Austria: European Court of Human Rights denies vital reprieve, allowing man to be deported to Syria

Responding to today’s European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) decision which will allow the Austrian government to deport a man to Syria, Shoura Zehetner-Hashemi, Executive Director of Amnesty International Austria said:

“Today’s decision effectively allows Austria to deport a man to Syria, in spite of UNHCR’s current guidance to halt all forced returns to the country, and despite reports that a man previously deported by Austria to Syria has since disappeared.

“This sets an extremely worrying precedent and should not serve as a green light for Austria’s reckless and premature deportation policy. In all cases the safety of people seeking protection must come first. 

Shoura Zehetner-Hashemi, Executive Director of Amnesty International Austria

“This sets an extremely worrying precedent and should not serve as a green light for Austria’s reckless and premature deportation policy. In all cases the safety of people seeking protection must come first. 

“The situation in Syria remains very unstable with ongoing outbreaks of violence and human rights violations. The Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself classifies the entire country at the highest threat level. Amnesty International has repeatedly warned that forced returns to Syria violate the principle of non-refoulement and has recently documented unlawful killings and abductions in the country.

“It’s time for the Austrian government to heed its own warnings and follow UNHCR’s advice: halt forced returns to Syria immediately.”

Background

In its decision today, the ECtHR lifted the interim measure that it issued in August 2025, ordering Austrian authorities to halt a planned deportation to Syria.

Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UN Convention against Torture, and the European Convention on Human Rights, states are obliged to ensure that no deportations take place to a country where there is a risk of life, or torture, inhuman treatment, or degrading punishment or treatment and other serious human rights violations. The principle of non-refoulement, a cornerstone of international law, explicitly prohibits this. UNHCR continues to oppose all forced returns to Syria. 

On 3 July 2025, the Austrian authorities deported a Syrian man to Syria – reportedly the first such deportation in 15 years. According to reports, he has since disappeared and his whereabouts remains unknown.

The post Austria: European Court of Human Rights denies vital reprieve, allowing man to be deported to Syria appeared first on Amnesty International.

Eswatini: Repatriation of Jamaican national must be followed by justice for all US deportees

Eswatini’s authorities must disclose why Orville Etoria was held in detention without charge for more than two months, Amnesty International said today following his arrival in Jamaica.

Orville Etoria was one of five men who were deported from the United States to Eswatini on 16 July and held in arbitrary detention. A statement released by the Government of Eswatini on Sunday announcing Etoria’s repatriation failed to address the serious human rights violations he faced together with the four other men, who remain arbitrarily detained and without charge in Eswatini.

“The safe arrival of Mr Etoria to Jamaica, cannot be an excuse for silence about what happened to him while he was held without charge and without full and confidential access to lawyers,” said Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa.

“Eswatini authorities must account for the legal basis of his detention, ensure access to justice and effective remedies, and immediately clarify the status and whereabouts of the four other men transferred in July.”

Eswatini officials previously indicated that the five men — from Jamaica, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and Yemen — deported by the United States would be repatriated to their countries of nationality.

The authorities must now disclose the whereabouts and legal status of the remaining four men and guarantee their human rights, in line with Eswatini’s international human rights obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to which Eswatini is a state party.

Any facilitation of return by international organizations must meet Assisted Voluntary Return (AVR) standards. This requires documented, informed, and freely given consent, obtained while the person has confidential access to qualified legal counsel and interpreters, free of any coercion or inducement tied to release from detention, with robust data protection and no adverse consequences for declining AVR. AVR cannot be used to legitimize arbitrary detention.

“Return is only acceptable when it is truly voluntary and rights-compliant,” said Tigere Chagutah. “Authorities must guarantee unmonitored family contact and confidential access to lawyers, appropriate medical care, and protection from refoulement for anyone still detained.”

Background

Lawyers representing the five men reported obstacles to confidential legal access and delays to court proceedings. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has urged transparency and protection in any migration accords between African Union member states and the United States.

For more details on their case, see here.

The post Eswatini: Repatriation of Jamaican national must be followed by justice for all US deportees appeared first on Amnesty International.

Slovakia: Parliament must reject draconian constitutional amendments

Ahead of the vote in the Slovak parliament on 25 September on amendments to the constitution that would recognize only two genders (male and female), restrict comprehensive sexuality education and limit adoption to only married heterosexual couples, Rado Sloboda, Director of Amnesty International Slovakia said: 

“If adopted, the proposed constitutional changes would deal a devastating blow to gender equality, human rights and the rule of law in Slovakia. Cloaked in the language of ‘national identity’, these amendments would strip away rights to private and family life, education and healthcare from children, women and LGBTI people. 

If adopted, the proposed constitutional changes would deal a devastating blow to gender equality, human rights and the rule of law in Slovakia

“While the proposed changes specifically target the rights of LGBTI persons and reproductive rights, they also threaten the principle of primacy of EU and international law and undermine the application of international court rulings concerning a wide range of human rights issues. 

“These draconian measures clearly breach EU law and international human rights treaties. On 25 September parliamentarians must take a stand for fairness, equality and dignity for everyone: reject these amendments and protect people’s human rights.”  

Background 

The current Slovak legislation only recognizes two sexes. The proposed constitutional changes would further entrench this, making any future progressive reforms – including recognition of gender diverse, intersex and non-binary people – more complicated, if not impossible. It could also further restrict legal gender recognition rights of transgender people. 

Another proposed amendment would require parental approval on comprehensive sexuality education in schools. This would restrict children’s access to information necessary for sexual violence prevention, education about consent, and sexual and reproductive health, for example.  

Amnesty International has long warned that these amendments are part of a wider attempt by authorities to roll back rights in Slovakia. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, multiple UN Special Rapporteurs in the fields of education, health and privacy as well as the EU institutions have also expressed their concern regarding the amendments and have recommended withdrawal or rejection of the proposed changes.  

On 1 Septemberthe UN Special Procedures mandate holders published a legal review underlined that the changes are incompatible for international human rights standards and called on MPs to reject the draft law. 

For more information see here

The post Slovakia: Parliament must reject draconian constitutional amendments appeared first on Amnesty International.

‘I have no reason to stay silent’ – relative of ‘war on drugs’ victim tells of fight for justice

On 11 March 2025, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested on an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for the crime against humanity of murder.

A few days later, Maria (not her real name) marked the eighth anniversary of her husband’s death. He was one of the tens of thousands of people, mostly from poor and marginalized communities, killed during the Duterte government’s “war on drugs”.

Here, Maria speaks about her continued fight for truth, justice and accountability alongside the families of other victims.

My husband was gunned down in 2017 at a crowded terminal in Caloocan City. He was a jeepney* driver. When I last saw him alive, he was waiting for the jeepney that he was using alternately with another driver. That night, he didn’t come home. 

The next morning, I told my children that I needed to look for their father. Later that day, I learned from my husband’s parents that he was killed by two men “riding in tandem”*.

In an instant I lost my husband. The next time I saw him, he was in the morgue. It seemed so simple. Someone waited for him and shot him dead. That’s it.

No sympathy for tokhang victims

There were witnesses, but no one wanted to testify. No one wanted to talk to me. It seemed like they’d kill anyone just for the sake of killing.

I wanted to file a case but all I could think of was that I needed to find work. How could I feed our children or send them to school? How could I pay our rent and other bills? How could we survive?

I needed witnesses, but friends and relatives could not even visit my husband’s wake for fear of being identified and targeted next. That was how things were back then: no one wanted to sympathize with the family of a tokhang* victim.

Children bullied over father’s death

Life has been difficult ever since. My husband was our breadwinner. I didn’t know where to begin, what to do. Even while we were holding my husband’s wake, I had to start working.

My children were bullied at school. It felt so heavy when they would come to me crying and saying, “Mama, other kids told me that Papa was killed because he was a drug addict. Is that true?” How could I answer that?

When filling out school forms and indicating that their father is dead, their teachers would ask, what happened? He was killed; he didn’t die of an illness. Society looks at death differently based on how a person dies. It’s always viewed negatively when you say someone died because they were shot dead, because they were tokhang victims.

Support from church members and lawyers

I became a community organizer of our group Rise Up for Life and for Rights, composed of families of victims of the “war on drugs” supported by church members and lawyers from the NUPL (National Union of People’s Lawyers). Initially, I only wanted to find something else to do other than work, so I started joining their check-in sessions.

When we all felt at ease with each other, we began sharing our stories. There was trust and comfort, knowing that others would listen to your story of how you lost your husband, or your father, or your child.

Sometimes, I’d bring my children to these sessions so they would understand why I had to be away often. I wanted to show them how proud I am of being part of this group. I wanted them to see how I regained my self-confidence.

‘I have no reason to stop’

It was also my personal interest to prove that my husband did nothing wrong, that he didn’t use or sell drugs. I wanted to clear his name.

Eventually, I began asking: why did they have to kill him and many others? What about the families left behind? If they were indeed bad people who violated the law, why did they have to be killed?

My husband was just 34 years old when he was killed. He had so much hope; he wanted to achieve more. He didn’t even get to see his children grow up. I keep telling myself, I have no reason to stay silent. I have no reason to stop.

Duterte’s arrest: This is because of us

I was at work, cooking at a school canteen, when I heard the news. I jumped for joy. I was screaming in the kitchen, “Yes, yes, yes!”. When I got home, I asked my children, did you hear the good news? I told them to open their social media and the TV. Duterte was arrested. I told my children, “See, we can do it if we work together.”

The other families and I were calling each other, and we agreed to come together for a solidarity action. I was so excited to see them. I know he was just arrested, but it felt like we won already.

Friends called to congratulate me on Duterte’s arrest, and I told them this is because of us, because of me. Yes, I claimed credit for it. Because it had been so difficult for us to fight back, to stage protests and speak up in the streets, even when we also have our children and families to take care of. 

Requests for interviews started pouring in. At one point, I could no longer say I was happy. I felt drained, especially as Duterte’s arrest made me recall the difficulties I went through before.

I pitied myself, that this is all a gamble. I wanted to say, I want to be a normal person. This isn’t me. I should not be in the streets protesting, nor on the TV granting interviews. I don’t want any of this.

But this is what my circumstances demanded of me. I would often think of the other families. It gave me strength, knowing what we could achieve if we stood together.

Continuing lack of justice and accountability

I want the ICC and the world to know that we are not just numbers; we are real people, real families. We are not just past victims; we continue to be victimized by a lack of truth, justice and accountability. We may be under a new administration now, but we still feel unsafe.

I want Duterte and all others who are responsible to be held accountable. When that happens, we can be proud of ourselves that we were able to do this against the odds. We don’t want to continue living in fear.

We want protection for ourselves and for our families from any reprisal for speaking up. I hope the ICC sides with the truth. Even as we are unable to obtain justice here in our own country, we are grateful for anyone who can give us some hope. 

Strength and opportunity to fight back

I hope our country’s policies will really serve to protect us and not target and kill us like the policy on the “war on drugs”. I hope this does not happen again, because what if there were no more people like me, like us, who would collectively work for justice?

At the moment, I feel we have the opportunity and strength to fight back. I will use this to keep telling not just my story but the stories of countless other victims still searching for justice.


The text was translated from Filipino and has been edited for brevity and clarity.

*A jeep or jeepney is a public utility vehicle that is the primary mode of transportation in the Philippines.

*Across the Philippines particularly during the height of the “war on drugs”, masked individuals arrive on motorcycles in groups of two and gun down their targets who allegedly use or sell drugs—a practice known commonly as “riding in tandem.”

*The notorious police operation “Oplan Tokhang” involved door-to-door visits by the police to demand that people suspected of using or selling drugs ‘voluntarily’ surrender to the authorities, stop their drug activities and enter drug rehabilitation and treatment programmes that are in reality a form of arbitrary detention. In practice, however, many faced punitive action and even death.

Stand in solidarity

Support maria’s fight for justice and accountability

The post ‘I have no reason to stay silent’ – relative of ‘war on drugs’ victim tells of fight for justice appeared first on Amnesty International.

Burkina Faso/Mali/Niger: Announcements of ICC withdrawal a serious backwards step in fight against impunity in the Sahel region and worldwide

Reacting to the news that Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have announced their withdrawal from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Marceau Sivieude, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for West and Central Africa, said:

“The announcements by Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger that they will withdraw from the ICC are an affront to victims and survivors of the most serious crimes and to all people fighting against impunity in these countries and worldwide.

“Withdrawing from the Rome Statute would not have any impact on the ongoing ICC investigation in Mali, or on the state’s continuing obligations towards the Court. However, once any withdrawal takes effect, it would significantly harm the prospect of victims and survivors of future war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide from these Sahel countries from being able to pursue justice at the ICC if they cannot find justice at home.

“All ICC member states must urgently call on Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger to urgently reconsider their stated decisions to withdraw from the Rome Statute.”

Marceau Sivieude, Amnesty International’s
Regional Director for West and Central Africa

“If these three countries have genuine concerns about selectivity of the ICC, these should be raised as ICC member states through dialogue and constructive engagement within the Assembly of States Parties. Withdrawals will not serve to address concerns, they will only remove the prospect of justice for victims and the protections they are provided by the Rome Statute.

“All ICC member states must urgently call on Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger to urgently reconsider their stated decisions to withdraw from the Rome Statute.”

Background

The process and effect of withdrawal from the Rome Statute is provided in Article 127 of the Rome Statute. Withdrawal takes effect one year after notification is received by the UN treaty office in New York. Currently, 125 States are parties to the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court.

Mali’s withdrawal will not affect the ICC’s ongoing investigation into the situation in Mali, nor Mali’s obligations to the Court, including to cooperate with that investigation, which covers all crimes committed on the territory of Mali since January 2012 to the date that its withdrawal would take effect. There are currently no public ICC investigations in Niger or Burkina Faso.

The post Burkina Faso/Mali/Niger: Announcements of ICC withdrawal a serious backwards step in fight against impunity in the Sahel region and worldwide appeared first on Amnesty International.