Kategorie: Humans

Ahead of the trial of prominent lawyer and human rights defender Ahmed Souab starting on 31October in Tunis, Heba Morayef, Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, said: 

“Ahmed Souab is facing unfounded charges that carry heavy prison sentences, including ‘forming a terrorist organization’ and ‘spreading fake news,’ solely for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression and carrying out his professional duties as a human rights lawyer. His arrest and subsequent prosecution are in retaliation for his criticism of the lack of due process and independence of the court regarding the ‘conspiracy case’ in which he was representing three defendants. 

Ahmed Souab should never have been detained in the first place, let alone be prosecuted.

Heba Morayef

“Ahmed Souab should never have been detained in the first place, let alone be prosecuted. His case is a chilling example of the Tunisian authorities’ broader authoritarian practices to target critics, lawyers, and human rights defenders who dare to speak out against persistent violations of judicial independence and the rule of law and executive overreach. Authorities are using bogus “terrorism” charges as a pretext to crackdown on peaceful dissent and severely restrict the right to a fair trial and create a pervasive climate of fear. This travesty of justice must stop.

“The Tunisian authorities must immediately and unconditionally release Ahmed Souab and drop all the baseless charges against him. They must uphold their international human rights obligations and cease the targeting of lawyers for defending their clients or criticizing the judiciary. Authorities must uphold the rule of law including judicial independence and allow lawyers to freely carry out their professional functions without any harassment, intimidation or improper interference.” 

 Background 

Ahmed Souab is a prominent Tunisian lawyer and human rights defender known for his outspoken criticism of violations of fair trial rights and executive interference with judicial independence, particularly under President Kais Saied’s administration. He previously served as a judge at the Administrative Court and has been a vocal critic of the dismantling of the rule of law following President Saied’s July 2021 power grab.  

Souab has represented several high-profile victims of human rights violations, including political opposition and activists in the “conspiracy case,” the highest-profile example of the broader authoritarian practices including crackdown on political opposition and the erosion of judicial independence and the rule of law in Tunisia. On 19 April, a Tunis criminal court sentenced 37 individuals including prominent political opposition figures, lawyers, and human rights defenders, to harsh prison terms ranging between four and 74 years on unfounded “conspiracy” charges.   The defendants have been convicted solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights. Their trial has been riddled with procedural and substantive violations and a blatant disregard of defense rights and was based on unsubstantiated charges. 

Ahmed Souab’s hearing will be held without his physical presence as the court extended its decision to hold terrorism trials remotely citing a vague “imminent danger.”  Souab is refusing to attend his court hearing remotely and insists on being physically present during his trial in order to defend himself. There is no justification to deny detainees their right to be brought physically before the court to challenge the lawfulness of their detention. Denying the detainees this right is also incompatible with the requirements of respect for due process law, as for example, it undermines the ability of the detainees to effectively participate in and follow the proceedings and to be heard without technical impediments. Such a denial is incompatible with the principles of due process guaranteed under both Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Tunisia is a State Party. 

Souab’s arrest on 21 April 2025 came just two days after he spoke at a press conference criticizing the lack of fair trial in the “conspiracy case,” in his capacity as defense lawyer for 3 of the defendants.  Following his arrest, authorities held him in incommunicado for detention 48 hours before his pre-trial detention was ordered. Amnesty International has documented a concerning pattern of the misuse of counter-terrorism laws to crackdown on peaceful dissent and a growing trend of targeting lawyers representing activists and political opposition groups in Tunisia.  

For instance, lawyer Dalila Msaddak faces trial on 25 November 2025 with journalist Borhene Bsaies for comments made on his TV show two years ago defending her clients detained in the notorious “conspiracy case”. In the November 2023 interview, Msaddak said the charges against her clients were unfounded and the case was “fabricated.” Two days later, prosecutors opened an investigation against Msaddak and Bsaies  under Decree-Law 54 accusing them of spreading “false news,” and then referred them to trial.    

Tunisian authorities have the legal obligations including under Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which the country is a state party to ensure the right to a fair trial includes the right to be defended by counsel of one’s choosing.  

Similarly, under Principle 16 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, lawyers “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.”  Principle 20 provides that, “lawyers shall enjoy civil and penal immunity for relevant statements made in good faith in written or oral pleadings or in their professional appearances before a court.” 

The post Tunisia: Authorities must immediately release detained lawyer Ahmed Souab  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Climate change is getting worse and so are the threats it poses to human rights. The right to adequate housing is being violated on a massive scale, as homes, particularly those in informal settlements, are destroyed by the effects of climate change.

For example, South Africa has experienced devastating extreme weather and flooding over the past few years. People living in informal settlements – which are often built in low-lying, flood prone areas – are among the worst affected . These residents already face the challenges of living in poverty and a lack of access to essential services. Now they must confront additional threats to their human rights posed by climate change.

States have human rights obligations, which means they have the duty to upgrade informal settlements to help realize the right to housing. However, in many cases, this duty is not being met. It’s up to us to speak out and hold governments accountable.

What are informal settlements?

Informal settlements are residential areas where people do not have secure tenure over the land or housing they occupy. These homes are not legally recognized, which puts residents at higher risk of forced evictions. They also have limited or no access to essential services and infrastructure, including access to water, sanitation, waste collection, street lighting, electricity, playgrounds, schools, healthcare centres and open green spaces.

Housing in informal settlements is usually inadequate and might not comply with planning and building regulations. Homes are often made of corrugated metal sheets, or lightweight panels made from wood and other recycled materials.

Informal settlements are often situated in hazardous areas, like wetlands, and have poor soil conditions. It can be difficult for emergency vehicles to access these areas because of where they are located and how they are built. Often living in poverty, residents of informal settlements are highly vulnerable to homelessness if their homes are destroyed.

In 2022, 1.1 billion people – almost a quarter of the world’s urban population – were living in informal settlements. This number is expected to triple within 30 years.

Why do people live in informal settlements?

There is not enough affordable formal housing to meet the population’s needs. This means many people must find other places to live which exist outside planning and building regulations. To many, informal settlements are the only affordable means of living close to work opportunities.

Informal settlements lay bare the failure of governments to guarantee adequate and affordable housing. They are a product of poverty and discrimination that exclude people from formal housing. People living in informal settlements are sometimes victims of past and present segregation. Informal settlements are therefore spaces where people facing racial and/or socio-economic discrimination are often concentrated. Informal settlements are also home to migrants, internally displaced people and refugees.

Many informal settlements have been around for decades and provide shelter, opportunity and collective support to people living in poverty in cities. Despite the challenges – their worsening living conditions, neglect from the authorities, discrimination and stigmatization – residents in these neighbourhoods have created spaces that foster strong social bonds and economic activity.

What is it like living in informal settlements?

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing has highlighted that the living conditions in informal settlements are one of the most pervasive and widespread violations of human rights globally.

The living conditions of different informal settlements around the world may vary. Most people living in these areas don’t have adequate access to clean drinking water, plumbing or electricity. There also isn’t adequate waste collection, creating huge sanitation and hygiene problems impacting the right to health.

Some people have to walk long distances to use the toilet or bathe. Many living in informal settlements only have access to communal toilets and bathing facilities, shared by multiple households. These facilities are unclean, lack proper drainage and are often broken.

Informal settlements are overcrowded and unplanned. They often lack tarred roads, making them inaccessible to emergency vehicles.

What is it like for people who face multiple intersecting forms of discrimination?

While all residents are impacted by the lack of adequate housing and essential services, the suffering is borne disproportionately by groups at risk of multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination.

For example, women and girls are particularly affected by a lack of adequate access to sanitation facilities for toilets and bathing. Women have additional physical needs compared to men – for example, related to menstruation – and have a greater need for privacy when using toilets and when bathing. Inadequate and inaccessible toilets and bathrooms, as well as the general lack of effective policing within settlements, makes women even more vulnerable to crime and gender-based violence.

The lack of access to essential services is also particularly difficult for children, older people and people with disabilities, especially those who have limited mobility.

What impact is climate change having on the residents of informal settlements?

Due to poverty and inequality in access to essential services, residents of informal settlements are also disproportionately vulnerable to extreme weather events made worse by climate change.

In rare cases, homes in informal settlements are made of bricks and mortar. But for most people, homes are made of corrugated metal sheets, light-weight wooden panels  or other recycled material, assembled out of necessity, not choice. These materials do not provide sufficient protection from heavy rain, extreme heat or high-speed winds. Living in informal settlements also means having to contend with waterlogging and flooding, due to a lack of proper drainage.

What are the human rights obligations of states to people living in informal settlements?

States have a duty to take concrete steps to ensure that residents of informal settlements can also enjoy the rights to housing, water and sanitation. They have a duty to use the maximum of available resources, both financial and technical, to fulfil these rights.

This includes the duty to:

• Recognize the right to housing and prohibit forced evictions in national laws.
• Provide security of tenure that gives residents legal guarantees to stay in their homes.
• Adopt housing policies and strategies that prioritize a basic level of housing for everyone and set out time-limited goals to progressively improve housing conditions, and ensure the participation of people, particularly disadvantaged groups in the formulation of such a strategy.
• Ensure that there is sufficient housing stock that is affordable to all, including to people in lower-income groups
• Ensure that everyone has safe and adequate access to all essential services including water, sanitation, waste collection, and energy for cooking, lighting and heating
• Set-up effective mechanisms for monitoring all authorities, at national and local levels, to ensure that they act consistently with the state’s international obligations.
• Ensure that people are able to participate in and are consulted over decisions that will affect their lives.
• Provide for effective remedies and reparations to all people, whose right to adequate housing has been violated, including through recourse to the courts where necessary.

What makes informal settlements and underserved areas more vulnerable to flooding?

Informal settlements are often located in environmentally high-risk zones including flood plains and low-lying areas. This is because these are the only areas available for people to set up their homes.

Added to this, informal settlements and other underserved areas do not have infrastructure like embankments that can stop rivers from overflowing, and drainage systems that can channel water away from the area. Failure to regularly collect and dispose waste in informal settlements also sometimes blocks the natural flow of the water leading to flooding and waterlogging.

For these reasons, informal settlements are disproportionately impacted by flooding when rivers and streams overflow but also when there is heavy rain and there is no way for the water to flow away from the area.

How do these floods affect people’s lives?

When floods hit these areas, residents not only lose their homes, but also their livelihoods. Many of them have to sacrifice their income, forfeiting their daily wage work to stay back and salvage their belongings, clean their homes and repair the damage. Missing work means missing out on critical income.

Flooded pathways in settlements can sometimes make it difficult for people to leave their homes. Depending on how severe the floods are, residents may be required to relocate temporarily.

Residents also often lack sufficient savings or other assets. In the absence of robust social protection measures such as unemployment or pension payments, coping with disasters including floods is very difficult for them.

How does the climate crisis make it worse?

Human-induced climate change, caused mainly by the burning of fossil fuels, like coal, oil, and gas, leads to extreme weather events. This includes more frequent and more intense floods, heatwaves, wildfires, cyclones and storms which can devastate lives and livelihoods. While not every flood is the result of climate change, with the continuing climate crisis, floods are only going to get worse and happen more frequently.

For example, World Weather Attribution, a group of researchers and scientists from key institutions around the world quantifying how climate change influences the intensity and likelihood of extreme weather events, found that the 2022 floods in KwaZulu-Natal and eastern South Africa were a result of record-breaking rainfall. They further concluded that, “… the probability of an event such as the rainfall that resulted in this disaster has approximately doubled due to human-induced climate change. The intensity of the current event has increased by 4-8%.”

What can states do to protect people in informal settlements?

States can uphold their human rights commitments by providing the necessary resources and policies to upgrade the infrastructure around informal settlements. These upgrades should do more than just fix or replace existing infrastructure. They should aim to tackle the root causes of the problems faced by those living in informal settlements and be designed to allow the full enjoyment of residents’ human rights.

When possible, this upgrade work should be carried out in a way that doesn’t require residents to leave their homes. Relocation to an area nearby should be considered as a last resort and carried out in full compliance with international human rights safeguards against forced evictions, including genuine consultation and adequate notice.

Upgrading of informal settlements should always be carried out with the active participation of the affected people and should build in strong accountability mechanisms to ensure timely implementation.

What should be included in these upgrades?

A holistic upgrading of an informal settlement should provide residents with security of tenure – legal protections to prevent people from being arbitrarily or forcibly evicted – of the land they live on. It should also include the building and provision of public structures and services such as water pipelines, sanitation systems, electricity connections, street lighting, paved roads and waste collection; and structural improvements to housing so that it is safe and habitable.

Upgrading also includes measures to support access to other essential services such as schools, health centres and, places of work, including by improving transport connections; and constructing or improving communal facilities such as playgrounds and community centres.

With the ongoing climate crisis, it is important that upgrading of informal settlements builds in climate change adaptation measures to protect residents from the impacts of disasters.

These measures must not only address current risks but also ensure future proofing against the likelihood of worsening conditions in the coming years. In the case of flooding, these measures include functioning storm water and other drainage systems, roads, electricity, and improved sanitation. Nature based solutions such as restoration of wetlands and, reducing erosion through planting trees are also important. Adaptation measures must be suitable in the local context and planned and implemented with the involvement of the local community. 

What can we do to make sure that governments fulfil their obligations towards residents of informal settlements?

We should raise our voices and seek accountability from our governments at the local, provincial and national levels for their failure to provide sufficient stock of truly affordable housing.

We should call on governments to commit to upgrading informal settlements in a manner that complies with human rights standards, including through budgetary and policy commitments.

We should call on all states in a position to do so to complement existing climate justice initiatives, including massively scaled up financial and other support for adaptation and mitigation, just transition and loss and damage, so that people, including those living in informal settlements are able to enjoy their human rights. Wealthier states that have contributed the most historically to carbon emissions have a particular responsibility to assist others to adapt and address loss and damage.

The post How do we protect the right to housing amid the growing threat of climate change? appeared first on Amnesty International.

Visa systems in Europe’s Schengen area function like an obstacle course for human rights defenders from different parts of the world, preventing many from participating in key decision-making forums. These obstacles contradict the rights and values that Schengen states claim to uphold, Amnesty International said in a new report today. 

Closing the door? How visa policies in Europe’s Schengen area fail human rights defenders, documents the many obstacles that activists from 104 visa-restricted countries –mainly in Africa, Asia and the Middle East– face when trying to access short-term visas to travel to the area for advocacy, networking, or respite from the risks they face because of their work.  

These human rights defenders (HRDs) are mostly racialized as Black, Asian and/or Muslim, and the negative impact on their mobility amounts to indirect discrimination, according to the organization’s analysis. 

“The inability to access Schengen visas means that the voices and testimonies of human rights defenders from countries in the Global South are excluded from forums where decisions that deeply affect their lives are made,” Erika Guevara Rosas, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns at Amnesty International.   

“While Schengen states are entitled to decide who enters their territory, the impact of their visa systems on human rights defenders from 104 countries represents a clear disconnect between what they have committed to, through their guidelines and other commitments to protect human rights defenders, and what they actually do.” 

The inability to access Schengen visas means that the voices and testimonies of human rights defenders from countries in the Global South are excluded from forums where decisions that deeply affect their lives are made

Erika Guevara Rosas, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns at Amnesty International.   

“Ensuring that HRDs have access to short-stay Schengen visas in a reliable, predictable, transparent, and timely manner is indispensable to realize their right to defend rights without discrimination.” 

Barriers to securing short-term visas 

The EU Visa Code, the legislative instrument governing short-term Schengen visas, allows for visa applications that do not meet all requirements to still be accepted on a case-by-case basis. However, those who receive and process visa applications, including external service providers, often seem unaware of the existence of this flexibility, resulting in many barriers, including applications being tossed out before they even make it to the decision-making stage. 

One of the first barriers to obtaining a Schengen visa is simply identifying where to submit a visa application. Many Schengen states do not have diplomatic representations or agreements with other countries in every visa-restricted country. This means human rights defenders may be required to travel to another country to file the application, which can be prohibitively expensive or pose a security risk. 

The time it takes to secure an appointment, wait for a decision, and the validity length of visas, are other hurdles in the obstacle course that defenders must go through to travel to countries in the Schengen area. In some cases, visas are issued too late or for a period so short that it does not account for the time it takes to travel to and from a location, or for any potential flight delays. 

Ensuring that HRDs have access to short-stay Schengen visas in a reliable, predictable, transparent, and timely manner is indispensable to realize their right to defend rights without discrimination.

Erika Guevara-Rosas

Visa applicants are often required to submit a long list of supporting documents, usually including proof of financial means, such as employment status, pay cheques or proof of property ownership. This is particularly difficult for activists, especially those most marginalized and discriminated against.  

A woman human rights defender from the Dalit community in Nepal told Amnesty International: “They ask for bank statements for those who want to visit a Schengen state. Imagine what this means for people who live in a situation where they can’t even earn a daily livelihood. Some people who want to advocate at the international level might not have this because they are human rights defenders, and most of the advocacy they do is on a voluntary basis.”  

These obstacles result in indirect discrimination for human rights defenders as Schengen visa policies impact disproportionately on racialized applicants. Although visa rules are apparently race-neutral, as they do not explicitly mention race or ethnicity as grounds for different treatment, there is a strong correlation between visa-restricted countries and populations racialized as Black, Asian, and/or Muslim. 

Existing flexibility and steps forward 

In June 2024, the European Commission published a revised version of the EU Visa Handbook –a set of guidelines to explain how to apply the EU Visa Code– which includes practical examples of how visa applications by human rights defenders can be facilitated.  

Amnesty International welcomes this development and calls on countries in the Schengen area to ensure that the revised EU Visa Code Handbook is well disseminated and fully implemented, ensuring that visa officers worldwide, including external service providers are fully trained in how to facilitate the travel of human rights defenders.  

The organization also calls on countries in the Schengen area to collect disaggregated data on race and ethnicity to end discrimination in the visa system as well as the development and implementation of a facilitated visa procedure for human rights defenders, including fast-tracking of applications. In addition, Schengen countries should issue more regularly long-term, multiple-entry visas as key protection tools, to allow agency to travel when the need arises without having to go through the same bureaucratical hurdles every time. 

The Schengen area is comprised of 29 countries, most of which are EU member states, and non-EU members, such as Switzerland and Norway. All Schengen countries are bound by the EU Visa Code for the issuance of short-term Schengen visas. 

Amnesty International spoke with 42 international organizations, based both within the Schengen area and in visa restricted countries, who have facilitated the travel of hundreds of HRDs over the years. The organization also gathered testimonies from 32 human rights defenders, with direct experience of visa processes.  

The post Europe: Human rights defenders excluded by discriminatory Schengen visa system  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Reacting to a vote by the French Senate to introduce a consent-based definition of rape in the penal code, Lola Schulmann, Gender Justice Advocacy Officer at Amnesty International France, said: 

“The adoption of this law is a historic step forward. It is a long-awaited victory for victims of rape and the culmination of years of tireless campaigning by activists, feminist organizations and survivors of sexual violence. 

“Amending the penal code will have a broad educational impact, which is essential for establishing a culture of consent in our society and in the training of those involved in the legal system. 

This is a long-awaited victory for victims of rape and the culmination of years of tireless campaigning by activists and survivors of sexual violence

“Taking this final step towards amending the outdated law and recognizing that non-consensual sex is rape, will help to prevent and combat sexual violence and improve access to justice for victims of sexual violence. 

“The adoption of the law will be crucial to change attitudes about rape but it is not a silver bullet. A true paradigm shift will require substantial financial resources and a truly intersectional perspective in its implementation to put an end to impunity for gender-based and sexual violence.”

Background 

The bill, adopted by the Senate today, was voted at the National Assembly on 23 October. 

Sixteen European Union member states have already introduced consent-based definitions of rape in their legislation: Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden. Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and the UK also have similar definitions of rape in their legislation in line with international human rights law, including the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, also known as “the Istanbul Convention”. 

The post France: ‘Historic victory’ as French law adopts consent-based definition of rape  appeared first on Amnesty International.

An Amnesty International delegation will join abortion providers and defenders from across the globe at two gatherings in Bogotá, Colombia, to review progress on expanding access to safe abortions and to discuss new strategies to counter rising threats to human rights.  

The delegation will take part in a number of panels at the Latin American Consortium Against Unsafe Abortion (CLACAI) (30 Oct – 1 Nov), and the International Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) (4-6 Nov).  

 “While many advances have been made towards ensuring life-saving abortion services are available and accessible, anti-abortion narratives and legislation are gaining ground around the world, posing new threats,” said Fernanda Doz Costa, Director of the Gender Justice, Racial Justice, Migrants and Refugees Programme at Amnesty International, who will take part in a number of panels. 

“Despite all the risks, brave activists and health professionals continue to work to protect the hard-earned right to access the essential healthcare that so many people’s lives depend on. These gatherings are a clear signal that the movement to protect gender equality is standing strong in the face of many challenges, and it is a source of inspiration.” 

These gatherings are a clear signal that the movement to protect gender equality is standing strong in the face of many challenges, and it is a source of inspiration.

Fernanda Doz Costa, Director of the Gender Justice, Racial Justice, Migrants and Refugees Programme at Amnesty International

Criminalization of abortion is the biggest contributing factor to the estimated 35 million unsafe abortions that occur every year. It means healthcare staff are constantly caught between their ethical and professional duty to provide the best available care and being criminally liable if they do not follow harmful laws. 

A report by Amnesty International found that, despite many advances, abortion providers and defenders are facing an increasing wave of attacks. In Bogotá, the organization and its partners will also continue promoting the Key Principles and actions to safeguard abortion care providers as human rights defenders and advocate for new narratives to advance reproductive justice through the new campaign “Latido Común.”  

The post Global: Amnesty delegation meets abortion defenders as backlash against human rights intensifies appeared first on Amnesty International.