Schlagwort: Amnesty International

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

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

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

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

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

Background:

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

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

By Joshua Franco is a Senior Research Advisor at Amnesty Tech  

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

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

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

GDPR – what’s at stake? 

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

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

Implications on AI Act 

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

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

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

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

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

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

What it would mean for DSA and DMA 

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

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

Rationale for stronger regulation 

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

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

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

First published in Tech.Policy Press. 

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

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

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

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

Deadly violence amid climate change

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

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

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

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

Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International

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

“We laid the bodies on the road in protest”

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

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

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

© Amaury Hauchard/AFP via Getty Images

Structural responses urgently needed

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

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

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

Background

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

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

Responding to the European Commission’s so-called “digital omnibus” proposals, which will dismantle the bloc’s protections against digital threats, Damini Satija, Programme Director at Amnesty Tech, said: 

“The EU’s ongoing deregulatory push will lead to a weakening of people’s rights and expose them to digital oppression. It will open the door to unlawful surveillance, discriminatory profiling in welfare and policing, strip people of their right to have control of their personal data and object to automated decisions, and the spread of harmful content online. It will also make it harder to detect and challenge decisions made by automated systems on who gets social benefits, jobs, and educational opportunities, while further exacerbating climate harms fuelled by policies that prioritize the tech industry. 

“Years of hard work by civil society, trade unions, and human rights defenders has gone into ensuring that the EU’s digital rulebook protects people against digital threats and unfair AI systems, while safeguarding their data and holding governments and corporations accountable for misusing technologies. These measures are essential for a digitally safe society.  

“Some of these hard-won laws have yet to even come into effect, but the EU is already seeking to shift the balance of power from individual protections to corporate impunity, conceding to the profit-centric motives of tech behemoths who often operate at the cost of our rights.  

Years of hard work by civil society, trade unions, and human rights defenders has gone into ensuring that the EU’s digital rulebook protects people against digital threats and unfair AI systems, while safeguarding their data and holding governments and corporations accountable for misusing technologies. These measures are essential for a digitally safe society.  

Damini Satija, Programme Director, Amnesty Tech

“If the EU truly wants to support the smooth implementation of digital laws, including the AI Act, the GDPR, and other vital protections, it should strengthen existing safeguards and ensure that laws are meaningfully enforced – not dismantle the frameworks that currently hold companies to account and allow progress towards a rights-respecting tech future.” 

Background 

The digital omnibus is part of a wider deregulatory push by the EU, which civil society has raised alarm over.  

The post EU: Digital omnibus proposals will tear apart accountability on digital rights  appeared first on Amnesty International.

*Names changed to protect identities 

Kenyan authorities systematically deployed technology-facilitated violence as part of a coordinated and sustained campaign to suppress Generation Z-led protests between June 2024 and July 2025 against corruption and the introduction of new tax legislation, a new Amnesty International report shows. 

The report, “This fear, everyone is feeling it”: Tech-facilitated violence against young activists in Kenya, shows how government and allied groups are increasingly weaponizing digital platforms to stifle protests as part of broader repressive measures designed to shut down digitally-organized dissent.  

“Our analysis of online activity throughout several waves of protests in 2024 and 2025 and the interviews we’ve conducted with young human rights defenders, clearly demonstrate widespread and coordinated tactics on digital platforms to silence and suppress protests by young activists, including through online threats, intimidating comments, abusive language, smearing, and targeted disinformation,    

Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

“Our research also proves that these campaigns are driven by state-sponsored trolls, individuals and a network of people paid to promote and amplify pro-government messages with the aim of reaching Kenya’s top daily trends on X.”  

Between June and July 2024, Generation Z – young people aged under 28 – led the #RejectFinanceBill protests opposing proposed taxes on essential goods and services. Between June 2024 and July 2025, young people also organized protests on and off-line demanding an end to femicide and corruption.  

Major demonstrations took place across 44 of Kenya’s 47 counties including Nairobi, Mombasa, and Kisumu. Social media played a major role in the organization of protests and amplification of protest voices.  

Kenyan authorities responded with online intimidation, threats, incitement to hatred, and surveillance interfering with rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Online harassment and smear campaigns became core state tools to undermine the credibility and reach of government critics. Some of these tactics facilitated and were later used to justify arrests, enforced disappearances and killings of notable protest organizers.  

Amnesty International estimates that, across both sets of protests, excessive use of force by security agencies resulted in at least 128 deaths, 3,000 arrests and over 83 enforced disappearances. 

Targeting human rights defenders  

Of the 31 human rights defenders (HRD) interviewed, nine reported receiving violent threats via direct and public messages on X, TikTok, Facebook and WhatsApp during the 2024 protests. 

“I had people coming into my inbox and telling me, ‘You will die and leave your kids. We will come and attack you,” said Mariam*, a 27-year-old Mombasa-based HRD who was forcibly disappeared by police for two nights in 2024. 

Another HRD, Joseph, * received a direct message on X reading: “We are coming for you.”  

The research shows coordinated campaigns against young HRDs through state-supported trolling, and the spreading and amplification of hatred towards them.  

“They want to maintain their social media image, and that means anytime you post something about a certain ministry or individual, they always send what we call the 527 bloggers. These are government paid bloggers whose job is to abuse you, to say very dehumanizing, demeaning things,” said Joshua, a student leader who survived enforced disappearance. 

Much of the online violence is delivered through public posts and comments organized to cause harm. X (formerly Twitter) is central to pro-government networks spreading disinformation and smear campaigns. The networks mass-posted identical messages repeatedly to hijack X’s algorithm and maximize visibility of government sponsored messages. 

Hanifa Adan, a prominent Kenyan journalist and HRD of Somali descent was described in social media posts, as a “foreigner,” a “fool” and “a Somali terrorist.”    

“Having strangers say things about you every single day, being targeted every single day, it’s hard. It took away the spark, the joy. It took away who I was,” she told Amnesty International. 

Coordinated online attacks 

In April 2025, suspected state-supported trolls used the #ToxicActivists campaign to target Hanifa Adan after she gave an interview for BBC’s “Blood Parliament” documentary, which investigated the shooting of several protesters on 25 June 2024 and the alleged Kenyan military involvement.  

Organized trolls posted Islamophobic imagery and repeated posts to discredit her and other prominent Kenyan activists as financially driven and corrupt.  

These campaigns also illustrate X’s failure to adequately address organized threatening campaigns, which are against its own policy. 

“The chilling effects of such harassment and incitement to violence goes far beyond their immediate targets. It must be stopped before it silences critical voices, undermines civil liberties and fosters a culture of fear irreconcilable with our constitutional freedoms,  

Irungu Houghton, Amnesty Kenya Executive Director.

Young women who participated in the Gen Z protests and the #EndFemicideKE campaign reported misogynistic comments, body shaming, threats, doxxing and AI-generated pornographic images produced to shame, threaten and silence them.  

“We are being forced to shut up, it’s an attack on our voice, on our bodies,” said Sarah*. 

False and harmful narratives spread against HRDs included claims that survivors of enforced disappearances had staged their own abductions. 

Paid campaigns, disinformation and manipulating the algorithm  

John*, runs paid coordinated campaigns on X for political and commercial clients. He told Amnesty International that he’s part of a network of around 20 people paid between 25,000 to 50,000 KES (approximately USD $190-390) per day to promote and amplify pro-government messages with the aim of reaching Kenya’s top daily trends on X.  

“Most of the things you see trending in Kenya, I’m among the people doing that,   

John*. 

During large protests, his network created counter-campaigns and hashtags in real time to drown out trending protest hashtags. For example, the popular protest hashtag #RutoMustGo was countered with #RutoMustGoOn.  

In response to Amnesty’s findings, Kenya’s Interior Cabinet Secretary, Kipchumba Murkomen, said, “The Government of Kenya does not sanction harassment, or violence against any citizen. All security agencies are required to operate strictly within the constitution, the National Police Service Act, and all applicable laws and any officer implicated in unlawful conduct bears individual responsibility and is subject to investigation and sanction in accordance with the law.” 

However, Amnesty research indicates otherwise. The failure of both state authorities and corporate actors to investigate credible claims of unlawful tech-facilitated surveillance undermines human rights by fostering widespread chilling effect on the right to expression and peaceful assembly. 

HRDs interviewed by Amnesty International believe that state surveillance was supported by Safaricom, one of Kenya’s biggest telecommunications companies, allowing clandestine police units to track activists involved in the protests. Evidence points to many of them being subsequently forcibly disappeared.  

In response to the allegations, Safaricom said it “only shares customer data through lawful means and for lawful purposes. Our client confirms that their systems are not designed to track the live location of any subscriber, and such functionality does not exist within their operational architecture.”  

Amnesty International also approached X, other Kenyan authorities and key individuals named in this report but did not receive a response. 

Amnesty International calls on the Kenyan government to stop tech-facilitated state violence against peaceful protesters and civil society organizations, troll campaigns and smear narratives that vilify critics as “paid activists” or “foreign agents.” 

Kenyan authorities must also launch an investigation into enforced disappearances, unlawful killings and the reports of unlawful surveillance during the “Gen Z protests.” Victims of unlawful use of force and family members of those killed must be adequately compensated.  

The post Kenya: Authorities weaponized social media and digital tools to suppress Gen Z protests  appeared first on Amnesty International.