Schlagwort: Amnesty International

Chinese authorities must ensure that Yu Wensheng is allowed to reunite with his family in Beijing without restrictions, Amnesty International said ahead of the human rights lawyer’s expected release from prison following a baseless “subversion” conviction.

Human rights lawyer Yu Wensheng is due to be released on 13 April after completing a three-year sentence for “inciting subversion of state power”. He was arrested on 13 April 2023, alongside his wife Xu Yan, while on their way to meet European Union officials in Beijing.

“If and when Yu Wensheng walks out of prison next week, his freedom cannot be partial. He must be allowed to return home, reunite with his family and resume his life and his work without surveillance, intimidation or other restrictions on his rights,” Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director Sarah Brooks said.

In research released last year, focused on the application by Chinese courts of national security provisions to target human rights defenders, Amnesty International found that in 38 of the 68 cases reviewed – including Yu’s – the defendant had been sentenced to “deprivation of political rights” following the end of their prison sentence. This so-called “supplemental” sentence violates international standards; in practice, it is used to justify ongoing harassment of activists to ensure they do not continue human rights work.

“Yu Wensheng was punished for defending people from alleged abuses of power and advocating for a fairer, more accountable system. He should never have been jailed in the first place, and his persecution must end the moment he is released.”

Yu Wensheng previously served four years in prison between 2018 and 2022. Xu has said that during that time, she and her son faced surveillance and harassment by the authorities. She has reported that these activities continued during the current imprisonment, resulting in serious mental health impacts on their son, including since her release in January 2025.

“The suffering inflicted on Yu Wensheng’s family is a reminder of how China’s repression extends far beyond those it imprisons. The past impacts of this repression can never be undone, but the harm being done now can be stopped.”

Yu Wensheng and Xu Yan are prominent advocates for rule of law and human rights in China and have faced government harassment for years. Yu developed a profile as one of the best known and most vocal critics of human rights in the country, based on his experience seeking to defend victims of injustice and human rights violations.

“Yu Wensheng’s imprisonment was a clear attempt to send a warning to others in China who dare to defend human rights. Yet despite the government’s heavy-handed tactics, human rights defenders have refused to be silenced,” Sarah Brooks said.

Amnesty International, alongside 24 NGOs, is calling on the Chinese authorities to ensure that Yu Wensheng is released without delay after serving his sentence, reunited with his family in Beijing, and able to freely exercise his human rights.

Read our joint statement.

The post China: Human rights lawyer jailed over planned EU meeting must be truly free after release appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the United States President Donald Trump’s statement about Iran on Truth Social on 7 April 2026, warning that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again”, Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International said:

“President Trump’s very act of making such apocalyptic threats, including his warning of ending ‘a whole civilization’, reveals a staggering level of cruelty and disregard for human life. It becomes all the more terrifying when coupled with his explicit threats to directly attack civilian infrastructure by bringing about the ‘complete demolition’ of Iran’s power plants and bridges.

“International humanitarian law strictly prohibits direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects. The US President’s threat of extermination and irreparable destruction brazenly shreds core rules of international humanitarian law, with potentially catastrophic consequences for over 90 million people. It may constitute a threat to commit genocide, a crime defined by the Genocide Convention and by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as committing one or more defined acts ’with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.’

The US President’s threat of extermination and irreparable destruction brazenly shreds core rules of international humanitarian law, with potentially catastrophic consequences for over 90 million people.

“The stakes could not be higher. The international community, including the UN Security Council, regional bodies and all states must urgently intervene to avert an impending catastrophe and unequivocally affirm that inciting, ordering or committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide entail individual criminal responsibility under international law.  

“President Trump’s threats, coupled with escalating USA and Israeli attacks destroying civilian infrastructure, are terrorizing millions of people in Iran and their distressed relatives abroad as tens of millions of lives hang in the balance. We call for immediate action to stop unlawful attacks that would plunge an entire country into darkness and deprive millions of their fundamental human rights to life, water, food, healthcare, and an adequate standard of living.

“In recent days, US and Israeli forces have attacked civilian infrastructure, including power plants, bridges, universities, steel factories and petrochemical facilities, killing and injuring civilians, condemning the population to years, if not decades, of deepened economic hardship, inflicting serious harm on civilian health and the environment, and leaving long‑lasting damage to civilians’ lives and livelihoods.

“Intentionally attacking civilian infrastructure constitute war crimes under international law. Even in the limited cases that civilian infrastructure qualify as military targets, a party still cannot attack them if this may cause disproportionate harm to civilians. Power plants, water systems and energy infrastructure are indispensable to civilian life, underpinning access to clean water, medical care, hospital electricity, food supply chains, and basic livelihoods. Attacking them would be disproportionate and thus unlawful under international humanitarian law and could amount to a war crime.”

Background

In recent days, President Trump has repeatedly issued escalating threats against Iran’s energy and transport infrastructure, warning that unless the Iranian authorities reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the United States would carry out the “complete demolition” of the country’s power plants and bridges. He also threatened to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Age”.

On 5 April, President Trump warned that Iran could be “taken out in one night” and set a deadline of 8pm Eastern Time on 7 April for Iranian authorities to comply. He further vowed that every power plant and bridge in the country would be left “burning, exploding, and never to be used again”.

On 7 April, the Israeli military issued an overly broad warning to civilians in Iran to avoid trains and railway lines nationwide, stating that being near such infrastructure would “endanger your life”.

During the same period, USA and Israeli strikes across Iran struck bridges, petrochemical facilities and steel factories, killing and injuring civilians and heightening fears of widespread, unlawful attacks on essential civilian infrastructure.

The post Iran: President Trump’s apocalyptic threats of large-scale civilian devastation demand urgent global action to prevent atrocity crimes appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the sentencing of nine police officers to death by the First Additional District and Sessions Court in Madurai for the 2020 custodial torture and killing of P. Jayaraj and P. Bennix, Aakar Patel, Amnesty International India’s Chair of Board, said: 

“The court verdict marks a rare moment of accountability in India’s long struggle against police torture. The verdict acknowledges the brutality of a crime that shocked the nation. But this death penalty sentence is not justice – it is a deflection from the deeper reforms urgently required to ensure police oversight and accountability. Punishing a human rights violation with another does not end violence; it just perpetuates it.  

“What is needed is structural reform. India must ratify the UN Convention against Torture, a long-pending step that would legally bind the country to international law and strengthen domestic accountability mechanisms. While ratification alone will not end torture, it is a critical part of a broader solution that should include a standalone anti-torture law, independent investigations, and strict enforcement of existing safeguards. India must also facilitate the visit of UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, whose requests have gone unanswered since 1999.

Punishing a human rights violation with another does not end violence; it just perpetuates it

Aakar Patel, Amnesty International India’s Chair of Board

“The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. It neither deters torture nor delivers systemic change. Justice for Jayaraj, Bennix and thousands of others lies in transforming the institutions that enabled their deaths and ensuring it will never happen again.” 

Background 

In addition to the death sentences, the court ordered the police officers to jointly pay ₹1.40 crore (USD 150,500) in compensation to the deceased’s family. 

Jayaraj and his son Bennix died days after being taken into custody by the Sathankulam police in Tamil Nadu state in June 2020, allegedly for violating COVID-19 restrictions. They were subjected to torture including sexual violence in custody. Their deaths exposed systemic failures: routine torture, weak oversight, and a culture of impunity that persists despite existing legal safeguards. 

According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, between 1999 and 2023, over 2,200 people died in police custody in India. However, convictions remain exceptionally rare, with no convictions recorded in custodial death cases between 2018 and 2023.  

India has established legal and institutional safeguards to ensure police accountability for torture in custody. The Criminal Procedure Code requires medical examination, production before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest and judicial inquiries into custodial deaths. The National Human Rights Commission has investigative authority. Yet these safeguards are routinely ignored or weakly implemented. 

Regardless of India’s non-ratification of UNCAT, prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is a norm of customary international law that applies to all people in all circumstances.  

For more information on Amnesty International’s position on the death penalty, see here. 

The post India: Death penalty for nine police officers will not end custodial torture in India  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the news that parliamentarians loyal to former Senior General Min Aung Hlaing voted him in as the next president of Myanmar on 3 April, Amnesty International Myanmar Researcher Joe Freeman said:

“If Min Aung Hlaing thinks that an official civilian title will shield him from prosecution for the many grave violations of international law that he is accused of overseeing as head of the military, that is not how international justice works. He may exchange his military fatigues for civilian attire, but this changes nothing with respect to his suspected responsibility for serious crimes under international law in Myanmar.

“For the many Myanmar people who have been victims of Min Aung Hlaing’s violently unfettered military in the aftermath of the 2021 coup and beforehand, seeing their oppressor formally elevated instead of prosecuted will be deeply painful. They may also fear that this will entrench impunity across the country.

“No individual should have immunity from prosecution for crimes under international law, no matter their position. There is an existing arrest warrant request for Min Aung Hlaing at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Should that be granted, ICC member states have a duty to enforce it if he travels to their territory, and the whole international community should ensure he is denied safe haven and immediately arrested if he leaves Myanmar, rather than use this political development as an excuse to ignore their international legal obligations.

“Until Min Aung Hlaing, his alleged co-perpetrators in the military and others are prosecuted fairly in independent courts for the crimes they are accused of being responsible for, Myanmar’s cycle of impunity will continue, and a Myanmar where human rights are protected, promoted and fulfilled will recede ever further into the distance.

“We also urge the ICC to proceed with arrest warrants for Min Aung Hlaing and other Myanmar junta officials under the ICC’s investigation, and for the UN Security Council to refer the whole situation in Myanmar to the ICC.”

Background

On 3 April, Min Aung Hlaing, the former head of Myanmar’s Armed Forces, and the leader of the February 2021 coup that deposed Myanmar’s elected government, was voted in as president by a loyalist-stacked parliament.

He assumed the presidency following an election imposed by the junta, dismissed by observers as fraudulent and conducted in December and January amidst the ongoing conflict and a repressive environment rife with human rights abuses.

Min Aung Hlaing led the 2021 coup, in which military authorities jailed the previous president Win Myint and de facto civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi, as well as several other senior officials, many of whom remain imprisoned more than five years later. In the coup’s aftermath, he was the head of the junta that carried out violence against civilians nationwide, including mass arbitrary arrests, raids, violent crackdowns on protests, and unlawful air strikes that altogether have killed more than 7,000 civilians.

Min Aung Hlaing was also one of 13 individuals named in the June 2018 Amnesty International report “We Will Destroy Everything”. The report gathered extensive, credible evidence that these individuals bore direct or command responsibility for crimes against humanity in a campaign against the Rohingya minority in Rakhine State following attacks by Rohingya militants in August 2017.

In November 2024, ICC prosecutors sought an arrest warrant for Min Aung Hlaing and other unnamed officials for the crimes against humanity of deportation and persecution against the Rohingya in Myanmar and Bangladesh during their expulsion from Rakhine State into Bangladesh in 2017.

However, the application is pending since then and no arrest warrants for any Myanmar junta official under the ICC’s investigation have been made public. Separately, provisional measures have been issued by the International Court of Justice in the Rohingya genocide case against Myanmar brought by The Gambia, with hearings on the merits of the case having concluded in January.

The post Myanmar: Presidency must not shield Min Aung Hlaing from being held accountable appeared first on Amnesty International.

As humanitarian and human rights organisations that have worked for years in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, we are appalled by the Israeli Knesset’s decision to approve a bill that makes death penalty effectively mandatory in the West Bank and which will de facto apply exclusively to Palestinians.

On 30 March, the Knesset approved a bill, introduced by the party of Minister of National Security Ben-Gvir, expanding the use of the death penalty in both military and civilian courts. Although Israeli law has long provided for the death penalty for cases of genocide and wartime espionage, Israel has not carried out executions nor imposed death sentences since 1962. This new legislation not only marks a significant regression: it also does so by imposing capital punishment on de facto ethnic or national grounds and by diluting basic legal safeguards.

In the West Bank – excluding East Jerusalem – the law imposes the death penalty as the default sentence for those convicted of intentional killings classified as acts of terrorism under Israeli legislation, allowing life imprisonment – and life imprisonment only – in “special circumstances” that are not specified in law. Military courts may impose capital punishment by a simple majority, even without a prosecutorial request. Sentences cannot be commuted or pardoned and must be carried out within 90 days. Notably, Israeli settlers in the West Bank are explicitly excluded from the scope of this provision.

Within Israel, civilian courts may impose the death penalty or life imprisonment for intentional killings, if they are committed with the aim of “negating the existence of the State of Israel.” 

Therefore, while the law does not explicitly reference ethnicity or nationality, it is effectively designed to target Palestinians exclusively. It also introduces an exceptional execution regime by hanging, characterised by secrecy, and limited access to legal counsel and external oversight.

The European Union has consistently held that capital punishment is cruel, inhuman, and incompatible with human dignity under all circumstances. But even beyond this principled stance, the new Israeli law breaches basic safeguards recognised by the international community to protect the rights of those facing the death penalty. Its discriminatory nature and lack of due process guarantee, violate the right to life and protections enshrined in international humanitarian and human rights law, such as the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Hague Regulations, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture.

Diplomatic engagement by the EU and its Member States urging Israel to reverse course has so far proven ineffective. This appalling development occurs amid an ongoing manmade humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, which a UN Commission of Inquiry, multiple Palestinian, Israeli and international organizations, and independent experts have characterised as constituting genocide, and against the backdrop of an accelerating de facto annexation of the West Bank, as acknowledged by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024. The adoption of the death penalty law is thus part of a pattern of discriminatory policies and practices against Palestinians, which in the same Advisory Opinion the International Court of Justice has found to violate Article 3 CERD, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid.

In furtherance of these policies, Israel has already crossed established EU red lines: the advancement of settlement construction in the E1 area, which breaks the territorial contiguity of the West Bank, with the intent to prevent a future Palestinian state; the ban on UNRWA and attacks on its facilities, including schools and clinics built and run with EU contributions; the expulsion of international NGOs through restrictive registration procedures; forced evictions of Palestinian residents in East Jerusalem; forced displacement of tens of thousands of Palestinians and widespread demolitions of Palestinian homes and infrastructure in the West Bank, including EU-funded projects; persistent impunity for abuses by Israeli security forces and state-backed settler violence; reports of widespread and systemic torture and mistreatment of Palestinian prisoners; restrictions on religious freedoms; attacks on journalists; and denial of access to EU officials.

As also recalled by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kallas in her statement of 31 March, the EU-Israel Association Agreement establishes respect for democratic principles as an essential element of EU-Israel relations. A review conducted by the EU in June 2025 based on Article 2 of the Agreement found Israel in breach of its human rights obligations for serious abuses against Palestinians and violations of the laws of war, both in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

Nine months on, the time for action is long overdue. The European Union must uphold its stated principles and legal obligations by finally suspending, as a minimum immediate measure, the trade component of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and adopting other measures, as proposed by President von der Leyen in September 2025.

Signatories:

1. 11.11.11
2. ACT Alliance EU
3. Act Church of Sweden 
4. ActionAid International
5. Amnesty International
6. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
7. Bystanders No More
8. Caritas Europa
9. Caritas MONA (Middle East and North Africa)
10. Child Rights International Network (CRIN)
11. Children Not Numbers
12. Christian Aid
13. CIDSE – International Family of Catholic Social Justice Organisations
14. CNCD-11.11.11
15. Cooperazione Internazionale Sud-Sud (CISS)
16. DanChurchAid
17. 80:20 Educating and Acting for a Better World
18. EuroMed Rights
19. Finn Church Aid
20. Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P)
21. Human Rights Watch
22. Insecurity Insight
23. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
24. Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH)
25. Norwegian Church Aid
26. Oxfam
27. Pax Christi International
28. Public Commitee Against Torture in Israel
29. Trócaire
30. United Against Inhumanity
31. Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC) 

The post EU/Israel: Adoption of death penalty law by the Israeli Knesset requires urgent EU measures – Joint statement appeared first on Amnesty International.