Kategorie: Humans

To counter the increasing criminalization of human rights defenders, activists and journalists across the world, Amnesty International, the African Policing Civilian Oversight Forum (APCOF) and Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) will publish a briefing on 27 November, outlining a series of legal and advocacy strategies to protect critical voices from discrimination, harassment, prosecution and imprisonment.

The briefing, “Dissent on Trial: Strategies to Counter Rising Criminalization of Activism”— developed in the context of the Campaign to Decriminalize Poverty, Status and Activism — documents the alarming global trend of punishing civil disobedience and peaceful activism by using national security and organized crime laws, defamation laws and Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPPs).  It also provides concrete strategies to resist and counter criminalization at different stages of the legal process – before charges are pressed; during criminal proceedings; and at the sentencing stage.

It’s increasingly important also to build on and amplify specific strategies that could protect human rights defenders facing trials

“Human rights defenders from across are world are facing threats and imprisonment just for speaking out against the climate crisis, the genocide in Gaza or homophobia and transphobia. Our work has long focused on repealing problematic laws that are abused by governments. However, it’s increasingly important also to build on and amplify specific strategies that could protect defenders facing trials,” said Marco Perolini, Amnesty International’s policy expert on the criminalization of dissent.

“Dissent on Trial highlights how specific arguments such as the necessity defence, freedom of expression, and the right to a healthy environment can be successfully used in courts to protect individuals who engage in civil disobedience from harsh criminal sanctions.”

The briefing features stories of human rights defenders from around the world, including Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, Indonesia, Peru, South Africa, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Grégoire is an environmental defender who was arrested and prosecuted for spraying washable orange paint on the Prefecture of Nantes in France, to demand policies to address the use of poor insulation in buildings. Grégoire, who was eventually acquitted, but is currently being prosecuted for another act of civil disobedience, said:

“It’s important to develop legal tools to protect activists who mobilize at the height of the climate emergency. An environmental state of necessity could be one such tool.”

To mark the launch of the briefing, Amnesty International will host a webinar on 27 November, from Johannesburg, at 16:00 SAT. The panel will feature Marco Perolini from Amnesty International, Sithuthukile Mkhize, senior attorney from Centre for Applied Legal Studies, Louise Edwards, director of research and programmes at the African Policing Civilian Oversight Forum, as well as Grégoire. The event will be hosted by the Centre for Applied Legal Studies at Witts University.

To join the webinar, please sign up here:

In person (Johannesburg): https://forms.gle/376Gxgw9i8x5ex19A;

Online: https://forms.gle/QT5PARkQJmREcDRd9

The post Global: How human rights defenders can pushback against their criminalization appeared first on Amnesty International.

Leaders at COP30 in Brazil failed to agree to place people over profits as a lack of unity, accountability and transparency chipped away at delivering the urgent and effective climate action needed, though there were some bright spots, Amnesty International said today at the end of the annual UN climate summit. 

The headliner COP30 ‘Global Mutirão’ decision’ intended to bring global consensus on a range of priority climate actions during this summit billed as the “COP of truth.” Yet the final document avoided any mention of fossil fuels, the primary driver of climate change, failing to build on or even to reaffirm the commitment to “transition away” from fossil fuels agreed upon in COP28. 

The fractious finale failed to garner consensus on a much-needed package including concrete plans for a fossil fuel phase out and an end to deforestation, as well as scaled up grants-based support for lower income countries. Climate finance provision is an obligation for high-income countries that lower income countries have for years been demanding be fulfilled, particularly to provide much more support to help them adapt to devastating current and future impacts of climate change for which they are not responsible, with needs estimated to be at least USD 300 billion per year. 

“The COP30 Brazilian Presidency had vowed to ensure no one is left behind and every voice is heard and made strenuous efforts to broaden participation, which should be replicated. Yet the lack of participatory, inclusive, and transparent negotiations left both civil society and Indigenous Peoples, who answered the global mutirão call in large numbers, out of the real decision making. At the same time, a record number of fossil fuel lobbyists at COP30 showed who had the real access, leaving humanity, especially those already the most marginalized, to suffer the deadly consequences of their plans to continue fossil fuel expansion and to be the ones to pump the last barrel of oil,” said Ann Harrison, Climate Justice Advisor at Amnesty International.  

“Nevertheless, people power, including by Indigenous Peoples, among them those on whose ancestral lands the conference took place, was out in force. Refusing to surrender to setbacks, it was instrumental in achieving a commitment to develop a Just Transition mechanism that will streamline and coordinate ongoing and future efforts to protect the rights of workers, other individuals and communities affected by fossil fuel phase out. We salute all those whose voices and actions led to this successful outcome and will be pushing for human rights, including of Indigenous peoples, to be respected and protected as the mechanism is developed.”

People power, including by Indigenous Peoples… was instrumental in achieving a commitment to develop a Just Transition mechanism… We salute all those whose voices and actions led to this successful outcome.

Ann Harrison, Climate Justice Advisor at Amnesty International

Systemic lack of inclusivity, compliance and accountability 

Following a trend set in recent COPs, much of the so-called Mutirao process at COP30 was conducted behind closed doors with state delegations only, thereby resulting in a lack of oversight by civil society who could not observe the proceedings. This lack of transparency, along with the fractious consensus process and unchecked influence of the fossil fuel industry, continues to pose fundamental problems and gives a stronger voice to calls for reforms to the summit and its organizing body, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 

As Leonela Moncayo, a young environmental activist who accompanied Amnesty International to COP30 said, “I did not come to Belém to ask for favours. I came to remind all states to respect human rights and that caring for the environment is not an expense — it is the best social and cultural investment a government can make. Allowing pollution and rights violations is not a show of political strength; it’s a show of indifference.” 

Future climate summits will only generate effective results if everyone is not only able to follow what is happening in real time, but is also free to criticize, gather and peacefully demonstrate, and is meaningfully able to inform the design and outcome of effective global climate policies. Relatedly, decisions must be made based on a transparent assessment of the best available science; yet the threat of the growing global anti-science backlash also affected COP30, with some countries attempting to muddy the waters with dogmatic positions on science and gender, including by seeking to undermine the IPCC as the authoritative source on climate science.   

Allowing pollution and rights violations is not a show of political strength; it’s a show of indifference.

Leonela Moncayo, a young environmental activist

Gaps in climate finance  

COP30 was unable to deliver on firm commitments from high income countries for scaled up grants-based finance that lower income countries need for adaptation, instead merely urging them to “increase the trajectory of their collective provision” leaving individuals and communities at ever increasing risk of climate change related harms.

Fossil fuel companies continue to receive trillions in subsidies every year from governments and generate huge profits. As a part of the ongoing process to develop a UN Framework Tax Convention, the latest round of negotiations of which were running in parallel to COP in Nairobi, governments should introduce a polluter pays surtax applied to the global profits of fossil fuel companies. 

“However, governments do not need to wait for global tax rules to be agreed. They should immediately impose profit surtaxes on fossil fuel companies and stop subsidizing fossil fuel production and use; these measures would go a long way to raising resources for urgently needed non debt-creating climate finance,” said Ann Harrison.

Looking ahead to 2026

Irrespective of what is included in the COP outcome documents, the International Court of Justice’s recent Advisory Opinion confirmed that states are required by law to “make good faith efforts” to tackle the climate crisis, that limiting warming to 1.5 degrees is the primary goal, and that states have duties to present and future generations to provide remedy and reparations for climate-related damage, including holding big polluters accountable.

“All eyes will now be on COP31. Türkiye and Australia, who are sharing presidency duties, must demonstrate climate leadership by taking decisive and transparent actions to tackle climate change in line with their international obligations, as well as facilitating meaningful COP outcomes that actually deliver a full, fast, fair and funded fossil fuel phase out, and delivery of support for adaptation,” said Ann Harrison.    

Türkiye and Australia, who are sharing presidency duties, must demonstrate climate leadership by taking decisive and transparent actions to tackle climate change in line with their  international obligations.

Ann Harrison

The two countries must also ensure an inclusive and accessible COP where the rights of all are protected and respected before, during and after the conference. The lived experiences and solutions of Indigenous Peoples, affected communities, women, children and youth, people of African descent, people living with disabilities and workers must be central to moving forward to achieving climate justice at the scale and pace needed. Australia must deliver on its commitment to work closely with Pacific nations, who continue to face the most immediate and existential threats posed by the climate crisis, to ensure their needs and priorities are no longer ignored. 

“Against the race to the bottom at COP, driven by the procedural requirement for consensus, one ray of hope was the announcement of initiatives outside the UNFCCC process. Colombia announced the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, to be co-hosted with the Netherlands next April. It will bring together states that want to make progress towards defossilizing our economies while protecting workers, communities and rights holders through a ‘fast, fair and fully financed’ transition. This will feed into two inclusive and science-based roadmaps to be developed by the Brazilian presidency on transitioning away from fossil fuels and on ending deforestation,” said Ann Harrison.

“Amnesty will be following both sets of initiatives closely to ensure that human rights obligations are kept at the heart of the discussions.”

The post COP30: Rights trampled, yet people power demonstrates that humanity will win   appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the news of Türkiye hosting COP31 next year, Marta Schaaf, Amnesty International’s Programme Director for Climate Justice said:

“As the newly designated host for the annual UN Climate summit next year, Türkiye must take decisive and transparent actions to tackle climate change in line with its international obligations as confirmed in this year’s Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice. This requires not only establishing and implementing greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets that are aligned with the collective target to keep global warming to below 1.5, but also delivering a full, fast, fair and funded fossil fuel phase out through a just and human rights compliant transition across all sectors that protects people’s rights and ensures that no one is left behind.

“Türkiye must also respect, protect and facilitate the work of environmental human rights defenders, and guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and to peaceful protest so that those advocating for climate justice can freely participate in shaping climate policies before, during and after COP31.”

Türkiye must respect, protect and facilitate the work of … those advocating for climate justice (to) freely participate in shaping climate policies before, during and after COP31.

Marta Schaaf, Amnesty International’s Programme Director for Climate Justice

Background:

Türkiye will host next year’s COP31 summit as the location of the annual United Nations climate summit. The Climate Action Tracker has rated Türkiye’s overall climate policies and targets as “highly insufficient” to meet the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature goal.

The post Türkiye: New climate summit host must respect, protect and facilitate climate justice advocacy before, during and after COP31 appeared first on Amnesty International.

By Joshua Franco is a Senior Research Advisor at Amnesty Tech  

For years, the EU has taken a leading role in creating standards that protect our rights online. But the winds have now shifted, and under the guise of “simplification” a corporate-backed wave of weakening digital rules is underway that threatens all of our rights – on and offline. 

Digital and human rights advocates including Amnesty International have been documenting some of the human impacts caused by new technologies, and it’s clear from these, that what’s needed more than ever is stronger rights protections. Despite this, this simplification agenda aims to roll these very protections back. 

It is becoming increasingly clear that this process is inevitably leading towards the weakening of provisions of the AI Act and data protection, and perhaps much more. The Commission have also proposed a “Digital Fitness Check.” While we haven’t been told what this will mean in practice, it is most likely going to be an exercise to identify further laws to be “simplified”. All of this is being undertaken under expedited procedures without prior impact assessments to ask how individuals and communities experience or are harmed by high-risk and emerging technologies, on the preposterous basis that laws that protect our rights can be pared back without impacting our rights.  

GDPR – what’s at stake? 

A brief overview of the human rights at stake shows that the  the EU is moving in the wrong direction. One of the regulations in the crosshairs is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). If you think GDPR is about cookie banners – think again. This landmark legislation is one of the key ways in which not only Europeans, but people around the world, are protected against abuses of their personal data by Big Tech as well as states. Though enforcement has been lacking, the potential for this law to serve as a bulwark against the voracious appetite of Silicon Valley’s unlawful surveillance-based business model  is vitally important. 

Without proper data protection, our data can be harvested at will, used to profile us in discriminatory or unfair ways, repackaged, combined, analyzed and sold and resold onwards by a massive and complex web of data brokers, and online advertising companies. It can also be shared or sold to state authorities, who can use it to profile us, put us under unlawful surveillance, deny our rights, such as to social benefits, or even decide whether to arrest or detain us. This not only puts all of our human rights at risk, but also threatens national security, as location data and other sensitive personal data about government and security officials – as well as everyone else – is put up for sale around the world, opening us up to blackmail and mass surveillance. 

Implications on AI Act 

Another key regulation being targeted is the AI Act which provides guardrails for the development and use of artificial intelligence. The harms we all face from AI systems that this law could help protect against are massive. In Denmark, the authorities have rolled a new AI-powered system to detect cases of fraud in their social benefits system. Instead of anticipated benefits, Amnesty International’s research found that – as is so often the case with such systems – human rights ended up being undermined.  

The system used variables such as links to foreign countries, or “unusual” housing compositions to flag potential cases of fraud, and this ended up disproportionately targeting people of migrant backgrounds and anyone who’s way of life deviated from what was deemed as the ‘norm’ in Danish society. These people, as well as other members of marginalized groups, wound up being subjected not only to digital surveillance using their personal data, but also invasive analogue forms of surveillance such as so-called “duvet-lifting” aimed at determining whether a person might be cohabitating with a partner. 

These sorts of harms are precisely what the EU’s new AI Act should help prevent. In fact, we at Amnesty International believe such systems should be defined and prohibited as “social scoring” systems under the AI Act. If the Omnibus continues in the direction it’s heading, and the AI Act is weakened even before it’s fully operational, we may have even less protection against such systems, as proposed amendments will further weaken the already weak transparency requirements for high risk systems – effectively allowing companies to self-certify whether an AI system should be deemed safe or not. 

Nor is Denmark an isolated case, our research on the “digital welfare state” shows that human rights harms, especially to the right to social security and non-discrimination, are inherent in nearly all of these increasingly ubiquitous systems, including The Netherlands, Serbia, France, Sweden and the UK. 

And the human rights threats from AI don’t stop there. In Hungary, legislative changes paved the way for the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement in a range of new contexts, enabling blanket surveillance on peaceful assemblies, notably Pride Marches in Budapest and Pecs.  

To protect against all this, what’s needed is stronger regulation and stronger enforcement. Even a forceful implementation of the AI Act would leave massive gaps that need to be addressed. Despite a concerted push by civil society, the final text of AI Act fails to protect people around the world from the export of dangerous tech whose use is prohibited in Europe, and fails to protect the rights of people on the move. But the omnibus clearly signals that the Commission are more interested in smoothing the way for corporate profits than doing what’s needed to close these gaps and protect our rights. 

What it would mean for DSA and DMA 

EU regulations also affect how large digital platforms impact our rights, and if the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act are brought into scope (such as through the so-called “Digital Fitness Check”) as expected, this could be a significant roll back as well. The risks from the profit-driven, surveillance-based, algorithmic curation of our online content cannot be overstated. Amnesty International research has demonstrated how this technology has contributed to ethnic cleansing against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, and grave human rights abuses against Tigrayan people in Ethiopia with Meta failing to moderate and, in some instances, actively amplifying harmful, discriminatory content on Facebook. 

Amnesty has also repeatedly found that this technology – specifically TikTok’s ‘For You’ feed – can push children and young people into a cycle of depression, self-harm and suicide content. Young people in France interviewed for Amnesty research  shared that TikTok served them an increasing stream of videos that normalized and even encouraged self-harm and suicide after they engaged with mental health related content. Parents of children who had died by suicide described the horror of discovering the content TikTok was pushing to their children after they passed. 

Rationale for stronger regulation 

Digital rights regulations in the EU offer crucial – but inadequate protections against these sorts of harms. They need to be strengthened and enforced, not rolled back.  

The whole simplification process is based on a flawed premise. The Commission seem to believe that rights are an obstacle to competitiveness and innovation, but real innovation means finding ways to make new technologies work for everyone’s benefit, without trampling on our human rights. The new wave of laws in Europe have started to make it possible to imagine a world where the power of big tech can be meaningfully constrained, where our rights to be free from endless profiling and discrimination can be a tool to rein in the abuses from states and corporate monopolies. 

But instead of building on this progress, the Commission seems to be racing to appease corporate interests and build an “AI Continent,” tearing out the guardrails that protect our data – and therefore us – from being swallowed up by Big Tech’s voracious appetite for profits, at the cost of our environment, and our rights. We need to oppose this attempt to roll back protections in the name of simplification and tell the Commission that our human rights are not for sale. 

First published in Tech.Policy Press. 

The post EU Simplification: Throwing human rights under the Omnibus  appeared first on Amnesty International.

The Chadian authorities have failed to protect the victims of armed clashes between herders and farmers as well as their right to truth, justice, and reparations, Amnesty International said in a new report.

“Live off the land and die for it: Human rights violations in conflicts between herders and farmers in Chad” documents seven episodes of herder-farmer violence – driven among other reasons by climate change pressures – in four provinces between 2022 and 2024 that left 98 people dead, more than 100 injured, and hundreds of families without homes or sources of income. In total, there are thousands of victims of these clashes, according to the United Nations data shared over the last years.

“Faced with recurring violence between herders and farmers, the authorities are failing to adequately protect the population. The security forces’ response is often delayed, and those suspected of killings, looting, and destruction of property are rarely brought to justice, fueling a sense of impunity and marginalization within communities,” said Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.

Deadly violence amid climate change

On 26 August 2019, in the village of Sandana, in Moyen-Chari, a conflict that started with cattle trespassing on a field escalated: seven people were killed, eight wounded, and more than 140 cattle were stolen. On 9 February 2022, another attack in the same village left 13 people dead.

Several less publicized attacks are documented in the report, including in Pala Koudja, in Logone Occidental. On 30 August 2024, the repeated trespassing of a herd into a field triggered a violent altercation between herders and farmers, leaving three people dead and seven wounded. During the night, unidentified individuals set fire to 53 homes.

Tensions between herders and farmers are exacerbated by demographic pressure, the effects of human-induced climate change, particularly on herd movements, and competition for access to natural resources. Rising temperatures in the center of the country have led many herders to move further south for grazing or to settle in the southern provinces, while at the same time farmers seek to expand and diversify their production.

The effects of climate change will only fuel more clashes between herders and farmers. This makes it all the more urgent to find structural, sustainable solutions based on human rights.

Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International

Clashes are often triggered by incidents such as livestock trampling fields or crops blocking herding corridors, and can affect entire communities.

“We laid the bodies on the road in protest”

The authorities are struggling to respond quickly to protect the population, despite prior warnings about escalating conflicts by the communities and an increase in the Ministry of Public Security’s budget since 2022. The minister in office in May 2023 confirmed that there had been “delays in responding when villages are attacked.”

A community leader from a village in Logone Oriental said: “Since 2014, we have had a problem with herders, and I reported it to the canton chief and the sub-prefect [local government officials], but no response was given. In 2023, we were attacked by a group of armed people. The toll was 18 people killed and 11 wounded. We were angry and laid the bodies on the road in protest.”

Despite the existence of conflict prevention and management mechanisms set up by the authorities, their lack of coordination and structural inefficiency, limit their ability to prevent and resolve conflicts. In addition, testimonies indicate that certain local administrators entrust their privately owned cattle to armed herders. This arrangement compromises administrative neutrality and facilitates abuses.

© Amaury Hauchard/AFP via Getty Images

Structural responses urgently needed

Although several instances of violence between herders and farmers have led to legal proceedings, impunity remains a strong feature of these cases. Of the seven waves of clashes documented in the report, only three have resulted in trials. Thirty-seven people were convicted following those trials.

“Under regional and international human rights law and standards, the Chadian state has an obligation to guarantee the safety of everyone in the country, investigate crimes, bring those responsible to justice, and ensure victims of these crimes have effective access to the courts,” said Agnès Callamard. 

“The effects of climate change will only fuel more clashes between herders and farmers. This makes it all the more urgent to find structural, sustainable solutions based on human rights. This requires strengthening the presence of law enforcement agencies, implementing a proactive disarmament policy, establishing a coherent legal framework for transhumance, revitalizing joint conflict prevention committees, and implementing a national climate change adaptation plan.”  

Background

This report is based on research conducted between March 2023 and September 2025 in 14 villages in four provinces in southern Chad. Amnesty International interviewed 110 people, including 70 victims and/or witnesses of conflict. The report’s findings were sent to the Chadian authorities on 25 June 2025. At the time of publication, Amnesty International had not received a response.

The post Chad: Authorities failing to address deadly clashes between herders and farmers amid climate crisis appeared first on Amnesty International.