Thousands of people living in Ukraine have been forced to protect themselves and their families by seeking safety in neighbouring countries after Russia invaded, and more are expected to do so in the coming days.

The response by receiving countries needs to be immediate and must protect human rights.

Here are 5 ‘golden rules’ that all States should follow:

The post How to respond to large refugee arrivals: 5 ‘golden rules’ for European countries as people flee Ukraine. appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the brutal killing of one supporter of political opposition and the injury of more than a dozen others at a Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) rally in Kwekwe, Muleya Mwananyanda, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director  for Southern Africa, said:

This assault bears all the hallmarks of a pre-meditated attack that aims to intimidate political opposition and block access to their constituents

Muleya Mwananyanda, Amnesty International's Deputy Director for Southern Africa

“This assault bears all the hallmarks of a pre-meditated attack that aims to intimidate political opposition and block access to their constituents ahead of the upcoming by-elections in March.

“The government’s rhetoric has done much to incite such ferocious violence and unfortunately little to ensure the free exercise of the rights to freedom of assembly and association.

Zimbabwean authorities must immediately end the culture of politically-motivated violence by refraining from issuing inflammatory statements that may incite violence

Muleya Mwananyanda

“The Zimbabwean authorities must immediately end the culture of politically-motivated violence by refraining from issuing inflammatory statements that may incite violence and they must ensure an impartial, independent and transparent investigation into this attack. The perpetrators must be brought to justice.”

Background

On 27 February, a machete-wielding gang appeared at Mbizo 4 shopping centre in Kwekwe, where the CCC was holding a political rally.

The gang’s efforts to prevent people from attending the rally soon turned violent. Mboneni Ncube, a 30-year-old man and supporter of the CCC, died after being stabbed, while at least 22 others were seriously injured.

The gang allegedly used not only machetes but also beer bottles, iron bars, spears and bricks to attack supporters while Nelson Chamisa, the leader of the CCC, was giving a speech.

On 26 February, Zimbabwe’s Vice President, Constantino Chiwenga, sent a warning to the CCC, saying the ruling ZANU-PF party would “crush the party like lice”.

The post Zimbabwe: Investigate violence on political opposition supporters appeared first on Amnesty International.

The Pakistan government’s amendment to its cybercrimes act is the latest in a concerted campaign to restrict freedom of expression and stifle dissent, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today.

On February 18, 2022, the government passed an ordinance amending the Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA) to make online “defamation” of authorities, including the military and judiciary, a criminal offense with harsh penalties.

“PECA has been used to silence freedom of expression on the pretext of combating ‘fake news,’ cybercrime, and misinformation,” said Nadia Rahman, Acting Deputy Regional Director for South Asia at Amnesty International. “This amendment not only violates the Pakistan Constitution, but also puts anyone who questions the government or other state institutions at further risk. It particularly targets journalists, human rights defenders, and political opponents who run the risk of prosecution for merely doing their jobs.”

While PECA already contained broad provisions criminalizing defamation of “natural persons,” the Pakistan Amendment Ordinance (2022) expands those provisions to include criticism of government bodies and the military by inserting a new definition of “person” that includes “any company, association or body of persons, … institution, organization, authority or any other body established by the Government under any law or otherwise.” 

The amendment makes defamation a non-bailable offense, and increases the prison term, if convicted, from three to five years. It also expands the definition of those who can initiate criminal proceedings for defamation, allowing any person or institution to register the complaint.

Pakistan has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects the right to freedom of expression. Article 19 of the ICCPR allows for restrictions on freedom of expression to protect the reputations of others, but such restrictions must be necessary and narrowly drawn. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch oppose all criminal defamation laws as a disproportionate and unnecessary response to the need to protect reputations that chills freedom of expression. Expanding PECA’s already overbroad criminal defamation provisions to online statements about government institutions violates Pakistan’s international obligations.

By excluding civil society groups and the private sector from consultation on the amendments, the government prevented genuine public scrutiny of the amendments prior to enactment.

The amendment to PECA also makes it incumbent upon courts to conclude trials within six months and furnish monthly progress reports of pending trials, and orders federal and provincial officials to remove any obstacles that may hinder the progress of the proceedings. It is not evident how an already overburdened court system will safeguard people from unfair trials and poor evidence gathering, the groups said.

“The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act neither protects the public from legitimate cybercrime concerns nor respects fundamental human rights,” said Patricia Gossman, Asia associate director at Human Rights Watch. “The new amendments will further embed violations of basic rights with a thin veneer of legality.”

On February 23, the Islamabad High Court restrained the Federal Investigative Agency, the main investigative body for PECA, from making any arrests under the ordinance. While this offers temporary relief, it is not enough to mitigate the grave impact that the amendment will have on Pakistan’s already imperiled freedom of expression by potentially putting anyone at risk of criminal charges for expressing their views online, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty said.

The Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 is a draconian law that contains vague and overly broad offenses. It has been criticized by Pakistan’s human rights defenders and civil society organizations for criminalizing legitimate forms of expression based on supposed national security concerns and to protect majoritarian interpretations of Islam. Muzzling online and offline expression is part of an ongoing crackdown on dissent.

In 2021, the Pakistan Media Development Authority Ordinance was proposed which effectively enables press censorship by bringing all media under one regulator, granting the government unchecked powers to punish journalists through steep fines, instituting special “media tribunals” and appointing government officials to key positions. The draconian Removal and Blocking of Unlawful Online Content (Procedure, Oversight and Safeguards) Rules – legislation that would censor online content – was enacted in October 2021.

“The amendment, in effect, permits authorities to digitally police what people are saying online and levy heavy punishments if they do not like what they are saying,” said Patricia Gossman. “Laws should be centered around protecting human rights, not insulating the government from legitimate criticism. The authorities should either swiftly repeal PECA and this amendment entirely, or substantially amend them to align them with international human rights standards,” Nadia Rahman said.

The post Pakistan: Repeal amendment to draconian cyber law appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the news that the Kremlin has censored domestic media as it disperses anti-war protests and persecutes those who publicly oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia Director, said:

“As thousands of protesters take to the streets across Russia to denounce the war, the Kremlin remains hellbent on stifling state critics as it coerces domestic media into supporting its policies. By using force to disperse anti-war rallies and censoring the press, the Russian authorities are plunging deeper and deeper into repression as public sentiment against the war grows.”

As thousands of protesters take to the streets across Russia to denounce the war, the Kremlin remains hellbent on stifling state critics as it coerces domestic media into supporting its policies

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

“Amid its desperation to silence dissent, Russia is also using state-controlled companies to muzzle those who speak out against the conflict. The removal of television presenter Ivan Urgant and the sidelining of respected journalist Elena Chernenko, who was excluded from a government press pool for composing an anti-war letter, speaks to the state’s sheer disregard for press freedom.

“As Russia engages in indiscriminate attacks in violation of international humanitarian law as part of its invasion of Ukraine, the authorities are trampling on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in Russia while promoting its narrative of the conflict. The authorities’ brutal crackdown on those who express their dissent regarding the war must stop now.”

Background

On 24 February 2021, Russian media watchdog Roskomnadzor ordered all media to only use information provided by official state sources while covering Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Anyone caught disobeying this order could see their websites blocked and be fined up to $62,600.

On 28 February, the watchdog blocked the site of Nastoyashchee Vremya (Current Times), a RFE/RL subsidiary, for spreading “unreliable publicly important information” about the conflict. On 27 February, the Prosecutor General’s office issued statement threatening prosecution under “high treason” charges for any type of “assistance to a foreign state, international or foreign organization or their representatives in activities directed against the security of the Russian Federation.”

Over the first four days of invasion, Russian police routinely used force to disperse nationwide anti-war protests. According to human rights NGO OVD-Info, over 5,900 peaceful protesters have been arrested in at least 67 cities and towns across Russia. On 24 February, political philosopher Grigory Yudin was beaten unconscious by the police and briefly hospitalized.

The post Russia: Kremlin censors media and disperses protesters opposed to Ukraine invasion appeared first on Amnesty International.

The Chinese human rights lawyer Yu Wensheng must not be subjected to intimidation or surveillance after enduring years of injustice and mistreatment in prison, Amnesty International said ahead of his scheduled release this week.

Yu’s four-year sentence for “subverting state power” is due to end on Tuesday 1 March, but the Chinese government has a record of targeting human rights defenders even after their release from prison.

“Yu Wensheng should never have been jailed in the first place, but now that his unjust prison sentence has ended, he must be granted true freedom,” said Gwen Lee, Amnesty International’s China Campaigner.

“That means he must be allowed to return home to his family in Beijing on 1 March, without facing the kind of intimidation, surveillance and restrictions on movement that the Chinese government has inflicted on other human rights defenders on release from prison.”

Yu Wensheng is a prominent human rights lawyer who has been detained since January 2018 – apparently being targeted after he criticized Chinese President Xi Jinping. He was sentenced in June 2020 following a secret trial and says he was tortured while in prison. He was also sentenced to a three-year “deprivation of political rights”, which are due to begin after he is released from jail.

The court judgement said Yu Wensheng had distorted and fabricated facts and intervened in sensitive domestic issues by accepting interviews with foreign media. The sensitive issues included cases related to Falun Gong religious practitioners, the authorities’ crackdown on lawyers in 2015 and an “Open Letter on Proposed Amendments to the Constitution” that Yu wrote in 2018, just before he was detained. 

When Yu was granted a first meeting with his lawyer in August 2020, after more than two and a half years in detention, he said he had been pepper sprayed during detention and was sometimes required to sit on a metal chair for extended periods until he partially lost consciousness.

He also said he was often not given enough food, and that he suffered heatstroke in the summer due to his poor detention conditions.

Yu Wensheng’s wife Xu Yan has fought tirelessly for the release of her husband and made numerous failed attempts to visit him in prison.

Her first successful visit was three years after Yu’s arrest. She discovered he had been secretly transferred to Nanjing prison and immediately travelled across the country to see him on 5 February 2021.   

She has been under constant surveillance and repeatedly faced harassment by the Chinese authorities – having been summoned, detained and occasionally banned from leaving her house.  The Chinese government continues to crack down on human rights lawyers through administrative measures, intimidation and even prosecution.

In the past, Chinese authorities have released human rights defenders from prison only to continue targeting them. For example, human rights lawyer Jiang Tianyong was released from prison in 2019 after serving a sentence for “incitement to subvert state power”, but he is effectively still under house arrest in his parents’ home and unable to travel abroad to see his wife and children, who live overseas.

“Yu Wensheng is a victim of China’s relentless crackdown on freedom of expression who has suffered greatly in prison despite never committing any crime,” Gwen Lee said.

“Any further restrictions on him now would only compound the injustice of his politically motivated jailing. Now that his jail sentence has ended, the Chinese government must let him live his life and resume his work as a human rights lawyer.”

Yu Wensheng is the winner of the 2021 Martin Ennals Award, an annual prize for human rights defenders selected by a jury of 10 of the world’s leading human rights NGOs.

The post China: Lawyer Yu Wensheng must be granted true freedom after unjust imprisonment appeared first on Amnesty International.