rights lawyer Dimitris Choulis, who is defending a survivor of the wreck facing smuggling charges, of slandering the Coast Guard to serve a political agenda.
Meanwhile, Health Minister Adonis Georgiadis announced that the national intelligence service will investigate the activities of an unnamed nongovernmental group (which he subsequently identified as Médecins Sans Frontières), which tried to visit survivors of the wreck in the hospital, alleging the group tried to coach patients into making claims against the coast guard.
Government spokesperson Pavlos Marinakis also threatened journalist Chris Avramidis with a lawsuit live on air for questioning the Coast Guard’s tactics. Human Rights Watch has documented how such intimidation continues an ongoing attack on media freedom where abusive lawsuits and government pressure have created a stifling environment for independent media.
On February 11, Greek prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for Tommy Olsen, founder of Aegean Boat Report based in Norway. The warrant accuses Olsen of “forming a criminal organization” and “facilitating illegal entry,” charges stemming from his legitimate work documenting pushbacks of migrants and asylum seekers.
By treating solidarity as potential criminal conduct and the search for accountability as a threat, the Greek government is undermining democratic checks and balances. The European Commission should launch a formal assessment of Greece’s new migration law and its compatibility with EU law. It should also ensure Athens adheres to its commitments to protects critics from legal harassment.
Kazakhstan: Draft Constitution Raises Rights Concerns
(Berlin) – The Kazakhstan Constitutional Commission’s proposed amendments to the country’s constitution would severely weaken checks on executive power and fundamental human rights protections, Human Rights Watch said today.
Police have responded to public criticism of the changes by intimidating and arresting journalists, lawyers, and social media users. The draft constitution will be put to a vote in a referendum hastily scheduled for March 15, 2026.
“Genuine constitutional reform should strengthen rights protections and be shaped through an open and transparent process – not used to concentrate power or silence dissent,” said Mihra Rittmann, Central Asia adviser at Human Rights Watch. “Public discussion of amendments to the constitution should be inclusive and pluralistic, not policed.”
The draft constitution, published for public discussion on January 31, proposes changes to approximately 80 percent of the current constitution. Authorities have portrayed the proposed changes as necessary to ensure “law and order” and modernize the country’s political framework. Officials have rejected concerns that the amended constitution would lead to violations of international human rights law.
Yet several of the proposed provisions in the draft, if adopted, could enable excessive and undue restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. Clauses allowing restrictions in the interests of public order and morality are vague, creating a risk of broad and arbitrary interpretation that could be used to silence critical voices.
The draft introduces constitutional restrictions on the financing of political parties and trade unions by foreign citizens and international organizations, among others, and omits mention of the fundamental right to strike. It would also enshrine in the constitution a requirement for nongovernmental organizations to publicly disclose information about any receipt of foreign funding. The proposed amendments could be used to unjustifiably restrict legitimate civil society activity, stigmatize organizations receiving foreign support, and interfere with the right to freedom of association, Human Rights Watch said.
The draft defines marriage exclusively as a “union between a man and a woman,” cementing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, who already face stigma and harassment in Kazakhstan. The government in December 2025 adopted a discriminatory law banning the so-called propaganda of “nontraditional sexual relations,” violating the rights to freedom of expression and association that are protected under international human rights conventions to which Kazakhstan is party.
The draft removes a reference to international law taking precedence over domestic law. It also undermines the independence of national human rights institutions by doing away with Senate approval of Kazakhstan’s Ombudsman, who is appointed by the president.
In recent weeks, the authorities have responded aggressively to negative public commentary about the proposed amendments. In early February, an Almaty court fined a man 86,500 Kazakh tenge (US$170) for allegedly disseminating “false information” after he posted critical comments about the draft on Facebook. Police have also visited and questioned several journalists who posted critical commentary on social media, in some cases pressuring them to delete their posts.
The police also warned at least two lawyers who commented publicly on the draft. The news site KazTAG reported that several internet providers had blocked its website shortly after it had published an article highly critical of the constitutional amendments.
A court in the capital, Astana, on February 4 ordered that Ermek Narymbay, an activist who is subject to restrictions barring him from engaging in social and political activities, be sent into pretrial detention after he took to social media to criticize the proposed amendments. The same day, Almaty police also detained the activist Zharkyn Kurentaev for questioning prior to his participation in a news conference on the draft constitution. He was later released.
The government’s actions contribute to a climate of fear and self-censorship and undermine open public discussion and access to information on the proposed constitutional reforms, Human Rights Watch said.
In an open appeal to Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, more than 60 civil society activists, human rights defenders, and legal experts expressed concerns about the legitimacy of the reform process. They warned that rushed and opaque changes, vague provisions, and concentration of authority could weaken rights protections and further shrink civic space. They called for inclusive public consultations, guarantees that there would be no reduction in human rights protection, and a transparent reform process, among other proposals.
Kazakhstan is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other core international human rights treaties, which guarantee the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and require that any restrictions on those rights be lawful, necessary, and proportionate.
The government should revise draft amendments that could be used to unjustifiably restrict rights, ensure meaningful public participation in the reform process, and refer the draft constitution to the European Commission for Democracy through Law, also known as the Venice Commission, for independent legal review.
Kazakh authorities should also stop harassing journalists, activists, lawyers, and others and ensure that no one is penalized for peacefully expressing views critical of the ongoing constitutional reform process, Human Rights Watch said.
“When police detain activists and question journalists for nothing more than expressing critical views, it shuts down public debate and makes clear that speaking out comes at a cost,” Rittmann said. “Authorities should stop such harassment and ensure a rights-based approach to the constitutional reforms underway.”
Indonesia: Police Disperse Papuans Protesting ‘Food Estate’ Project
(Tokyo) – Indonesian police unlawfully dispersed, beat, and detained 11 Papuan protesters in Merauke City, South Papua, on January 25, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today. The authorities should promptly and impartially investigate the incident, appropriately discipline or punish those responsible for abuses, and consult with Indigenous communities to address longstanding grievances.
That morning, members of the Voice of Catholic People of Papua (Suara Kaum Awam Katolik Regio Papua) had gathered at the St. Francis Xavier Catholic Cathedral to call on church officials to protect Indigenous people harmed by the government’s massive Merauke food project. They also expressed opposition to the bishop of the Catholic Archdiocese of Merauke for backing the government project. The police arrived and forcibly dispersed those gathered inside the church courtyard and arrested 11.
“Indigenous Papuan communities have the right to protest the government’s Merauke food project without having to worry about being beaten, arrested, and jailed,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Police and military personnel who commit abuses against local communities should be held to account and appropriately punished.”
Protesters allege that the police broke up the peaceful protest with unnecessary force. Stenlhy Dambujai, 30, said that the officers “choked and beat” him, and hit two others, Maria Amote, 24, and Angel Gebze, 22, on the head with batons.
The police took those detained to the Merauke Traffic Police Station, where the officers again beat them, and then transferred them to the Merauke police precinct for further questioning. All the protesters were released without charge after midnight, but their legal counsel, Arnold Anda of the Merauke Legal Aid Institute, said that the police had refused to disclose any legal basis for their detention.
“The police also forcibly seized a smartphone belonging to one of our friends, which was only returned after the photos and videos had been deleted,” Dambujai said. “I feel unsafe because it feels like I am constantly being monitored by the authorities.”
The Indonesian government’s Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate project aims to convert nearly three million hectares of forest and swampland to grow rice, sugarcane, and other crops for national food self-sufficiency. Then-President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono initiated the project in 2010, but it stalled. His successor, Joko Widodo revived and expanded the plan in 2023, giving it National Strategic Project status, which increased deforestation in Merauke. Since succeeding Widodo in October 2024, President Prabowo Subianto has accelerated expansion of the food estate, saying he wished to transform Indonesia into the “granary of the world.”
The Merauke food project risks the customary land rights of over 40,000 people from the Indigenous Malind, Maklew, Yei, and Khimaima communities, who depend upon the forest and swampland for their livelihood and traditional practices, Human Rights Watch said. The communities allege that the project is displacing Indigenous communities, forcibly taking customary lands, logging traditional forests, threatening biodiversity, and using the military to suppress dissent.
The government asserts that no one has applied for the designation of customary forests in the Merauke project area and that the project has complied with applicable national laws and regulations, including those related to upholding Indigenous rights, environmental protections, and human rights.
The civic group Solidarity for Merauke says the project has exacerbated human rights violations and forced displacement. President Prabowo has deployed the Indonesian military to support agricultural programs in the Merauke regency, including to plant and harvest food crops, but also to discourage protests.
Norton Kamuyen, a Marind resident of Nakias village, Nguti district, told Human Rights Watch that he and his family were forced to flee to a neighboring village in January due to a land dispute. “We once lived safely and without fear, free to forage in our forests,” Kamuyen said. “But since we disagree with the National Strategic Project, we are considered to be opposing the government. The military makes us afraid, so we have to leave our villages to find safety and protect our lives.”
Indonesian authorities regard Merauke as an important symbol of nationalism, signifying the unity of the vast Indonesian archipelago through the “From Sabang to Merauke” anthem, referring to Sabang Island, Indonesia’s westernmost tip, and Merauke, which is Indonesia’s easternmost regency. Protests by Indigenous Papuans are unusual in Merauke because of the heavy military deployment. A Malind tribal leader in Merauke said that “Bulldozers here are always guarded by soldiers with semi-automatic weapons.”
On February 5, the Communion of Churches in Indonesia, the umbrella organization of 105 Protestant denominations, issued a joint statement in Merauke, calling on the Indonesian government to “[end] land grabbing of Indigenous Papuans, even in the name of National Food Security,” in the six Papuan provinces and to have “honest, equal, and dignified dialogue with Papuan Indigenous communities” in reviewing the food estate.
In March 2025, nine United Nations special rapporteurs raised concerns in a letter that Indigenous peoples living in 40 villages within and around the project area would lose their livelihoods and traditional rights. They reported systematic human rights and environmental violations, including the denial of customary land rights, deforestation, severe environmental degradation, minimal meaningful participation by Indigenous peoples in decision-making, and the military’s alleged intimidation of Indigenous peoples and others.
“The Indonesian government has a responsibility to improve food production in the country,” Ganguly said. “But it should be clear that the Merauke food project cannot be pursued by trampling on the rights to liberty, land, and livelihoods of the Indigenous Papuan population.”
Indonesia: Police Disperse Papuans Protesting ‘Food Estate’ Project
(Tokyo) – Indonesian police unlawfully dispersed, beat, and detained 11 Papuan protesters in Merauke City, South Papua, on January 25, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today. The authorities should promptly and impartially investigate the incident, appropriately discipline or punish those responsible for abuses, and consult with Indigenous communities to address longstanding grievances.
That morning, members of the Voice of Catholic People of Papua (Suara Kaum Awam Katolik Regio Papua) had gathered at the St. Francis Xavier Catholic Cathedral to call on church officials to protect Indigenous people harmed by the government’s massive Merauke food project. They also expressed opposition to the bishop of the Catholic Archdiocese of Merauke for backing the government project. The police arrived and forcibly dispersed those gathered inside the church courtyard and arrested 11.
“Indigenous Papuan communities have the right to protest the government’s Merauke food project without having to worry about being beaten, arrested, and jailed,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Police and military personnel who commit abuses against local communities should be held to account and appropriately punished.”
Protesters allege that the police broke up the peaceful protest with unnecessary force. Stenlhy Dambujai, 30, said that the officers “choked and beat” him, and hit two others, Maria Amote, 24, and Angel Gebze, 22, on the head with batons.
The police took those detained to the Merauke Traffic Police Station, where the officers again beat them, and then transferred them to the Merauke police precinct for further questioning. All the protesters were released without charge after midnight, but their legal counsel, Arnold Anda of the Merauke Legal Aid Institute, said that the police had refused to disclose any legal basis for their detention.
“The police also forcibly seized a smartphone belonging to one of our friends, which was only returned after the photos and videos had been deleted,” Dambujai said. “I feel unsafe because it feels like I am constantly being monitored by the authorities.”
The Indonesian government’s Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate project aims to convert nearly three million hectares of forest and swampland to grow rice, sugarcane, and other crops for national food self-sufficiency. Then-President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono initiated the project in 2010, but it stalled. His successor, Joko Widodo revived and expanded the plan in 2023, giving it National Strategic Project status, which increased deforestation in Merauke. Since succeeding Widodo in October 2024, President Prabowo Subianto has accelerated expansion of the food estate, saying he wished to transform Indonesia into the “granary of the world.”
The Merauke food project risks the customary land rights of over 40,000 people from the Indigenous Malind, Maklew, Yei, and Khimaima communities, who depend upon the forest and swampland for their livelihood and traditional practices, Human Rights Watch said. The communities allege that the project is displacing Indigenous communities, forcibly taking customary lands, logging traditional forests, threatening biodiversity, and using the military to suppress dissent.
The government asserts that no one has applied for the designation of customary forests in the Merauke project area and that the project has complied with applicable national laws and regulations, including those related to upholding Indigenous rights, environmental protections, and human rights.
The civic group Solidarity for Merauke says the project has exacerbated human rights violations and forced displacement. President Prabowo has deployed the Indonesian military to support agricultural programs in the Merauke regency, including to plant and harvest food crops, but also to discourage protests.
Norton Kamuyen, a Marind resident of Nakias village, Nguti district, told Human Rights Watch that he and his family were forced to flee to a neighboring village in January due to a land dispute. “We once lived safely and without fear, free to forage in our forests,” Kamuyen said. “But since we disagree with the National Strategic Project, we are considered to be opposing the government. The military makes us afraid, so we have to leave our villages to find safety and protect our lives.”
Indonesian authorities regard Merauke as an important symbol of nationalism, signifying the unity of the vast Indonesian archipelago through the “From Sabang to Merauke” anthem, referring to Sabang Island, Indonesia’s westernmost tip, and Merauke, which is Indonesia’s easternmost regency. Protests by Indigenous Papuans are unusual in Merauke because of the heavy military deployment. A Malind tribal leader in Merauke said that “Bulldozers here are always guarded by soldiers with semi-automatic weapons.”
On February 5, the Communion of Churches in Indonesia, the umbrella organization of 105 Protestant denominations, issued a joint statement in Merauke, calling on the Indonesian government to “[end] land grabbing of Indigenous Papuans, even in the name of National Food Security,” in the six Papuan provinces and to have “honest, equal, and dignified dialogue with Papuan Indigenous communities” in reviewing the food estate.
In March 2025, nine United Nations special rapporteurs raised concerns in a letter that Indigenous peoples living in 40 villages within and around the project area would lose their livelihoods and traditional rights. They reported systematic human rights and environmental violations, including the denial of customary land rights, deforestation, severe environmental degradation, minimal meaningful participation by Indigenous peoples in decision-making, and the military’s alleged intimidation of Indigenous peoples and others.
“The Indonesian government has a responsibility to improve food production in the country,” Ganguly said. “But it should be clear that the Merauke food project cannot be pursued by trampling on the rights to liberty, land, and livelihoods of the Indigenous Papuan population.”
Italy’s Harsh Immigration Bill Puts Lives at Risk
Before she was elected prime minister, Giorgia Meloni threatened to impose a naval blockade in the Mediterranean Sea to stop boats carrying migrants and asylum seekers from reaching Italy. Her government has now proposed draft legislation that will allow it to do just that.
The bill, approved by the cabinet on February 11, would allow the government to prohibit boats from entering Italian territorial waters “in cases of grave threats to public order or national security.” The bans could be imposed for 30 days, renewable for up to six consecutive months. The grounds for triggering the ban are expansive: a concrete risk of acts of terrorism or infiltration of terrorists on national territory, “exceptional migratory pressure,” a global health emergency, or high-level international events that require extraordinary security measures.
Under the legislation, Italy would interdict boats and return everyone on board, apparently without any assessment of their protection needs, vulnerabilities, or physical and mental health, to third countries with which Italy has such an agreement. The European Parliament recently approved changes to EU asylum rules to allow member states to send asylum seekers to “safe third countries.”
The plans would further constrain and sanction nongovernmental organizations performing lifesaving search and rescue at sea. Violations of the ban would be punishable by fines up to 50,000 euros and boat seizure for repeated offenses. The Meloni government already severely limits rescue capacity in the central Mediterranean, one of the deadliest migration routes in the world, through various means including regularly fining rescue groups and detaining their ships on various grounds.
Other measures in the bill relate to the implementation of harsh new rules included in the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum due to enter into force in June, including the creation of an accelerated border procedure designed to facilitate the swift deportation of people from so-called “safe countries of origin” or whose asylum claims are considered inadmissible on other grounds.
Meloni has called on parliament to approve the bill quickly. Instead, it should debate each article carefully, strike every measure designed to undermine humanitarian efforts at sea and improperly shift responsibility to other countries, and ensure that new EU asylum rules are implemented in Italy in the least harmful way and in full compliance with international human rights and refugee law.
Global Leaders Should Speak Out on Ethiopia Crisis
This week African and other international leaders and actors arrive in Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, for the annual African Union (AU) summit.
The 39th meeting of heads of state and governments is taking place amid Ethiopia’s deteriorating human rights situation and the apparent unravelling of the fragile peace in the country’s Tigray region. Tigray’s population is still reeling from the 2020-2022 armed conflict and a man-made humanitarian disaster. The United Nations secretary-general, AU leaders, and international partners attending the summit should speak out about the threats to the population unfolding in the host country.
Most concerning were reports in late January of heavy fighting between the Ethiopian army and Tigrayan forces in the central and southern parts of the region causing widespread displacement. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk on February 10 expressed concern about the region’s “already precarious human rights and humanitarian situation.” He said that “[a]lleged serious violations or abuses must be promptly and independently investigated, irrespective of the perpetrators.”
In addition, Ethiopian authorities have again accused neighboring Eritrea of supporting armed groups in the Amhara region, where hostilities have been ongoing since 2023.
AU leaders should not fear alienating the host of the summit and a perceived ally. During and since the 2020-2022 conflict, the AU as well as the UN failed victims of killings, widespread sexual violence, abductions, and ethnic cleansing. The current situation provides a critical opportunity to change tact.
The AU and UN leadership, should publicly call on all actors, including signatories and non-signatories to the November 2022 Pretoria Cessation of Hostilities Agreement, to protect civilians and prioritize the implementation of key provisions on civilian protection, aid access, access to basic services and transitional justice.
They should call on Ethiopia to allow the AU monitoring mechanism, established as part of the 2022 peace agreement, to deploy more monitors. The AU Peace and Security Council and Commission should also consider strengthening the mechanism’s civilian-protection and human rights components, improving transparency, and ensuring regular public reporting on violations.
The AU summit presents a crucial opportunity for clear and concerted action from leaders to prevent further abuses against civilians in Ethiopia. By strengthening reporting, transparency, and accountability, the summit also provides an opportunity to stem the suffering of civilians in the region as a whole. There’s not a moment to lose.
Niger: Islamist Armed Group Massacres Villagers in West
(Nairobi) – An Islamist armed group has killed 30 civilians, including 4 children, and 5 captured combatants in two attacks in western Niger since January 18, 2026, Human Rights Watch said today. The attacks by the Islamic State in the Sahel (IS Sahel) are unlawful and apparent war crimes.
On January 18, IS Sahel fighters rounded up and executed 31 men and boys in Bossieye village in apparent retaliation against residents for refusing to pay the zakat, or Islamic tax, it had imposed, and for joining pro-government militias. On January 26, in Alfaga Daweyzé Koira village, IS Sahel fighters killed four men and wounded five others who were attempting to protect a villager accused of collaborating with the military. The two villages are in the Tillabéri region, a focal point of IS Sahel activity and government counterinsurgency operations for a decade.
Click to expand Image © 2026 Human Rights Watch“IS Sahel is brutally targeting civilians in the Tillabéri region,” said Ilaria Allegrozzi, senior Sahel researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The recent killings fit a disturbing pattern of IS Sahel’s atrocities against civilians and show complete disregard for human life.”
Between January 21 and February 4, Human Rights Watch remotely interviewed 13 people, including 6 witnesses to the attacks and 7 local activists, journalists, and community leaders. On February 6, Human Rights Watch sent a letter to the junta’s cabinet, sharing its findings and requesting the government’s comments. Human Rights Watch did not receive a response.
IS Sahel did not claim responsibility for the attacks, but witnesses said they believed the attackers were IS Sahel fighters based on their turbans with red bands seen during previous attacks.
In November 2025, IS Sahel fighters had arrived in Bossieye on six motorbikes and ordered villagers to pay the zakat within a month. A resident, 45, said the village chief told residents to stop paying the armed group and to contribute instead to the pro-government militia. “For the chief, it was unacceptable to continue giving our cows and millet to a few individuals arriving on six motorbikes,” he said. “That day, I stood up and told the village chief to be careful. I said, ‘It’s not the elephant’s trunk that’s scary, but where the trunk comes from.’ The chief did not listen to me. And the elephant came.”
In late 2025, some Bossieye residents, most of them ethnic Zarma, received training and weapons from the military and formed a militia to fight IS Sahel.
Witnesses said that around noon on January 18, armed assailants arrived in Bossieye on at least 100 motorbikes, prompting many villagers, including the village chief, to flee. They said the fighters rounded up men and teenage boys, going door to door, and apprehending those who attempted to flee or who were at the mosque for the 1 p.m. prayer. Five of those taken into custody are known to have joined the militia but were unarmed. A woman said she saw the fighters rounding up men between the mosque and the village chief’s house, but spared women and small children. She later heard gunfire.
Two men from Yatakala, a nearby village, said that late on January 18, the son of Bossieye’s village chief arrived in Yatakala carrying his father’s body. The son said that armed men had attacked Bossieye, killing his father and several other villagers. They said they helped him bury the body, then alerted the military and requested assistance.
The following day, Nigerien forces taking part in “Operation Borkono,” a campaign against the Islamist armed groups that begun in January, came to Bossieye with militiamen. They secured the area and allowed villagers to bury the victims.
A 42-year-old man from Yatakala who went to Bossieye on January 19 said he found 31 bodies near the mosque. “The attackers had really sprayed them with bullets,” he said. “Some were hit in the head, feet, legs, back.” Another man, 65, said: “We dug four mass graves: in the first one, we put 9 bodies; in the second, we put 9 more, and in the third and fourth, we put 6 and 7 bodies respectively.”
Human Rights Watch reviewed a list, compiled by residents, with the names of 27 men, ages 19 to 71, and 4 children, ages 15 to 17.
On January 26 at about 4 p.m., IS Sahel fighters arrived in Alfaga Daweyzé Koira village on five motorbikes. They searched the market for a man they accused of collaborating with the military and recruiting for the local militia. When they did not find him, they proceeded to his house, where a crowd had gathered to defend him. A 35-year-old man who narrowly escaped death, said: “At this point, they [IS Sahel fighters] opened fire on the crowd, killing four men on the spot and injuring five others.”
After the fighters left, “we first helped evacuate the wounded and then buried the four victims in individual graves at the village cemetery,” a 37-year-old man said.
Troops came to Alfaga Daweyzé Koira on January 28 and urged the village chief to leave the area but did not ask about the situation for other residents, including those injured in the attack.
Human Rights Watch reviewed a list, compiled by residents, of the men killed, ages 23, 25, 34, and 43, and of the wounded, ages 34 to 60.
Niger has been ruled by a military junta since July 26, 2023, when officers led by Brig. Gen. Abdourahamane Tiani overthrew and detained President Mohamed Bazoum, pledging to combat the Islamist insurgency. Nigerien security forces have conducted large counterinsurgency operations, including airstrikes, in the Tillabéri region, some resulting in serious laws-of-war violations.
The nongovernmental group Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) has reported that in 2025 the Tillabéri region recorded the “highest number of fatalities from attacks on civilians” in central Sahel, caused first by IS Sahel, followed by the Nigerien military, and finally by the Al Qaeda-linked armed group Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM).
All parties to Niger’s armed conflict are bound by Common Article 3 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and customary international humanitarian law. The laws of war prohibit attacking civilians, mistreating anyone in custody including captured combatants, looting, and destroying civilian property. Individuals who order, commit, or assist serious violations of the laws of war with criminal intent may be prosecuted for war crimes. The Niger government has an obligation to investigate and appropriately prosecute alleged war crimes committed within its territory.
“IS Sahel’s unabated atrocities against civilians are deeply alarming,” Allegrozzi said. “Niger’s military authorities should urgently prioritize the protection of civilians, bring those responsible for abuses to account, and ensure that victims and their families receive adequate support.”
Nepal: Publish Reports on Violent Crackdowns on Protests
(London) – Nepal’s interim government led by Prime Minister Sushila Karki should release the Commission of Inquiry report into deadly violence during the “Gen Z” protests of September 2025, as well as all the previous judge-led inquiry reports on human rights violations and abuses which were not published by previous governments, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the International Commission of Jurists said today. All of the political parties participating in the March 5, 2026 parliamentary election should commit to end impunity for rights abuses and corruption by upholding the rule of law, including by successfully completing the transitional justice process.
At least 76 people were killed, most unlawfully, during the September 8-9 protests after police opened fire on young protesters demonstrating against government corruption and a social media ban. On the second day of the protests, there were killings by both the security forces and protestors as well as widespread burning of public and private buildings. On September 9, then-Prime Minister K.P. Oli resigned. Sushila Karki, a former chief justice, was appointed interim prime minister on September 12 with the mandate to conduct elections, and established a commission to investigate violations committed during September 8-9.
“Successive Nepali government have buried a series of reports with recommendations that could have led to justice and reform, and ignored the findings,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Karki government has a unique opportunity to start dismantling the culture of impunity, by publishing all the reports documenting violations against protesters and those taking part in people’s movements.”
Since Nepal’s current democratic era began in 1990, several inquiry commissions have been appointed following serious violations and abuses. But none have published their findings, contributing to a culture of impunity that has fueled repeated human rights violations and widespread official corruption, the organizations said.
After the 1990 People’s Movement, the incoming democratic government buried the findings of the Malik Commission, which had been established to investigate lethal violence against protesters. In 2006, a second people’s movement ended a brief period of direct royal rule, but the Rayamajhi Commission report into violence against protesters, including the reported killings of at least 19 people, was buried once again.
In 2015, after about 45 people were killed in protests against a new constitution, the Lal Commission was established to investigate the incidents, but its report remains unpublished despite repeated promises to make it public. There have been numerous other unpublished official reports on rights violations since 1990.
Following the killings during the “Gen Z” movement in September, a commission chaired by former justice Gauri Bahadur Karki (who is not related to the interim prime minister) was formed to investigate, but on February 9 its deadline was extended beyond election day, for fear that its findings could be opposed by security forces or political actors and cause “friction” in the election environment.
In October, Prime Minister Karki said that the “Gen Z” movement that brought her to office “reflects people’s profound aspiration for good governance, economic opportunity and integrity in public life.” The protests arose in large part from the frustrations of young people over economic stagnation resulting from misgovernance and endemic political corruption.
“One of the reasons Nepal has been trapped in cycles of governance marked by weak accountability, and human rights violations, is that impunity has been hard-wired into elite politics, but Prime Minister Karki can take an historic step to reverse that trend by releasing all the reports,” said Isabelle Lassée, deputy regional director for South Asia at Amnesty International. “One of the greatest areas of ongoing impunity concerns abuses and violations committed during the 1996-2006 insurgency, and to address those, all parties standing in the election should commit to advancing the transitional justice process in line with international standards, including by addressing the concerns of victims around the accountability gaps in the law as well as political instrumentalization of the process.”
The internal armed conflict between Maoist rebels and security forces cost more than 20,000 lives, amid widespread abuses and violations by both sides. The 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement included a commitment to transitional justice, to hold perpetrators accountable, to provide reparations, and to reveal what happened to victims of enforced disappearance. However, justice has been repeatedly stalled by political interference that sought to shield those who may be responsible for crimes from accountability.
In 2024, Nepal’s parliament amended the law on transitional justice to remove some provisions that could have granted amnesty to people responsible for serious crimes under international law. Although some problems in the legislation remain, the amendments were accepted by some victims and survivors’ groups as a viable basis to move forward. However, in 2025 many victims’ representatives rejected appointments to the two transitional justice bodies as being flawed, unqualified, and lacking political independence. Little progress has been made since then, and the process once again appears deadlocked.
Victims and survivors of crimes committed during Nepal’s internal armed conflict are still awaiting justice and reparations. Impunity for these crimes has cast a long shadow over post-conflict Nepal. The repeated shielding of those suspected to be responsible by successive governments needs to end, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the International Commission of Jurists said.
“To break the cycle of impunity and help build a future based on the rule of law, the interim government should publish all of the reports by official commissions into past human rights violations before it leaves office,” said Mandira Sharma, Asia and Pacific Regional Director at the International Commission of Jurists. “All parties that aspire to lead Nepal after the election should publicly commit to fearlessly pursuing justice for corruption and human rights violations and abuses, including by successfully completing the transitional justice process taking victims and civil society’s voices into consideration.”
US Greenhouse Gas Deregulation Hurts Reproductive Rights
Today, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded its 2009 endangerment finding: a drastic move even in the context of the Trump administration’s larger deregulatory and anti-climate agenda. Impacts on climate action and communities threaten to be extremely broad but also pose particular threats to increasingly beleaguered reproductive rights.
Because it is a vital legal tool for regulating climate-warning pollutants, both health and environmental organizations have fiercely challenged this rollback of the endangerment finding. Some protesting groups cited community experience and scientific and medical evidence pointing to pollutants’ harmful impact on health as well as the urgent need for regulation to combat climate warming: the cause of increasingly severe hurricanes, wildfires, and heat.
Less regulation of vehicle and power plants emissions, for example, will mean worse air quality, which not only harms human health, in general, but also has specific detrimental impacts on pregnancy health. The National Climate Assessment, which was released by the US government in November of 2023, explained that extreme heat exposure is associated with adverse birth outcomes and noted other threats to pregnancy health, such as wildfire smoke. These studies showed that women of reproductive age “disproportionately experience a (climate change) burden,” according to the report. Because women of color more often belong to underserved communities they were especially at risk, the authors noted.
National Climate Assessments are congressionally mandated. But that did not stop the Trump administration from pulling the 2023 report off government websites and firing the contributors working on the next one as well as another report that found a higher risk of climate harms for communities of color.
Other more overt, more dramatic attacks on women’s health since Trump retook office have garnered more attention than slower environmental violence. But undermining the experiences of communities hit hard by climate disaster, science and practices, policies and rules—established by decades of fierce struggle to protect environmental health and equity for all—is just another, quieter way that this administration continues to dismantle women’s rights.
Hungary: Blocking Lawsuits Undermines Rule of Law
Hungary’s government dealt a severe blow to the rule of law by issuing a decree that terminates ongoing court cases challenging a tax on municipalities, Human Rights Watch said today. The move sets a dangerous precedent for executive interference with the courts and the separation of powers.
“Shutting down court cases by decree is not how a democracy functions,” said Benjamin Ward, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This is the government telling the courts what they can address simply because it does not like the legal challenge or those bringing it.”
The government used emergency decree powers on February 3, 2026, to immediately dismiss all lawsuits filed by at least four municipalities, including Budapest, against the central government over aspects of the so-called solidarity contribution tax for 2023-2025. All legal challenges were filed by municipalities led by opposition parties or independents. The new decree overrides all pending court cases and requires payment of the taxes in full, regardless of the unresolved legal questions. At least one judge has postponed hearings.
This latest authoritarian overreach deepens serious concerns under Hungary’s Fundamental Law and European Union law, Human Rights Watch said.
This rights-violating move is the latest in a lengthy legal battle between the central government and affected municipalities. Hungary’s Supreme Court, in a 2025 ruling, clarified that ordinary courts are competent to review disputes over the solidarity tax. Similarly, courts have ruledthat imposing the tax constitutes an administrative act subject to judicial review.
The new decree directly contradicts these rulings by declaring that the determination and collection of the contribution are merely “technical processes” and not administrative acts, thereby excluding them from court review and ordering an immediate end to ongoing cases.
The Budapest Metropolitan Court on February 5 stated the decree violates the principle of legal certainty, the principle of the rule of law, the right to an effective remedy, and the principle of judicial independence, as well as the prohibition of retroactive legislation. The court said it will initiate an individual constitutional review procedure and request a preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU, adding that the next hearing in the case will be held as scheduled in March. The Supreme Court in a statement on February 5, said that judges assigned these cases must issue decisions.
By intervening in pending cases, the government has blatantly overridden judicial decisions and positioned itself as judge in its own dispute, Human Rights Watch said. This violates core constitutional principles including the separation of powers and judicial independence.
Under Hungary’s Fundamental Law, courts are exclusively empowered to decide disputes over the legality of administrative acts. The Constitutional Court has previously held that the solidarity tax can only be constitutional if imposed following a fair administrative procedure that respects municipal rights, and that ensuring compliance with this requirement falls within judicial competence. The new decree removes the courts’ ability to assess whether such safeguards were met.
The government has ruled by decree for nearly six years, using various states of emergency, including mass migration, the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, to justify its actions. The government invoked Hungary’s ongoing state of emergency linked to the war in Ukraine to justify this measure. The state of emergency has enabled the government to sidestep parliamentary debate and to rule by decree, without meaningful scrutiny or challenge.
Intervening to terminate lawsuits obliterates the separation of powers and erodes confidence that courts can operate free from political interference, Human Rights Watch said. EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights require effective access to courts and respect for judicial independence.
The move comes amid a broader pattern of democratic backsliding in Hungary and in the run-up to April’s national elections. Over the past year alone, the government has adopted constitutional and legislative changes restricting peaceful assembly, including banning LGBT-related events, introduced measures threatening civil society organizations, and continued its war on independent media and journalists. These developments point to a steady hollowing out of institutional checks and balances.
The EU has already raised serious concerns about the rule of law in Hungary, including under the ongoing article 7 rule of law scrutiny procedure and through setting conditions for EU funding. The solidarity tax decree adds to the growing body of evidence that these concerns remain acute and unresolved.
The Hungarian government should revoke the decree, restore access to judicial review for municipalities, and ensure that emergency powers are not misused for political ends. EU institutions and member states should closely scrutinize the move and consider its implications in ongoing rule of law proceedings.
“Right-respecting governments argue their case in court,” Ward said. “This one shuts the courts down by decree, a clear sign of how deeply the rule of law has been eroded.”
Hong Kong: Conviction of Activist’s Father a Grim Milestone
(New York) – A Hong Kong court’s conviction of the father of a prominent US‑based democracy activist on February 11, 2026, reflects the Chinese government’s escalation of its campaign of transnational repression, Human Rights Watch said today.
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court convicted Kwok Yin-sang, 68, of a national security offense. He is the father of Anna Kwok, 28, the former executive director of the Washington DC-based Hong Kong Democracy Council. It is the first time Hong Kong authorities have convicted a family member for an overseas activist’s peaceful advocacy.
“The conviction of Anna Kwok’s father is both cruel and unjust, and highlights the lengths the Chinese authorities will go to pressure activists abroad,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Prosecuting a democracy advocate’s parent is an unlawful form of collective punishment as well as an afront to basic decency.”
The Hong Kong authorities should immediately quash the case against Kwok and release him. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for February 26; Kwok faces up to seven years in prison.
Kwok Yin‑sang was arrested on April 30, 2025, under section 90 of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (also known as Article 23), which criminalizes direct or indirect financial dealings with an “absconder,” a person living abroad accused of a national security offense. The case centers on the ownership of an AIA International insurance policy Kwok opened for his daughter when she was two years old. The judge ruled that when Kwok had tried to cancel the policy, he was aware that he was handling funds belonging to his daughter.
In July 2023, Anna Kwok was among the first group of eight overseas activists that the Hong Kong authorities targeted with arrest warrants and HK$1 million (US$129,000) bounties under the city’s China-imposed National Security Law. Since then, Hong Kong police have issued similar baseless arrest warrants and bounties against 19 exiled Hong Kong activists.
The Hong Kong authorities have also sought to intimidate dozens of their family members, primarily by interrogating them. The authorities confiscated HK$800,000 (US$103,000) from the Australian-based former legislator Ted Hui, and his family for allegedly violating the National Security Law.
Collective punishment—penalizing individuals for the actions of others—violates international human rights law protections of the rights to liberty and security of person and to a fair trial.
The 19 wanted activists have faced a range of harassment. The Hong Kong government has cancelled 13 of their passports, including Anna Kwok’s. Unidentified individuals have targeted them with anonymous harassing and defamatory letters, including sexually explicit deepfakes depicting them and their families. The activists have also experienced online harassment campaigns, including rape and death threats.
The activists live in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In 2025, the US government sanctioned six Hong Kong officials for using the National Security Law “extraterritorially to intimidate, silence, and harass” activists. The other three governments have issued statements condemning the warrants but have taken no meaningful action to hold Hong Kong officials accountable. The US is also the only country to arrest an individual for allegedly harassing a Hong Kong activist on its soil, though that person was later acquitted.
Australia, Canada, the UK, and the European Union—each with its own human rights sanctions regime—should impose targeted sanctions and visa restrictions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials responsible for serious rights violations, including transnational repression, Human Rights Watch said.
Since 2020, when Beijing imposed the National Security Law on Hong Kong, over 200,000 Hong Kongers have left the city, including many activists who have continued their advocacy from abroad. Governments should strengthen protections for these activists, including by expediting their and their families’ asylum applications, and by establishing national mechanisms to counter transnational repression.
Transnational repression can be defined as government actions beyond national borders to suppress or stifle dissent by targeting critics—including human rights defenders, journalists, academics, and political opponents—particularly those from that country.
“Beijing’s acts of repression beyond its borders will continue until governments forcefully push back,” Pearson said. “Affected governments should send a strong signal to the Chinese government that it cannot silence dissent and manipulate global conversations about China with impunity.”
Hong Kong: Conviction of Activist’s Father a Grim Milestone
(New York) – A Hong Kong court’s conviction of the father of a prominent US‑based democracy activist on February 11, 2026, reflects the Chinese government’s escalation of its campaign of transnational repression, Human Rights Watch said today.
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court convicted Kwok Yin-sang, 68, of a national security offense. He is the father of Anna Kwok, 28, the former executive director of the Washington DC-based Hong Kong Democracy Council. It is the first time Hong Kong authorities have convicted a family member for an overseas activist’s peaceful advocacy.
“The conviction of Anna Kwok’s father is both cruel and unjust, and highlights the lengths the Chinese authorities will go to pressure activists abroad,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Prosecuting a democracy advocate’s parent is an unlawful form of collective punishment as well as an afront to basic decency.”
The Hong Kong authorities should immediately quash the case against Kwok and release him. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for February 26; Kwok faces up to seven years in prison.
Kwok Yin‑sang was arrested on April 30, 2025, under section 90 of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (also known as Article 23), which criminalizes direct or indirect financial dealings with an “absconder,” a person living abroad accused of a national security offense. The case centers on the ownership of an AIA International insurance policy Kwok opened for his daughter when she was two years old. The judge ruled that when Kwok had tried to cancel the policy, he was aware that he was handling funds belonging to his daughter.
In July 2023, Anna Kwok was among the first group of eight overseas activists that the Hong Kong authorities targeted with arrest warrants and HK$1 million (US$129,000) bounties under the city’s China-imposed National Security Law. Since then, Hong Kong police have issued similar baseless arrest warrants and bounties against 19 exiled Hong Kong activists.
The Hong Kong authorities have also sought to intimidate dozens of their family members, primarily by interrogating them. The authorities confiscated HK$800,000 (US$103,000) from the Australian-based former legislator Ted Hui, and his family for allegedly violating the National Security Law.
Collective punishment—penalizing individuals for the actions of others—violates international human rights law protections of the rights to liberty and security of person and to a fair trial.
The 19 wanted activists have faced a range of harassment. The Hong Kong government has cancelled 13 of their passports, including Anna Kwok’s. Unidentified individuals have targeted them with anonymous harassing and defamatory letters, including sexually explicit deepfakes depicting them and their families. The activists have also experienced online harassment campaigns, including rape and death threats.
The activists live in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In 2025, the US government sanctioned six Hong Kong officials for using the National Security Law “extraterritorially to intimidate, silence, and harass” activists. The other three governments have issued statements condemning the warrants but have taken no meaningful action to hold Hong Kong officials accountable. The US is also the only country to arrest an individual for allegedly harassing a Hong Kong activist on its soil, though that person was later acquitted.
Australia, Canada, the UK, and the European Union—each with its own human rights sanctions regime—should impose targeted sanctions and visa restrictions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials responsible for serious rights violations, including transnational repression, Human Rights Watch said.
Since 2020, when Beijing imposed the National Security Law on Hong Kong, over 200,000 Hong Kongers have left the city, including many activists who have continued their advocacy from abroad. Governments should strengthen protections for these activists, including by expediting their and their families’ asylum applications, and by establishing national mechanisms to counter transnational repression.
Transnational repression can be defined as government actions beyond national borders to suppress or stifle dissent by targeting critics—including human rights defenders, journalists, academics, and political opponents—particularly those from that country.
“Beijing’s acts of repression beyond its borders will continue until governments forcefully push back,” Pearson said. “Affected governments should send a strong signal to the Chinese government that it cannot silence dissent and manipulate global conversations about China with impunity.”
Next UN Secretary-General Should Champion Rights
United Nations member countries will select a new UN secretary-general this year to succeed António Guterres in January 2027. The change in leadership comes at a time when human rights and democracy, as well as the international organizations created to uphold those principles and provide lifesaving assistance, are under unprecedented attack.
So far member countries have formally nominated only two candidates: former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet and International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Rafael Grossi from Argentina.
The threats to the global human rights system demand a courageous leader at the UN who will put human rights at the heart of its agenda. Yet the selection process gives veto power over any candidate to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States.
But human rights are clearly not a priority for China, Russia, or the United States.
Human Rights Watch and others have long documented attempts by China and Russia to defund and undermine the UN’s human rights pillar. More recently, the United States, which played a key role in creating the UN and its human rights architecture in 1945, has rejected and defunded dozens of UN programs promoting rights and humanitarian assistance. The Trump administration has also withheld billions of dollars in UN dues, which has been a major factor in the organization’s crippling financial crisis. While Washington recently announced an initial payment toward its arrears, its actions have nonetheless seriously affected the UN’s ability to do its work.
US President Donald Trump has also been trying to sideline the UN by establishing a “Board of Peace,” modeled after the Security Council, with himself as chairman for life. Invited leaders include serial rights abusers from China, Belarus, Hungary, and Saudi Arabia, along with two men—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin—facing International Criminal Court warrants.
The UN needs a leader willing to stand up to major powers and abusive governments to defend victims of abuses and marginalized communities, and aggressively support accountability for serious crimes.
As member states nominate additional candidates, they should put forward a diverse pool, especially women and others with proven track records on human rights, and ensure a competitive and transparent process that places an exceptional individual committed to human rights atop the UN.
US-Nigeria Security Cooperation Should Prioritize Rights
The United States Africa Command has recently disclosed a small troop deployment to Nigeria to support the country’s security forces. This announcement follows the establishment of a US-Nigeria working group focused on enhancing security and counterterrorism cooperation.
Increased collaboration may be a legitimate way to address escalating violence in Nigeria, including Islamist insurgency and banditry, but transparency and accountability concerns remain paramount. The disclosure, which sparked critical debate in Nigeria, was accompanied by few details about the force’s size, mission, or deployment. Nigerian authorities said that the troops’ activities were limited to intelligence support and training, without further elaboration. Media outlets, citing anonymous US government officials, have since reported that an additional 200 troops will be deployed to provide further support.
The working group was established in response to Nigeria’s designation by the United States as a Country of Particular Concern in 2025 under the International Religious Freedom Act, citing serious violations of religious freedom. While the announcement highlights Christians as a vulnerable group, many other communities across northern Nigeria have also been affected by violent abuses, reflecting the broader and indiscriminate nature of insecurity in the country.
The working group aims to bolster accountability and law enforcement capacity by combating money laundering, disrupting terrorist financing, and improving investigative capabilities.
These goals unfold against a troubling backdrop: Nigeria’s security operations have long been marked by abuses, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and unlawful deaths, with airstrikes often killing ordinary people without credible investigations or accountability.
These violations have fueled grievances, eroded public trust, and given rise to concerns about how new security cooperation agreements are being carried out.
Security cooperation between the US and Nigeria should ensure adherence to international human rights and humanitarian law, with safeguards firmly embedded in the working group’s framework, supported by measurable benchmarks and robust oversight to guarantee effective implementation. Transparency, harm prevention, and prompt investigation should be central elements of government policy, alongside public reporting and compensation for victims of any violations by government forces.
The US government should ensure regular reporting to Congress and strict enforcement of the Leahy Laws, which prohibit US military support to forces implicated in gross human rights violations.
Acquittal of Palestine Action Protesters Spotlights UK’s Protest Crackdown
Last week, six people linked to Palestine Action, a direct action protest group, were acquitted of aggravated burglary in connection with an alleged break in at Elbit Systems, a defense firm with close ties to the Israeli military, in August 2024. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on charges of criminal damage.
The six individuals had experienced lengthy pretrial detention, some of over 500 days, more than double the maximum limit set by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). In response to a January 2026 letter by Human Rights Watch expressing concern about pretrial detention, CPS shared that its limits “can be extended by the court where it considers that there is “good and sufficient cause” for doing so and that the prosecution has acted with “due diligence and expedition.”
More than 20 Palestine Action members are still awaiting trial and many have been held beyond maximum detention limits. These include Heba Muraisi, a 31-year-old former lifeguard and florist who engaged in a 72-day hunger strike to protest the United Kingdom’s actions with respect to Gaza and her treatment in prison.
Last year, several United Nations experts expressed concern about these prisoners as well as the application of counterterrorism legislation to police political protests. They warned against the criminalization of conduct that falls within the protected exercise of the rights to freedom of assembly, association, and expression, and the suppression of legitimate political dissent, including advocacy related to Palestine.
In July 2025, the government proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist organization. Since then, over 2,700 peaceful protestershave been arrested under counterterrorism legislation, most for peacefully holding signs reading “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.” This proscription is currently subject to a judicial review at the High Court, with a verdict expected in the coming weeks.
These arrests occur against a backdrop of repeated crackdowns on protest in recent years, which have been documented in Human Rights Watch’s report Silencing the Streets: The Right to Protest Under Attack in the United Kingdom. The government has not only failed to repeal legislation introduced by the last administration that restricted lawful protest but has introduced new measuresthat will further restrict protest rights. This undermines the rule of law and is already having a chilling effect.
An important opportunity to address widespread concerns raised by politicians and civil society will be the government’s independent review of Public Order and Hate Crime Legislation; however, the review does not cover the use of counterterrorism legislation. This is a huge missed opportunity and indicates this government is intent, at least in part, on continuing to try to silence the streets.
To safeguard democratic participation, the UK government needs to end its crackdown on the right to peaceful assembly and abandon its misuse of terrorism legislation.