Kategorie: Humans

The Egyptian authorities must immediately put an end to the shameful prosecution of Rasha Azab, a journalist and writer, who is on trial for her outspoken support for survivors of sexual violence, Amnesty International said today. 

Rasha Azab is on trial today on charges of “insult,” defamation” and “deliberately disturbing [the plaintiff]”, in relation to Tweets in which she expressed solidarity with survivors of sexual violence who published anonymous testimonies accusing film director Islam Azazi of committing sexual assaults and used curse words to express her dismay at the impunity he enjoys. If convicted, Azab could face up to two years in prison and/or a fine of up to EGP 50,000 (US$3200).  

“Rasha Azab is a well-known political activist and defender of women’s rights in Egypt. Prosecuting her for expressing solidarity with survivors of sexual violence sends a chilling message that women should suffer in silence and refrain from seeking justice and redress for rape and sexual violence,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Research and Advocacy Director.

“The Egyptian authorities must immediately end the judicial harassment against Rasha Azab, and instead focus on addressing the epidemic of widespread sexual violence in Egypt. It is the state’s responsibility to prevent and investigate sexual and gender-based violence, yet Egypt has repeatedly opted to instead punish those who speak out against it.”

In December 2020, the feminist blog Daftar Hekayat published six anonymous testimonies accusing film director Islam Azazi of sexual violence, including one allegation of rape.  According to women’s rights activists, survivors chose to post on this blog anonymously given their lack of trust in the judicial system. 

Consistent with patterns of entrenched impunity for sexual violence, the Egyptian authorities have made no efforts to work with women’s rights organizations and activists to encourage the survivors who shared their testimonies to report the abuses to State bodies by guaranteeing their confidentiality and safety. 

Between December 2020 and November 2021, Rasha Azab posted several messages on her Twitter account expressing support for the women behind the allegations. On 13 January 2022, Islam Azazi submitted a complaint against Rasha Azab and film director Aida el-Kashef, who also expressed her support for the survivors on her Facebook account, accusing them of defamation. Days later, the prosecution decided to move the case against Rasha Azab to court.

The Egyptian authorities must immediately end the judicial harassment against Rasha Azab, and instead focus on addressing the epidemic of widespread sexual violence in Egypt.

Philip Luther, Amnesty International

Amnesty International’s research shows that Egyptian authorities routinely fail to adequately prevent and investigate widespread violence against women and girls in Egypt. Instead, the authorities have threatened, arbitrarily detained, and prosecuted survivors, witnesses, and activists who report or campaign against sexual violence.

In January 2022, the Court of Cassation upheld the conviction against Amal Fathy, a women’s rights defender who criticized the Egyptian authorities’ failure to protect women from sexual harassment, and sentenced her to a year in prison. 

In May 2020, social media influencer Menna Abdelaziz appeared in a video with a bruised face, saying that she had been raped, beaten and filmed without her consent. Within days, security forces arrested her, and she spent four months in arbitrary detention pending investigations into accusations of “inciting debauchery” and “violating family principles and values,” with prosecutors basing their case on statements by those Menna Abdelaziz accused of the attack. 

In 2020, authorities arbitrarily detained, and opened criminal investigations against four people who came forward as witnesses in connection to reported gang rape at the Fairmont Nile City Hotel in Cairo in 2014, over charges related to “morality” and “misuse of social media”, among others. At least two witnesses reported being pressured by security agents to change their testimonies, while held in conditions amounting to enforced disappearance. 

“It is absurd and disgraceful that the Egyptian authorities continue to prosecute survivors, witnesses and activists standing up against the scourge of sexual violence in Egypt instead of providing justice and adequate reparation to survivors. The authorities must put an immediate end to such reprisals and remove the threat of prosecution, including by decriminalizing ‘insult’ and ‘defamation’, to signal to perpetrators that they can no longer intimidate women, girls and their supporters into silence and to break the chain of impunity for horrific sexual abuses,” said Philip Luther.  

Background

Under international human rights law, states are permitted to limit the right to freedom of expression including for the protection of the rights of others. However, limitations on the right to freedom of expression must be set forth in law in a precise manner, and must be necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim, as stipulated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Egypt is a party. In this regard, the Human Rights Committee has called on states to repeal laws criminalizing defamation and has sustained that imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty. Therefore, Amnesty International believes that laws aiming to protect the honour and reputation of third parties should always be treated as a matter of civil litigation, and laws criminalizing “defamation” and “insult” should be repealed.

The post Egypt: End prosecution of rights defender for speaking out against sexual violence appeared first on Amnesty International.

A bill being considered by Mexico’s Chamber of Deputies would severely restrict the work of civil society groups in Mexico and violate Mexico’s international legal obligations, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International said today. Legislators should shelve the proposal.

The bill was introduced by a legislator from President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s party, Morena, which holds a majority in both houses of Congress. It would prohibit non-profit organizations from trying to influence or change laws either through lobbying or through strategic litigation if they receive funding, directly or indirectly, from foreign governments or corporations. The government would have the authority to revoke the non-profit status of organizations that violate the prohibition.

“This proposal could effectively prevent Mexican human rights defenders from participating in debates about public policy, challenging abusive laws in the courts, or discussing how to improve rights protections with lawmakers,” said Tamara Taraciuk Broner, acting Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “This is the kind of attempt to expand executive power at the expense of fundamental freedoms we have seen from autocratic leaders in countries ranging from Russia, to Nicaragua, to El Salvador.”ccc

“Civil society organizations and human rights defenders who speak out against unjust laws and government practices, challenge those in power, and demand justice are being increasingly targeted across the region,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas director at Amnesty International. “For decades, civil society organizations have played a key role in advancing human rights in Mexico by pushing Congress for legislative changes and by challenging abusive laws in the courts. The proposed bill reflects the broader political trend in which toxic narratives demonize NGOs with the intention to silence critical views and inhibit the ability of human rights defenders to scrutinize state institutions.”

President López Obrador regularly attacks human rights, environmental, and transparency groups. He often publicly singles out specific people and organizations in his morning news conferences, baselessly accusing them of being part of an opposition plot to overthrow his government. He has also said that international donors and aid agencies should stop funding Mexican civil society groups out of respect for “non-interventionism.”

This proposal could effectively prevent Mexican human rights defenders from participating in debates about public policy, challenging abusive laws in the courts, or discussing how to improve rights protections with lawmakers

Tamara Taraciuk Broner, acting Americas director at Human Rights Watch

Mexican groups have spoken out publicly against projects and proposals promoted by López Obrador and his party that raise human rights concerns. Notable examples include a bill that would have effectively legalized arbitrary detention and allowed the use of evidence obtained through torture, and a railway project that opponents say would harm the environment and Indigenous communities. In some cases, groups have taken legal action to halt or delay these initiatives.

The introduction to the new bill, which outlines its motives, recognizes that civil society groups have impeded or blocked some government proposals and accuses those who have done so of “coup plotting,” “interventionism,” and “violat[ing] our national sovereignty.”

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented how other governments have used similar laws to arbitrarily restrict the activity of civil society groups.

In Nicaragua, the government has cancelled the registration of dozens of human rights and aid organizations, such as Oxfam, using a law requiring any organization that received foreign funding to register as a “foreign agent” and then prohibiting them from interfering in “internal politics.”

In Ecuador, during Rafael Correa’s presidency, the government issued a  decree giving it broad powers to regulate or dissolve civil society groups accused of “political interference.” It used these powers to expel a number of international organizations and dissolve an Ecuadorian environmental group after some of its members protested oil drilling in the Amazon.

In Venezuela, the government has passed a series of laws restricting the activities of civil society and has criminally prosecuted groups that receive foreign funding, accusing them of “treason” and “crimes against national sovereignty.”

In Guatemala, a law came into effect in June 2021 empowering the government to arbitrarily shutter any civil society group it considers to have violated public order.

In El Salvador, the government proposed a “foreign agents” law in November 2021 that would have barred groups receiving international funding from “political activities.” After objections from human rights groups, the law did not move forward, but remains pending.

Outside of Latin America and the Caribbean, authorities in places like Russia, Egypt, and China have passed draconian laws to restrict the work of human rights defenders and, in some cases, have prosecuted and fined human rights groups for engaging in “political activity.”

Civil society organizations and human rights defenders who speak out against unjust laws and government practices, challenge those in power, and demand justice are being increasingly targeted across the region

Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas director at Amnesty International

Since taking office in 2018, President López Obrador has eliminated the independent funding that supported the program that protects journalists and human rights defenders whose lives have been threatened. He has also vilified and intimidated independent journalists, publicly accusing them of lying, calling them “criminals,” and publicly sharing sensitive personal information about a journalist critical of him.

He has attempted to weaponize the justice system against his opponents, pushing for a reform to assert control over the courts, holding a referendum on whether to put former opposition party presidents on trial, and calling for a judge who ruled against him to be investigated. And he has attempted to neutralize or proposed eliminating independent institutions that serve as checks on presidential power, such as the independent access to information agency.

Under international law, as part of their duty to protect and promote human rights, governments must ensure that human rights defenders are allowed to pursue their activities without reprisals, threats, intimidation, harassment, discrimination, or unnecessary legal obstacles. Both the United Nations and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have recognized that this includes allowing human rights organizations to solicit, receive, and use funding from foreign governmental and non-governmental organizations and to benefit from tax exemptions available to other non-profit organizations.

The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders recognizes that human rights defenders have the right to propose legal and policy changes, to provide legal representation in defense of human rights, and to make formal complaints to government bodies and have those complaints reviewed.

For more information, please contact:
In Mexico, Tyler Mattiace (English, Spanish): mattiat@hrw.org. Twitter: @TMattiaceHRW

In Uruguay, Tamara Taraciuk Broner (English, Spanish, Portuguese): taracit@hrw.org. Twitter: @TamaraTaraciuk

In Mexico, Duncan Tucker (English, Spanish): duncan.tucker@amnesty.org. Twitter: @DuncanTucker

The post Mexico: Shelve regressive bill to curb civil society groups appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the Russian authorities’ decision to block access to Amnesty International’s Russian-language website as part of the Kremlin’s assault on freedom of expression following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia Director, said:

“People in Russia have the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds and from all available sources. By blocking Amnesty’s Russian-language site, along with those of many other human rights organizations, independent media outlets and social media platforms, the Kremlin is showing that it can’t stomach the truth about the horror Russia has unleased in Ukraine.  

People in Russia have the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds and from all available sources

Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia Director

This is just the latest attempt by the Russian authorities to suppress information about the possible war crimes its troops are committing in Ukraine and hide them from internet users across the country. We call on Russia to immediately unblock Amnesty’s Russian language website and allow people to freely decide what sources of information they want to access.”

Background

On 11 March, it transpired that the Russian media regulator, Roskomnadzor, blocked access to Amnesty International’s Russian-language website (eurasia.amnesty.org), as well as the websites of Human Rights Movement Golos (an independent election watchdog) and two independent media outlets, Colta and Vazhnye Istorii (Important Stories). Last week, the latter was designated as an “undesirable organization”, which criminalized its operations and barred it from working in Russia. The blocking of all these websites was implemented at the request of the Prosecutor General.

Over the last three weeks, the Russian authorities have unleashed an unprecedented nationwide crackdown on independent journalism, anti-war protests and any voices opposing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including by effectively banning the use of such terms as “war” and “invasion” and criminalizing independent reporting on the conflict.

The post Russia: Authorities block Amnesty International’s Russian-language website appeared first on Amnesty International.

Tunisian authorities should immediately scrap plans for new restrictions on civil society organizations, 13 Tunisian and international rights groups said today.

Those plans, if carried out, would reverse a major gain for freedom of association following the country’s 2011 revolution. They would constitute another blow to human rights safeguards by President Kais Saied since his July 2021 power grab.

“Tunisians know from experience the dangers that restrictive laws can pose to civil society and public debate,” said Amna Guellali, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International. “During the deeply repressive Ben Ali era, the authorities used restrictive regulations on associations and cumbersome administrative procedures as key tools to smother dissent.” 

A draft law to regulate civil society organizations was recently leaked. It would give government authorities overly broad powers and discretion to interfere with the way civil society organizations are formed, their functions and operations, their funding, and their ability to speak publicly about their work and to express their views.

In a videotaped speech on February 24, President Saied accused civil society organizations of serving foreign interests and trying to meddle in Tunisian politics, and said he intended to ban all funding for such groups from abroad.

“In the 10 years since Ben Ali’s ouster, nongovernmental organizations in Tunisia have played a crucial role in providing essential services to the public and holding the government accountable,” said Eric Goldstein, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Their work should be promoted and protected rather than threatened.”

Under Decree-Law 2011-88, both Tunisians and resident foreigners may freely establish civil society organizations, carry out a broad range of activities, lobby the authorities regarding laws and policies, speak publicly about their work and opinions, and receive foreign funding without government authorization.

The authorities have not formally confirmed that they are amending the existing law, nor have they released a draft law, and it remains unclear whether it has been modified since being leaked. Draft laws in Tunisia have not been made public or subject to formal debate by parliament since President Saied suspended the body on July 25, 2021. Under a presidential decree issued on September 22, 2021, all laws are currently enacted as decree-laws issued by the president.

Since 2011, Tunisian civil society has flourished. Over 24,000 civil society organizations are currently registered with government authorities, according to official data, although it remains unclear how many of those are active today.

Many civil society organizations work in areas such as education and cultural life. Others seek to help poor, marginalized, or otherwise vulnerable people. In addition, civil society has played a vital role in post-revolution Tunisia’s efforts to transition to a freer, more just society by bringing values such as human rights and the rule of law into public debate, and pushing policy makers to embed them in public policy.

“The authorities should immediately drop any further consideration of the leaked draft law and ensure that any future laws regulating civil society organizations adhere strictly to international human rights law,” said Amine Ghali, Director of the Kawakibi Democracy Transition Center.

Under existing law, people may form a civil society organization with automatic legal status simply by notifying the relevant authorities. Articles 10 through 12 of the leaked draft law would restore a Ben Ali era requirement for government authorization before an organization can legally operate.

The draft law states that associations may not “threaten the unity of the state or its republican and democratic system,” and says that their published material must align with “integrity,” “professionalism,” and “legal and scientific regulations,” broad wording that would allow for abusive enforcement by the authorities, the groups said.

Under existing law, civil society organizations must publish details of all foreign funding. Article 35 of the leaked draft law would impose a new requirement that all foreign funding be approved by the Tunisian Financial Analysis Committee (CTAF), a unit within the Tunisian Central Bank tasked with fighting money-laundering and terrorism financing.

While combatting money-laundering and terrorism are legitimate objectives, they should not be used as pretexts to control or prohibit foreign funding for civil society organizations by requiring prior approval. According to a survey of 100 civil society organizations in Tunisia published in 2018, nearly two-fifths said that they relied either partly or mainly on funding from abroad.

Under the existing law, civil society organizations may only be dissolved at will by their own members, or by the courts in response to a petition filed by the government. The leaked draft law would empower authorities within the office of the Head of Government to summarily dissolve civil society organizations that remained inactive beyond a certain length of time. It might also permit the authorities to dissolve such groups at will and outside of judicial procedure, although the relevant provisions are ambiguous.

“Freedom of association – including the right to form and operate civil society organizations free from undue interference by the government – is a basic human right and guaranteed under international law and the Tunisian constitution,” said Alaa Talbi, Executive Director of the Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights.

Under Article 38 of the Guidelines on Freedom of Association and Assembly in Africa, governments may neither impose blanket bans on foreign funding for civil society organizations nor subject foreign funding to government authorization. The guidelines reflect the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to which Tunisia is a state party.

Freedom of association – including the right to form and operate civil society organizations free from undue interference by the government – is a basic human right and guaranteed under international law and the Tunisian constitution.

Alaa Talbi, The Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights

Tunisia is obliged to respect, protect, promote, and fulfil the right to freedom of association, set out in Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 10 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Limitations on this right are only permissible when they are prescribed by law, and necessary in a democratic society; that is, using the least restrictive means possible and reflecting basic values of pluralism and tolerance. “Necessary” restrictions must also be proportionate; that is, carefully balanced against the specific reason for imposing the restriction and not discriminatory, including on the grounds of national origin or political opinion or belief.

On July 25, Saied dismissed then-head of government, Hichem Mechichi, and suspended parliament. On September 22, he issued Presidential Decree 2021-117, which suspends most of Tunisia’s constitution, grants the president the exclusive right to enact laws by decree, dissolves a temporary body to vet the constitutionality of laws, and bars anyone from overturning decree-laws via Tunisia’s Administrative Tribunal.

On February 12, 2022, Saied weakened judicial independence by issuing a decree dissolving Tunisia’s top independent judicial body, the High Judicial Council – set up in 2011 to shield judges from government influence – and granted himself broad powers to intervene in the functioning of the judiciary.

Signatories:

1. Access Now
2. Al Bawsala
3. Amnesty International
4. Arab Reform Initiative
5. Euromed Rights
6. Human Rights Watch
7. Jamaity
8. Lawyers Without Borders
9. Legal Agenda
10. Mourakiboun
11. Observatoire International des Associations et Développement Durable
12. Tunisian Association for the Defence of Individual Liberties
13. Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights

The post Tunisia: Looming curbs on civil society must be stopped appeared first on Amnesty International.

Civilians whose homes have been destroyed and others fearing for their lives forced to flee Russian bombardment must be granted access to safe humanitarian corridors, Amnesty International said today.

To date, thousands of people have been living under unlawful bombardment, while millions of people have been forcibly displaced over the course of two weeks of conflict in Ukraine. Russian forces’ assault on civilian populations and wanton destruction of the infrastructure of daily life violate the Geneva Conventions and international human rights law and must cease. 

Genuine humanitarian corridors must be established quickly, effectively, and safely

Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

At a bare minimum, safe evacuation routes must be provided and yet, to date, many such corridors have proven both unreliable and dangerous. Ukraine and Russia first agreed on 3 March to establish humanitarian corridors for civilian evacuation and humanitarian aid delivery, but implementation to date has been slow and limited. It is urgent that civilians seeking safety from the bombardments, including those whose homes have been destroyed be provided safe passage. They further should not be forced to relocate to Russian-controlled territory.

“Genuine humanitarian corridors must be established quickly, effectively, and safely. Civilians must not be put at even more risk as they seek to escape the conflict,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

“The deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian objects and indiscriminate attacks are prohibited under international law. All unlawful attacks must cease. This pressing need for humanitarian corridors is a direct result of Russia’s betrayal of its legal obligations. Regrettably humanitarian corridors are needed urgently.

“The parties to the conflict must give absolute priority to civilians’ safe passage out of the conflict areas and into safe havens, meaning also not to those under Russian control. Russian forces must also immediately allow humanitarian aid to reach civilians who remain in their homes.”

Ukrainian authorities have requested that the routes should allow civilians from heavily bombed Mariupol, Enerhodar, Sumy, Izyum and Volnovakha to escape, and for residents of several towns close to Kyiv – including Bucha, Irpin and Hostomel – to reach the capital. Testimonies that Amnesty International have collected to date from civilians in several of these locations indicate they were prevented from leaving by continuous Russian shelling.

Amnesty International is calling on the parties to agree on establishing well-planned, safe humanitarian corridors and to respect such agreements in good faith; for civilians to be provided accessible transportation as well as sufficient time to safely exit, and for international observers to be granted access to monitor their safe passage.

Hospitals, schools and civilian infrastructure must be protected. Even wars have law

Agnès Callamard

“Civilians must be protected at all times. Safe and secure humanitarian corridors are a must, but unlawful attacks which are killing and injuring civilians must cease forthwith and comprehensively,” said Agnès Callamard.

“International humanitarian law prohibits attacks against civilians and civilian objects, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks. Hospitals, schools and civilian infrastructure must be protected. Even wars have laws.”

The parties must grant impartial humanitarian relief organizations access to all civilians in need, including those who remain after evacuations. Russian forces must not employ the types of illegal sieges of civilians reminiscent of those they carried out in Grozny and Syria, subjecting them to indiscriminate bombardment, destroying infrastructure and leaving them with the choice to surrender or starve. Amnesty International also objects to any plan which would require civilians to relocate to areas they consider unsafe, including the occupied Crimea or Donbass regions of Ukraine, or Russia.

Attacks in Irpin

On Sunday 6 March, near the town of Irpin, a Kyiv suburb, Russian fire hit an evacuation crossing point, killing several civilians who were trying to flee.

One woman, who was in a convoy of 12 cars of civilians with signs marked ‘kids’ leaving Irpin, told Amnesty International they came under attack from Russian soldiers.

She said: “In two, three minutes [after they passed a destroyed tank] the shooting began. We know for sure that a 30-year-old woman died, [and a relative’s] mother died: she was 60, she was with me in the car.

“A shard or a bullet went two millimetres from my brother-in-law’s eye, [and] his arm is broken. Our driver has an issue with his ribs. I’m OK, a small wound close to my head, just blood… but in general, everything is fine with me. The other woman, who lost her mother… everything is OK with her too.”

Journalists filming in the area reported that another Russian attack occurred as civilians were streaming through an intersection, killing four people, including a woman and two of her children. Media also reported repeated firing and shelling in the area, raising concerns that these attacks were indiscriminate or disproportionate, violating the rules of international humanitarian law.

‘It isn’t possible to leave’

Amnesty International is concerned that certain groups will face particular challenges if they try to escape the conflict. In interviews with Ukrainian residents of threatened cities, the organization learned of people with disabilities, older people, and people with health conditions who are less able to easily evacuate their homes, seek safety during attacks, or get medical care.

Elena Kozachenko, a 38-year-old from Chernihiv, has breast cancer and is currently undergoing chemotherapy. She said: “I have cancer and I need to get medication. I had my last round of chemotherapy on 23 February. My next chemotherapy is supposed to be 16 April. I need check-ups, but they are bombing all the time in the neighbourhood where the cancer hospital is, it’s too scary to go there.”

“I want to leave because staying in Ukraine [now] with my diagnosis is suicide. [But] it isn’t possible to leave… I’m afraid to evacuate because I’m a living target.”

Many older people impacted by the conflict face great difficulty in trying to flee or in seeking safety during attacks, and are often less willing to leave homes where they have lived for decades, or even their whole lives.

Rita, a 64-year-old family doctor in Kyiv, explained: “Kyiv is an old city, all of the older people, people with limited mobility, can’t get from their apartments to the basement. In our building they wanted to turn off the electricity [at night] so as not to attract bombardment… We said it would be a death sentence for the older people; if they can’t use the lift, they can’t leave their apartments at all.”

A member of the Kyiv regional council – who represents Irpin, Bucha, and other communities under Russian siege – added: “It’s mostly [older people] who are staying… It is more safe for them to stay than to go without money or food, because it’s in their native town – they know their neighbours. If they move out, they’re not sure somebody will help them; they don’t have the money to move.”

Tatyana Sobko, a 70-year-old in Kyiv, told Amnesty International: “We don’t want to leave, our children have tried to take us away many times… This is our home, how can you abandon your home and go sit somewhere abroad? How is that possible?… It’s our land and we won’t run away.”

Older people and people with disabilities, as well as other groups who may face particular risks and challenges in fleeing, should be prioritized for evacuation, as is outlined under international humanitarian law. Planning and communication about evacuations and safe humanitarian corridors must also be undertaken in an inclusive way, including by ensuring that information, transportation, and services are all accessible. 

Interviewees across Ukraine also told Amnesty International of living in cramped conditions, and suffering severe shortages of food, water and medicine. Some have been unable to leave basements for days on end, due to relentless Russian shelling. They have also been experiencing loss of electricity, heating and communications for days.

The post Ukraine: Humanitarian corridors for civilians fleeing Russian attacks must provide safety – new testimonies appeared first on Amnesty International.