New media laws under scrutiny

In India, the Telecommunications Act of 2023 was passed in December amid objections by civil society groups that it “enables indiscriminate surveillance, undermines encryption, and erodes privacy and safety online.” IFEX member SFLC.in warned that the new law “raises significant concerns regarding the dilution of procedural safeguards, potential infringements on privacy rights, and the broadening of governmental powers in the interception and suspension of telecommunication services.” It added that the law expanded the grounds for the government to suspend telecommunication services “without any substantive checks and balances.”

In Sri Lanka, the Online Safety Law took effect this month. The government claims it will help curb cybercrimes. However, critics point out that it will lead to the establishment of an Online Safety Commission with no independence from the executive. Under the law, this commission has broad powers to take down content and block access to accounts on “extremely vague and overbroad grounds”. Human rights groups have warned that it could enable “over-censorship” and “self-censorship”, which might affect public discourse ahead of the elections scheduled to take place later this year. It is worth noting that social media played an important role in the 2022 protests that led to a change in government.

In Nepal, several bills introduced in 2023 will be deliberated this year. These include the National Mass Communication Bill, Media Council Bill, Information Technology Bill, and Social Media Regulation and Management Bill. Freedom Forum executive chief Taranath Dahal wrote that “an informed and inclusive debate is essential” in tackling these measures:

“If freedom of expression and press freedom elude these laws and policies at federal and provincial levels, the foundation of democracy would be weakened.”

Afghanistan: From bad to worse

Afghanistan’s media situation continues to worsen under Taliban rule. In 2023, the Afghanistan Journalists Center (AFJC) documented at least 168 instances of press freedom violations, which included 61 arrests involving journalists. The group noted that journalists who ignored or disregarded the 14 media directives issued by authorities have faced punitive measures.

In the past month, attacks against the media have intensified. For example, the private Nan FM radio station was forced to shut down after it was raided by security forces.

Three journalists were briefly arrested. Ehsan Akbari. a reporter for Japan’s Kyodo news agency, was detained for nine days. Journalists Ahmad Jawad Rasooli and Abdulhaq Hamidi of Gardesh-e-Etilaat News Agency were arrested on 18 January and allowed to post bail two days later. Taliban officials have not disclosed the reasons for making these arbitrary arrests. In response, AFJC urged the government to stop the media crackdown:

“AFJC urgently calls upon the General Directorate of Intelligence to cease the mass arrests of journalists, which perpetuate fear and self-censorship within the journalism community and hinder the operation of media outlets.”

Meanwhile, the Acting Minister of Information and Culture of the Taliban issued a letter directing the media to refrain from using “foreign terms” in order to protect the country’s “national identity.” AFJC said this could prevent the media from using different languages to effectively deliver news content.

Media-related arrests, raids, and the imposition of restrictive guidelines reflect the worrying state of free speech in the country. This prompted Nai, an organization supporting open media in Afghanistan, to announce that it is temporarily suspending its operations “in light of the political situation and unfavorable conditions” in the country. AFJC described the decision as a “significant loss for the media community” since Nai has been providing training and legal assistance since 2005.

Artists and writers under attack

Myanmar documentary filmmaker Shin Daewe was sentenced to life in prison on trumped-up terrorism charges. This was the harshest sentence given to a journalist since the military seized power in February 2021. Shin Daewe was arrested in October 2023 after picking up a drone she ordered online. Reporters Without Borders said that the sentence showed the extent of the junta’s “arbitrariness and ruthlessness.”

Human rights groups are citing the blasphemy case of Malaysian creators of the film “Mentega Terbang” as an example of the “criminalisation of religious offence” to curtail freedom of expression and artistic freedom in the country. The film was released in 2021, but banned in September 2023 for allegedly insulting Islamic beliefs. IFEX member the Centre for Independent Journalism warned that “silencing or cancelling artistic freedom will only continue to breed a culture of fear.”

Uyghur writer and scholar Ilham Tohti marked his 10th year of detention in China. PEN International noted that his detention “is emblematic of the PRC government’s repression of the Uyghur and other ethnic groups in Xinjiang, which includes systematic efforts to dislocate the Uyghur population from their cultural identity.”

“Incredibly disturbing”: Actions taken against journalist  spark outrage

In Australia, Lebanese Australian journalist Antoinette Lattouf was fired from her work at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation after she reposted on social media a Human Rights Watch video on the humanitarian situation in Gaza. IFEX member Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance described the action of the broadcaster as “incredibly disturbing.”

Pakistan elections and free speech

In IFEX’s recent special New Year brief, which took a deep dive into the challenges, trends, and prospects related to freedom of expression and democracy the region is facing, we highlighted the efforts of Pakistan-based IFEX members to promote the people’s right to information during the election period.

As tensions intensify ahead of the elections slated for 8 February, Bytes for All and Pakistan Press Foundation expressed their concerns about recurring social media blocking, which often coincides with activities organized by the opposition.

Incidents related to internet shutdowns are among the data compiled in the Election Desk of the Digital Rights Foundation. The portal also documents harmful content pertaining to “hate speech, disinformation, gendered disinformation and technology facilitated gender-based violence.”

Aside from its training sessions and “Scrapathon” workshops, Media Matters for Democracy unveiled Facter, a tech-based investigation tool designed to be used by newsrooms. MMFD said it “streamlines the monitoring and fact-checking process for newsrooms by delivering a neatly organised, searchable database of suspect information, verified/published information, misinformation, and misleading information.”

The post What’s new and old in 2024: Repressive laws, attacks, and election disinformation in Asia appeared first on IFEX.

With the daily death toll of Palestinians in Israel’s war on Gaza surpassing any other major conflict in the 21st century, and its displaced survivors being starved amidst continued attacks, much of the global rights community has sought to organise around legal avenues to hold Israel accountable.

Front and centre in the efforts to counter Israeli’s impunity, the year began with South Africa’s case with the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The two-day public hearings captured global attention and saw South Africa’s legal representatives present a well-documented case outlining how Israeli government’s own words and actions in Gaza amount to an intent to commit genocide. Rejecting the charges as “atrocious and preposterous”, Israel said its attacks on the enclave’s population, which has so far resulted in the deaths of over 25,000 (70% women and children), have been directed at Hamas and not civilians.

Support for South Africa’s case has been declared by over 1,500 organisations worldwide, with backing from several countries, including Turkey, Jordan, Brazil, Colombia, Bolivia, Pakistan, Malaysia, and the 57-member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

“South Africa’s genocide case unlocks a legal process at the world’s highest court to credibly examine Israel’s conduct in Gaza in the hopes of curtailing further suffering.” — Balkees Jarrah, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch (HRW)

So what comes next?

Observers note that while a final ruling on the matter will likely take time, the ICJ could potentially issue emergency measures that would call for a cessation of hostilities as it decides the case.

South Africa’s 84-page filing with the ICJ included several provisional measures against Israel that could be issued in order to “protect against further, severe and irreparable harm to the rights of the Palestinian people”. These include an immediate suspension of its Gaza offensive, halting forced displacement of Palestinians, facilitating humanitarian access, and preserving evidence.

While ICJ decisions cannot be appealed, the court lacks enforcement mechanisms and its rulings have been disregarded at times, such as the 2022 ruling that ordered Russia to immediately suspend military operations in Ukraine, but has done nothing to stem the conflict. Moreover, despite being independent, the court’s judges remain subject to the pressures of political influence from their country’s respective governments. The US – Israel’s closest ally and firm supporter – is expected to play a pivotal role in determining the effectiveness of any potential sanctions or measures against Israel.

Hope remains high for provisional orders bringing Israel’s military campaign to a halt. But despite the court’s decision, South Africa’s case is undeniably a historic and symbolic move, propelling a shift in global perceptions towards Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and fuelling further calls for eventual justice.

Indeed, if the arc of the moral universe is long, then South Africa has stepped up to bend it towards justice.

Exposing war crimes and crimes against journalists

Meanwhile, the world has also looked to the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a potential avenue for accountability, with Mexico and Chile leading the charge for an ICC probe into Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.

Although Israel is not a member of the Hague-based court, does not recognise its jurisdiction, and has rejected its authority in a prior investigation, the court’s focus is on prosecuting individuals for war crimes rather than states, and could provide an avenue to securing justice for victims and holding perpetrators accountable.

The court’s prosecutor Karim Khan visited Israel and Ramallah in the Occupied West Bank in December and announced the court’s priority to probe alleged crimes by Hamas fighters and Israeli forces since October 7.

In the UK, advocacy group the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) submitted a 78-page dossier to London’s Metropolitan Police, alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel in Gaza. The criminal complaint against senior British officials alleges their complicity in war crimes committed in Gaza, and implicates British nationals that travelled to Israel to participate in its military campaign.

ICJP’s evidence includes eyewitness testimony and features photographic evidence showing attacks on civilians, civilian infrastructure like hospitals and cultural buildings, the use of starvation as a weapon, and Israel’s use of white phosphorus against civilians.

As the unprecedented death toll of Gaza’s journalists continues to climb, surpassing the casualties of any country in a single year within a span of three months, attention has also turned to accountability for their deaths.

The eyes and ears of Israel’s war on Gaza, Palestinian journalists have been instrumental in providing world documentation of the multitude of war crimes being committed.

“You can think of it as a genocide of journalists; a massacre,” said journalist Shuruq As’ad of the Palestinian Journalists’ Syndicate (PJS) in a recent interview.

Working closer to the ground than their international peers, the syndicate’s work has been essential in keeping an accurate count of killed journalists and media workers, providing support to help colleagues in Gaza stay alive, and working with other organisations to prepare legal filings for the ICC.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) managed to secure assurances from Khan that the ICC’s probe would include investigating crimes against journalists.

In its statement, the prosecutor’s office noted: “crimes against journalists are being examined by the prosecutor’s office, among other potential crimes, as part of the ongoing investigation into the situation in Palestine, and RSF’s objectives and actions must be supported and are of crucial importance in Gaza and elsewhere. Journalists are protected by international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute and must not under any circumstances be targeted in the exercise of their important mission.”

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has called for an independent investigation into the 7 January killing of journalists Hamza Dahdouh and Moustafa Thuraya by an Israeli drone strike on their car.

“The killings of journalists Hamza Al Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuraya must be independently investigated, and those behind their deaths must be held accountable. The continuous killings of journalists and their family members by Israeli army fire must end: journalists are civilians, not targets.” — Sherif Mansour, CPJ MENA Program Coordinator

Following the journalists’ deaths, RSF also urged the UN Security Council to enforce Resolution 2222, which requires states to take measures to protect journalists and media professionals not only as members of the civilian population but also because of their particular social function. The resolution protects civilians’ right to freedom of expression by seeking, receiving and disseminating information, both online and offline.

Palestinian media workers, especially in the occupied West Bank, have also faced a “record wave of detentions” with Israel detaining at least 38 Palestinian journalists since 7 October.

According to RSF, in most cases they are being held without charges, with detentions clearly being carried out “with the deliberate aim of silencing the Palestinian media.”

In the US, six rights groups, including RSF, CPJ, and Human Rights Watch (HRW), called on President Biden to protect journalists and press freedom. However, Biden’s continued refusal to call for a ceasefire to protect any civilians, and his administration’s unquestioning support for Israel’s actions in Gaza suggest that such calls are likely to fall on deaf ears.

Highlighting the unprecedented and systematic targeting of journalists and their families in Gaza, the PJS also filed an amicus brief in a US federal court to block further military and diplomatic support to Israel.

“We urge our colleagues worldwide and the organisations dedicated to protecting journalists to intensify efforts, raise their voices, and take meaningful steps to ensure the safety and well-being of Palestinian journalists facing relentless threats,” said PJS head Nasser Abu Bakr. “Silence or inaction in the face of these dangers only perpetuates the assault on truth and human rights.”

Tech giants silence Palestinian voices

This year will also likely see concerted efforts to hold tech companies and social media platforms accountable for their active role in silencing Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices.

A recent HRW report detailed how Meta’s content moderation policies and systems have demonstrated a “pattern of undue removal and suppression of protected speech”, which includes peaceful free expression in support of Palestine, as well as public debate about Palestinian human rights.

Examining 1,050 cases of online censorship across 60 countries, the 51-page report highlights Meta’s flawed policies, inconsistent implementation, reliance on automated tools for content moderation, and government influence leading to systemic censorship of Palestinian content.

As per the report, many of the documented cases saw Meta apply its “Dangerous Organizations and Individuals” (DOI) policy that relies entirely on the US designated lists of “terrorist organizations”.

The report’s findings come as no surprise. It speaks to a larger growing role that Big tech companies play in enabling the oppression of Palestinians and maintaining Israel’s apartheid system, which has increasingly come under scrutiny from rights groups, activists, technologists, and even tech workers.

While Meta’s Oversight Board is expected to handle “expedited cases” of content removal this year, the company’s track record reveals a lack of real progress in addressing its flawed and inconsistent content moderation policies, particularly in the Palestinian context.

Ranging from the failure to address hate speech, misinformation, and disinformation disproportionately affecting Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices to actively censoring content and banning user accounts, the complicity in perpetuating real-world harms will undoubtedly attract global calls for accountability within the industry in the coming months.

The Arab Centre for the Advancement of Social Media (7amleh) noted in its annual report that while social media companies, especially Meta’s platforms, have long been accused of restricting Palestinian content, the evidence indicates these policies intensified throughout 2023. 7amleh highlighted how mass content removals and the practice of “shadowbanning” users critical of Israel or voicing Palestinian solidarity “soared to unprecedented levels” during the war on Gaza.

Lastly, Israel’s extensive targeting of telecommunications infrastructure in the Gaza Strip – a violation of international human rights law – is also coming under increasing scrutiny.

The vast destruction of communication networks, which even included the reported killing of technicians from the Palestinian Telecommunications Company as they attempted to repair a targeted cell tower, has thrown Gaza into increasingly extensive and unprecedented near-communications blackouts.

As the report notes: “The deliberate targeting of ICT and telecommunication networks severs Palestinians from the outside world, and impacts the flow of information. As a result, internet access is weaponized to silence Palestinians, and prevent the documentation of the reality on the ground.”

The post Looking ahead: The fight against Israel’s impunity gains legal momentum appeared first on IFEX.

What can we expect?

Dominating the African landscape will be polarised positions exacerbated by a rise in manipulated information, fervently peddled by paid social media influencers, as we witnessed during elections in Nigeria and Kenya. The control and flow of information will be exercised through the strategic use of legal frameworks to aggressively oppose dissent. The quelling of protests will be more brutal than ever before, as governments focus their energies on retention of power. Undoubtedly, freedom of expression, access to information and media freedom will come under duress, even in countries considered democratically progressive and politically stable.

A Thomson Reuters Foundation report, Weaponizing the Law: Attacks on Media Freedom, aptly describes how countries are purposefully using laws to take punitive measures against free speech:

While these new laws or provisions vary from country to country, they share certain features, including deliberately vague language. They often confer broad powers on authorities to interpret and carry out criminal investigations with limited judicial oversight and procedural safeguards. They specifically target and grant harsher penalties for speech that is disseminated online or via social media.

The case of Senegal

Possibly the most visible faltering of democratic principles has been observed in Senegal – which heads to the polls in February. Considered one of the secure countries in the Sahel region – where coups became a common feature of the political landscape – Senegal’s reputation as an outlier has taken a battering in recent years.

In the run up to elections there has been a brutal clampdown on protests, an upsurge in arbitrary detentions, the suspension of media outlets, arrest of journalists, disruption of the internet and the jailing of political opponents. As the analysis by Control Risks points out:

“In the last five years, Senegal’s democratic model has morphed into the type of dominant-party system seen elsewhere in West Africa. The opposition has been hollowed out, and checks and balances on executive power eroded.”

Ousmane Sonko, leader of the opposition party, has been at the centre of Senegal’s downward spiral into repression and violent clampdown of ongoing protests. Together with his party Patriotes africains du Sénégal pour le travail, l’éthique et la fraternité  (Patriots of Senegal for Work, Ethics, and Fraternity, or PASTEF as it is more popularly known) this “rising political star who fired up Senegal’s youth,” has been a target from the time he participated in the 2019 presidential election.

Sonko has spent the last few years fighting off a sustained legal campaign initiated with charges of rape, for which he was acquitted. A civil libel suit filed against him ended with a suspended two-year prison sentence. This was then followed by charges of fomenting insurrection, and on 1 July he was sentenced to two years in prison for corrupting youth. In between the intermittent protests, and the courtroom back and forth, Human Rights Watch reported that Senegal’s interior minister announced the dissolution of the opposition party “for rallying its supporters during violent protests in June this year and in March 2021. On the same day, the government also restricted access to mobile data internet services to stop what it called the spread of “hateful and subversive” messages on social media.”

Media outlets and journalists covering the trial or even commenting on Sonko’s case, have faced similar legal harassment – with arbitrary arrests, prolonged detention, constant court delays and the threat of heavy penalties if convicted.

Pape Alé Niang, the director of the privately owned news site Dakar Matin, has been arrested, released, rearrested, imprisoned, placed on probation, prohibited from commenting on Sonko’s case and barred from leaving the country. On 29 May 2023, Aliou Sané, the coordinator of “Y’en A Marre”, a popular citizens’ movement advocating for good governance in Senegal, was arrested while visiting Sonko.

The efforts to have Sonko removed from the electoral process came to a head at the beginning of 2024 when he, along with Karim Wade, the son of former president Abdoulaye Wade, were excluded from the final list of candidates approved for next month’s presidential election by the country’s powerful Constitutional Council.

How did we get here?

The first faltering misstep dates back to 2016 when President Macky Sall was halfway through his first term. Committing to the promise he made before he was elected, Senegal held a successful constitutional referendum, which approved amendments, including the reduction of the presidential term from seven to five years, and a limit of two five-year terms for the president. Based on optics alone, this referendum was reassuring, as it exhibited a break from the continental trend of leaders circumventing term limits.

However, President Sall then alienated a large portion of the public when he intimated that he was considering running for a third term, as his first term was under the previous constitution. It was only in July 2023 that he finally declared: “There has been much speculation and commentary on my eventual candidature on this election. My decision, carefully considered… is not to run as a candidate in the upcoming election.”

While this news was celebrated for “diffusing a political timebomb”,  Moumoudou Samb, a driver of an informal taxi, told VOA: “I’m impressed by his graceful exit, but it’s too late – too many people have needlessly died,” said Samb. “But at least he’s ending his reign on a high note.”

As highlighted by Al Jazeera: “In Sall’s 12 years in office, Senegal has dropped from “free” to “partly free,” in global democracy rankings from the Washington-based NGO Freedom House. Over the same era, Senegal dropped from a “flawed democracy” to a “hybrid regime”, as per The Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2022 Democracy Index. And yet, those flaws – as well as the deaths of protesters killed by security forces or the jailing of journalists and opposition politicians under his tenure – may soon be forgotten by an international community that was happy to see him decide to stand down.

Nationally, citizens may not be so easily pacified.

Tools to push back

The sustained pushback from civil society organisations and an energised youth movement has helped to some extent keep Senegal in check and prevent it from sliding further down on the democratic barometer. Information collected thanks to concerted efforts by IFEX member the MFWA to document violations and monitor the freedom of expression environment can be used to lobby and advocate both nationally and regionally.

Support has to be given to organisations like Amnesty International, whose submission for the 45th Session of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group for January-February 2024 gives a detailed outline of the deterioration of Senegal’s political landscape. The contents of the report can be used to develop a scorecard, against which promises made by the incoming head of state can be measured.

Another useful resource – developed by the International Press Institute (IPI), Senegalese digital rights group Junction and the MFWA – is a tool kit on the legal and regulatory frameworks governing the media in Senegal.  As MFWA’s 18 December launch article states:

“The tool kit is expected to be a useful reference material for journalists, media defense organisations, media training institutions and other actors with a stake in peaceful and effective media coverage of the upcoming polls.”

The post Looking ahead: Democratic deficits make for a bumpy road to Senegal’s elections appeared first on IFEX.

A vote for change, a vote for turbulence

In a quest for radical change, Argentina has voted itself into further uncertainty. Javier Milei’s election triumph came amidst hyperinflation and widespread disappointment, particularly among younger generations disillusioned by traditional political figures. However, those committed to protecting fundamental rights are bracing for a struggle. Milei’s promises and rhetoric do not suggest an easy period ahead.

His minimisation of human rights abuses during Argentina’s dictatorship and his intention to reverse the decriminalisation of abortion – a significant achievement for women’s rights and an inspiration for the rest of the region – signal challenging times. Notably, among the closing of other significant organisms, Milei said his administration would dismantle the Human Rights Secretariat, which would be an unprecedented move since the return of democracy to Argentina.

Technologies for repression – civil society and local government push back

Milei’s administration has wasted no time signalling a potential crackdown on civic space, using advanced technologies for protester identification. Argentina has been a pioneer in implementing biometric identification policies, which have increasingly incorporated sophisticated technological elements. Local media reports the existence of at least three automated facial recognition systems in the country, with applications ranging from stadiums to public transportation terminals. Argentine civil society has actively warned of these technologies’ risks, resulting in legal challenges and campaigns like Con mi cara no (“Not with my face”).

In his first presidential speech, Milei’s words, “El que corta, no cobra,” – a threat to cut any financial aid to those blocking streets during protests – conveyed a hardline approach to demonstrations. According to Security Minister Patricia Bullrich, in regards to the protests announced for December:

“We will identify people. We will have cameras, we will have drones, and we will have various ways of identifying them.”

The Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS) denounced the anti-protest set of rules and actions to the United Nations and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The denunciation was supported by 1,700 signatures from trade unions, human rights organisations, environmental groups, indigenous peoples groups and migrants, as well as transfeminist, religious, childhood, student, and political collectives.

Following a massive demonstration on 20 December 2023, the pre-transition government was asked to provide information collected by the cameras. It refused, explaining that the system is neither technically nor judicially equipped for use, and that such a request was a criminalisation of protest.

The struggle is far from over. CELS has reiterated its call to the IACHR after labour, social, and political organisations received, on 10 and 11 January, legal notices from the government demanding hefty sums of money for their involvement in public protests.

A worrying scenario ahead for freedom of the press and the feminist movement

One thing Milei can’t be accused of is inconsistency. His actions continue a pattern observed over past years. Since his time as an economic commentator, Milei’s contempt for journalism has been front and centre. His antagonistic attitude, characterised by verbal assaults and threats of legal action, has sparked global alarms. His plan to dismantle public media points to a disconcerting disregard for press freedom. Organisations like Reporters Without Borders (RSF) have taken note.

His tenure as an economic commentator on television and radio since 2018 was marked by a series of comments aimed at journalists, labelling them as “ignorant,” “imbeciles,” and “donkeys”. The situation escalated before his election as a deputy in 2021 and later, when he took legal action against five journalists while in office. Already known for his incendiary comments, he crossed a line by threatening journalists with physical violence, and even pushing them, during television appearances. As expected, new instances of his stigmatising discourse have been registered since he assumed the presidency – calling a journalist a “liar” and accusing her of organising a plot against him.

“The question is how to continue reporting while we tremble with fear.”

Milei’s followers, taking cues from his rhetoric, have increased the harassment of journalists, especially women. It has reached a point where some have had to resort to keeping a lower profile, or protect their safety by leaving the country. This was the case with journalist Luciana Peker, who left Argentina after receiving violent threats: “We are facing a witch-hunt from the ultra-right,” she told The Guardian.

Camila Parodi, a feminist journalist and cultural anthropologist, told Latin America Journalism that freedom of expression was especially problematic for journalists covering or working from social and geographic peripheries, and that those working for feminist, popular or independent outlets are being persecuted and attacked.

Their work in the period to come is expected to become even more difficult.

Claudia Piñeiro and Giselle Leclercq, who have covered the women’s movement and the libertarian movement, respectively, have seen online intense harassment and doxxing (the sharing of private or identifying information on the internet with malicious intent) .

According to Leclercq, Milei’s message has resounded among a portion of the population that is “very angry with the advance of gender rights, angry with feminism, and schoolboys bitter that their female classmates were suddenly empowered and stood up to them.” Given the backlash, Claudia Acuña, founder of Periodistas Argentinas, says “the question is how to continue reporting while we tremble with fear.”

Promises to erode women’s rights 

Three years after Argentina took the historic step of being among the first major Latin American countries to decriminalise abortion, women’s rights activists now brace themselves for renewed battles. The Argentine feminist movement is deeply concerned about Milei’s opposition to abortion, mandatory sexual education in schools, and free medical coverage for gender reassignment treatments, among other issues.

Further intensifying these concerns are Milei’s stark characterisation of abortion as “murder” and the promise he made during his campaign to call for a referendum to repeal the abortion law if he became president. He has also described pro-abortion rights advocates as “brainwashed by a murderous policy.”

Argentinians who propelled Milei to electoral success expect dramatic economic changes. If his government fails to deliver, they could find themselves confronting a familiar economic landscape. However, this time, it comes accompanied by an additional cost — the potential sacrifice of fundamental rights and the weakening of their democracy.

In this political climate, the role of civil society and local governments in Argentina is crucial. They have consistently worked to counter policies that threaten progress. The demonstrations that took place in December, as well as the initiatives of many groups against abusive uses of technology are a testament to their engagement and effectiveness. They have influenced positive policy changes in the past, and are ready to stand firm against attempts to reverse these advancements.

Region in brief

The dramatic escalation of violence in Ecuador peaked on 9 January with a criminal groups’ seizure of TC television station in Guayaquil. This attack, part of a series of assaults around the country, prompted the Ecuadorian state to declare a state of internal armed conflict. The channel was off-air for 24 hours following the attack, highlighting the precarious situation of press freedom in the region. Days later, in a local radio station, a journalist was forced to read a statement from a criminal group aimed at the populations of Tulcán and the Carchi province, both close to Colombia’s border.

Why are journalists killed in Mexico? IFEX member ARTICLE 19 Mexico and Central America has released Veracruz de los Silencios, a study examining the violence against journalists in Veracruz between 2010 and 2016, a period in which at least 17 journalists were killed and three went missing. The study highlights the roles of drug cartels and government officials, and also points to media companies as a detrimental force. It reveals a landscape of fear, ineffective investigations, and the increasing power of the perpetrators.

The post Looking ahead: Argentina at a crossroads, media and women’s rights at risk appeared first on IFEX.

Russia: A wartime election

The Russian presidential election is scheduled to take place over 15 – 17 March 2024, with the incumbent, Vladimir Putin, running for another term in office.

When he is re-elected – it would be naïve to say ‘if’ – Putin will continue as president until 2030, having held the office since 2012, and having previously been president from 2000 to 2008. (Putin was prime minister from 1999 to 2000, and from 2008 to 2012.)

Russia’s last presidential election took place in March 2018. OSCE observers described that ballot as “choice without competition”, highlighting “restrictions of fundamental freedoms”, “persistent pressure on civil society” and “the absence of critical reporting in most media”. The lead-up to the vote saw a crackdown on opposition voices, including the arrest of high-profile opposition figure Alexei Navalny (banned from standing for public office himself) after he called for a boycott of the election at an anti-Putin rally in Moscow. A few months later, Navalny would be arrested again, this time during the mass detention of approximately 1,600 people at protests against Putin’s inauguration.

The 2024 presidential election will take place in very different circumstances. The terrible violence that Russia’s ongoing war on Ukraine has inflicted on the Ukrainian people has been accompanied at home by an unprecedented crackdown on civic space, leaving critical voices in a more perilous position than they were at the time of the last presidential election.

Navalny, as we know, is currently serving a 19-year prison sentence on several dubious charges. Having recovered from a near-lethal poisoning in 2020, he was arrested and jailed in January 2021. This triggered mass protests across Russia at which police arrested approximately 3,700 people and assaulted 50 journalists. Navalny’s anti-corruption organisation was outlawed as “extremist” in the same year.

In mid-December 2023, Navalny temporarily “disappeared” in the prison system. Following protests by his family, lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on human rights in Russia, it was revealed (after 19 days incommunicado) that he had been moved to a harsh prison above the Arctic Circle in Siberia. Shortly before the move, Navalny’s supporters had launched a campaign to oppose Putin’s re-election in 2024; Navalny himself had issued a statement calling on Russians to vote against Putin.

Several members of Navalny’s circle have been targeted in recent months. In late December 2023, Ksenia Fadeyeva, the former head of Navalny’s regional office in Tomsk, was sentenced to nine years in prison for organising an “extremist” group. In October 2023, in what has been described as a pre-election “purge”, three lawyers representing Navalny – Vadim Kobzev, Igor Sergunin and Alexei Liptser – were arrested on “extremism” charges. They face heavy prison sentences if convicted.

Other opposition leaders have also been removed from the public sphere.

Legislation introduced in 2022 that criminalises “discrediting” or spreading “false information” about the Russian armed forces was used to send opposition politician Vladimir Kara-Murza (like Navalny, a survivor of poisoning) to prison for 25 years in April 2023; Ilya Yashin, another opposition politician, was convicted under the same law in December 2022 and sentenced to 8.5 years in prison.

In late December 2023, the anti-war candidate Yekaterina Duntsova was banned from running in the 2024 election because of “mistakes” on her registration documents.

The final two months of 2023 saw a spate of chilling convictions for “inciting hatred” towards, “discrediting”, or spreading “false information” about the army. Those convicted included leading human rights defender Oleg Orlov, artist-activist Aleksandra Skochilenko, and poets Artyom Kamardin and Yegor Shtovba.

The effects of the war and the speech-restricting legislation that it spawned will be felt throughout the election period and beyond. According to the independent Russian human rights project OVD-Info, by December 2023 there had been nearly 20,000 detentions of Russian citizens who had expressed anti-war views. Such a level of repression could have a dampening effect on opposition protests and rallies in the lead-up to voting day; its impact was certainly seen in 2023 which, as OVD-Info notes, “will not be remembered for large mass protests and thousands of arrests” (in contrast to 2022, for example).

The wholesale persecution of independent media that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will undoubtedly result in even more unbalanced domestic political coverage and an increase in censorship (both self- and state-enforced) during the 2024 election.

Several journalists were targets of this persecution in 2023. Among those behind bars as we begin 2024 are: RusNews’s Maria Ponomarenko, who was sentenced to six years in prison for spreading “false information” about the military; the Wall Street Journal’s Evan Gershkovich, who has been detained on dubious “espionage” charges since May; and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Alsu Kurmasheva, who has been in pre-trial detention since October, when she was detained for failing to register as a “foreign agent”, and who has since been charged with spreading “false information” about the military.

Political activism or commentary ahead of March’s presidential election is also likely to be impacted by increased legal restrictions on civil society organisations. In December 2023, a new law expanding Russia’s notorious – and already vast – “foreign agent” legislation came into force. Human Rights Watch (HRW) summarises its drastic implications for the rights to free expression and free assembly:

“The law expands the definition of foreign agent to a point at which almost any person or entity, regardless of nationality or location, who engages in civic activism or even expresses opinions about Russian policies or officials’ conduct could be designated a foreign agent, so long as the authorities claim they are under ‘foreign influence.’ It also excludes ‘foreign agents’ from key aspects of civic life.”

Authoritarian leaders need their scapegoats, especially during elections and wars. In Russia, “foreign agents” and the LGBTQI+ community have been among the chosen targets for over a decade.

In November 2023, Russia’s legislative attack on LGBTQI+ people delivered another serious blow when the Supreme Court ruled that the so-called “international LGBT movement” was an “extremist organisation”. HRW’s Tanya Lokshina described the ruling as an attempt to further “scapegoat” LGBTQI+ people ahead of the 2024 presidential election, and “paralyse” the activities of LGBTQI+ civil society groups and those who work with them. Under Russian criminal law, those who participate in or collaborate with an “extremist organisation” can face heavy prison sentences.

According to the independent Russian polling organisation Levada Center, Putin currently has an approval rating of over 80% in Russia. In 2021, he signed a constitutional amendment allowing him to run for president again in 2030.

Belarus: A serious stress test

Parliamentary elections in Belarus are scheduled for 25 February 2024. They will be the first elections to be held in the country since the August 2020 presidential election that kept Lukashenka in power, triggered a massive wave of popular protest, and launched the ongoing crackdown on the independent press and civil society.

The exiled opposition leader, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, has called on the international community to “reject” the upcoming elections: “With political parties dismantled, leaders jailed or exiled, this is nothing more than a charade,” she tweeted in November.

And it’s not just political parties that have been dismantled. Lukashenka’s “purge” of civil society organisations (CSOs), launched in 2021, has had a devastating effect on civil society.  According to the Belarusian human rights group Lawtrend, by September 2023 a jaw-dropping 1,441 CSOs had been dissolved by a court, otherwise de-registered, or opted for voluntary liquidation. Several CSOs have been forced to work in exile.

One of those CSOs ordered to dissolve is the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ). As BAJ reminded us in its recent overview of 2023, Belarus is one of the worst jailers of journalists in the world, with 32 media workers detained behind bars at the turn of the year. Other statistics for 2023 provided by BAJ are equally disturbing: 46 journalists arrested, 33 media outlets (including BAJ) declared “extremist” and 12 media outlets declared “terrorist”.

With so many groups put out of action, with so many journalists, civic activists and others in prison for challenging Lukashenka during the 2020 election or in its aftermath (currently, Belarus has over 1,400 political prisoners), it would be very surprising if February 2024 saw the massive, organised expression of dissent that we saw in 2020.

But that doesn’t mean that the authorities are taking any chances.

In a recent article for openDemocracy, the journalist Igor Ilyash (husband of imprisoned journalist Katsiaryna Andreyeva) describes the upcoming February elections as “a serious stress test” for Lukashenka’s government ahead of the 2025 presidential election. As Ilyash explains, preparations for smothering dissent and ensuring an unfair electoral process are already well underway:

“Belarusian security forces are currently training in how to disperse mass protests and conducting mass searches of members of the opposition Coordination Council. They plan to make the personal data of members of election commissions secret, so that they do not fear being publicly ostracised for participating in election fraud. A ban has been introduced on photographing or filming a completed ballot, after protesters in 2020 used ballot images to try and organise a new vote count. The authorities have refused to set up polling stations abroad, meaning several hundred thousand political emigres will be excluded from the election process. And specifically, as an antidote to the boycott strategy, the election turnout threshold has been eliminated.”

The shock to the Lukashenka regime of the 2020 protests is still reverberating, as is evidenced by the authorities’ continued harassment and persecution of those groups and individuals who did not toe the line. December 2023 saw rights activist Alyaksandra Kasko sentenced to ten years in prison for her involvement in the 2020 demonstrations. It also saw former observers of the 2020 elections subjected to searches and harassment by state agents.

In early January 2024, Lukashenka signed a law giving him immunity from prosecution for life and banning exiled opposition leaders from standing in presidential elections.

The post Looking ahead: A wartime election and a serious stress test appeared first on IFEX.

“Toxic control” over information

In 2023, several laws and regulations were updated in the region, eventually used as tools of censorship during election periods.

Bangladesh passed the Cyber Security Act in September, which critics dismissed as a mere renaming of the Digital Security Act, a draconian law used to detain critics, journalists, and members of the opposition.

Pakistan’s parliament was dissolved in August but not before it approved amendments to existing laws on blasphemy, national security, and data protection, which gave authorities broad censorship powers.

In December, Indonesia amended the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, which retained provisions on criminal defamation. The amended measure now criminalises the dissemination of “false statements” that cause “public unrest”, which the International Commission of Jurists criticised as “vague, overbroad and imprecise.”

These laws enabled ruling parties to expand their “toxic control over news and information”. In Pakistan, social media platforms became inaccessible when the main opposition party held a virtual rally in December and a fundraising event in January. The Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF) is worried that the recurring shutdown could set a dangerous precedent a month before the country’s general election.

In Bangladesh, a critical news website was blocked a day before the 7 January election. The government has been consistently suppressing online and offline voices. State forces and members of the ruling party violently clashed with those who joined the opposition-led protest on 28 October. A general strike was called to condemn the violent dispersal but the government responded by ordering a mass crackdown of opposition leaders and members. At least 20,000 have been arrested and 88,000 face threats of legal prosecution.

Muzzling the media

Even journalists who covered the rallies in Bangladesh were assaulted by the police. The violence directed against the media continued during the campaign period and on election day as some members of the ruling party were accused of harassing those who were documenting and reporting instances of fraud and poll irregularities.

Muzzling the press and blocking online platforms taints the credibility of the electoral process. In the case of Bangladesh, the opposition boycott and the silencing of dissent contributed to the record low election turnout. Hong Kong’s district election also yielded a low turnout because of the policy to limit candidates to so-called “patriots”. It is linked to the enforcement of the National Security Legislation, which criminalised the work of pro-democracy groups and independent media.

The harmful impact of restricting social media in Pakistan was not only limited to the opposition; it also prevented the public from accessing verified and reliable information. If the trend continues, this could also deprive voters of learning more about election-related concerns. If Pakistani media face state reprisals for reporting about issues that allegedly threaten national security and social harmony, it could lead to the censoring of politically-sensitive topics, such as religious discrimination, gender gap, disenfranchisement of transgender voters, corruption, and military meddling in politics.

AI, disinformation and trolls

The recent and coming elections in the region also put into spotlight the alarming use of disinformation and troll operations by various political forces. In Indonesia, whose election is scheduled to take place next month, some “cyber-troops” deployed by candidates spread hate and misogyny, which hinders women’s participation in the election.

In Bangladesh, political parties have been posting online content promoting disinformation, but groups linked to the ruling party and the government clearly got more resources in bombarding the public with deep fake videos attacking the opposition.

Election campaigning in Taiwan was marred by the “multi-pronged cognitive warfare” attributed to China-backed groups accused of endorsing an election outcome in favor of Beijing.

The use of AI by political parties in Pakistan, especially after a detained former prime minister used a clone video to address supporters and voters, ignited debates on consent, reality, and manipulation. AI-generated disinformation could potentially pose a greater danger to vulnerable segments of the population like the LGBTQI+ community and religious minorities.

A key takeaway from Asia’s election experience is the need to revisit existing media laws being weaponised to justify censorship and judicial tyranny. These were clearly designed not to boost democracy and empower citizens, but to deter dissent and punish free speech. Furthermore, measures aimed at ensuring the safety of journalists, especially during heightened moments of election-related uncertainty, must be adopted. Access to online information and services is essential to help voters make informed decisions and facilitate robust conversations between the electorate and public officials. New challenges have emerged, such as election interference and the aggressive use of AI by candidates, which has led to proposals for stricter regulations. Regulations require sustained and genuine public consultations; we have learned this from how previous disruptions were addressed. Our solutions need to enhance the independence of media, expand civic space, and inspire greater public vigilance to defend democracy.

In depth: The way forward for Pakistan

After years of vicious political infighting, can the general elections in Pakistan propel the nation to a peaceful transition? There are difficult hurdles to overcome but an urgent task is to make sure that media personnel can cover the elections without being attacked. This could be a difficult goal to achieve considering that in 2023 alone, media groups have documented 157 press freedom violations, which included 16 instances of arrests, five instances of detention, and 44 cases of assault.

In the run up to the elections, Pakistan-based IFEX members have identified reforms and specific actions that authorities and various institutions can implement to uphold the people’s right to information and freedom of expression.

One of the recommendations of PPF is the establishment of a federal-level Commission for the Protection of Journalists and Other Media Professionals. It also looked into the code of conduct drafted by the Election Commission and suggested some revisions to ensure that journalists are protected from cyber harassment and digital attacks. It urged authorities to refrain from misusing media laws.

“It is the state’s responsibility to ensure that critical news is not branded as disinformation or used to censor journalists producing critical reporting.”

Meanwhile, Digital Rights Foundation enjoined political parties to include digital rights concerns in their election agenda. It offered a guide that focuses on “conducting human rights impact assessments on tech tools and cyber policies, bridging digital divide, and revising existing tech policies that are detrimental to fundamental rights in the digital age.” DRF also published a special edition of its feminist magazine themed “Election Illusions: Deepfakes & Disinformation in Pakistan”, which explores the impact of AI and its ethical use ahead of the 2024 elections.

Recognizing the serious harm caused by election disinformation, groups like Media Matters for Democracy (MMFD) have stepped up efforts to initiate collaborative fact-checking training sessions and workshops with more than 100 journalists. In particular, MMFD organised several training programs in partnership with news outlets in Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad, and Peshawar. MMFD’s Trends Monitor toolkit has also been shared with journalists and serves as a course guide for the detection, investigation, and countering of disinformation.

The post Looking ahead: Censorship, AI, disinformation, and repression undermining elections appeared first on IFEX.

Israel targets Gaza’s journalists with nowhere to go

Emboldened by a glaring lack of deterrence, the dire consequences of impunity have become starkly evident in recent weeks as Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza killed at least 64 Palestinian journalists and media workers there. “Since 7 October, the Palestinian territory has been subjected to a veritable eradication of journalism,” said Reporters Without Borders (RSF), highlighting the cases of targeted journalists.

Fueling the impunity have been smear campaigns aimed at discrediting Palestinian journalists and legitimizing their killing. Israeli media and leading public figures helped bolster a narrative that likened journalists covering the war within Gaza to terrorists.

Eight family members of photojournalist Yasser Qudih were killed when their house in southern Gaza was struck by four missiles, with Qudih surviving the attack. It came five days after he and other journalists were falsely accused of having prior knowledge of the 7 October attack, prompting death threats against him online.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said on X: “These journalists were accomplices in crimes against humanity; their actions were contrary to professional ethics.” Danny Danon, a member of parliament, called for the “elimination” of photojournalists “who participated in covering the massacre”.

An investigation by +972 Magazine and Local Call revealed how the Israeli army has used an AI system called Habsora (“the Gospel”) to rapidly generate targets that are mostly residential homes, killing entire families in the process and facilitating what the investigation called “a mass assassination factory”.

The report revealed that the majority of cases involved no military activities in the targeted homes, many belonging to journalists’ families. This includes the home of UK-based Palestinian journalist Ahmed Alnaouq in Deir al-Balah, where 21 family members were lost to an Israeli airstrike.

Many journalists have also been killed in their homes alongside their families, including Duaa Sharaf, Salma Makhaimer, Salam Mema, and Roshdi Sarraj. The director of the Palestinian online news agency Quds News, Hassouna Sleem, and freelance photojournalist Sary Mansour were killed in an Israeli strike 24 hours after receiving an online death threat linked to their work.

Manhattan, New York, USA, 6 November 2023. People light candles during an event commemorating the journalists who lost their lives as a result of Israeil attacks in Gaza. Fatih Aktas/Anadolu via Getty Images

One of Gaza’s most prominent writers and intellectuals Dr. Refaat al-Areer was killed in his sister’s home in Gaza city, in what Euro-Med Monitor reports was a surgical strike of the second floor apartment in a 3-story building. Displaced multiple times throughout the current war, Al-Areer was subject to numerous online death threats and reportedly received an anonymous phone call from someone claiming to be an Israeli officer, who informed the Gazan poet that Israeli forces knew “precisely the school where he was located and were about to get to his location.”

Others targeted include prominent journalist Bilal Jadallah, who was also killed by an Israeli strike targeting his car while he was attempting to flee from Gaza City. Director of the non-profit Press House Palestine, Jadallah provided crucial research for CPJ’s May 2023 report “Deadly Pattern” that revealed a complete lack of accountability in Israeli military killings of journalists over the past two decades.

On 22 November, an Israeli airstrike hit Al Jazeera reporter Anas Al-Sharif’s family home in the Jabalia refugee camp, killing his 90-year-old father. The journalist reported receiving threatening phone calls from Israeli military officers instructing him to cease coverage and leave northern Gaza. Al-Sharif also received WhatsApp voice notes disclosing his location.

Al Jazeera correspondent Moamen Al Sharafi also lost 22 members of his family in an Israeli air attack on a home in the Jabalia refugee camp where they were sheltering.

After having to evacuate northern Gaza, journalists were told by Israel to gather at the Rafah border with Egypt without being able to cross. Trapped within the territory, many journalists posted their parting messages in case they should be killed.

Journalists and writers have also faced arbitrary detentions by Israeli forces throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Palestinian poet Mosab Abu Toha was abducted for two days by Israeli troops while attempting to flee towards the Rafah border crossing with his family. Abu Toha was reportedly taken to an Israeli prison where he was beaten and interrogated before being released.

Journalist Diaa Al-Kahlout, a correspondent for Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, was detained at gunpoint by Israeli forces along with his relatives and other civilians from Beit Lahia in northern Gaza. Footage of the detained men, who were forced to strip and kneel by Israeli forces while their hands were bound, circulated online. His whereabouts remain unknown.

Palestinian activist and writer Ahed Tamimi was taken from her home in the West Bank and arbitrarily detained in an Israeli prison where she was assaulted along with other detainees, and held incommunicado for three weeks before being released.

Lebanese reporter Farah Omar and videographer Rabih Al Maamari of Al-Mayadeen TV were killed by an Israeli strike in southern Lebanon on 21 November while covering back-and-forth fire between Israeli forces and Hezbollah. The attack came days after Israel’s security cabinet shut down the broadcast of the Beirut-based TV station, leading the station to conclude that its journalists were deliberately targeted.

Meanwhile, the Israeli parliament passed an amendment to the terrorism law on 7 November, introducing the potential for a one-year prison sentence for those deemed to be “systematically and continuously consuming terrorist publications.”

Although the amendment excludes publications “providing information to the public,” its vague language leaves room for broad interpretation and raises concerns about its impact on press freedom.

The move comes in the wake of the Israeli information minister calling the Qatari TV news channel Al Jazeera a “propaganda” outlet for “terrorist organizations”. According to RSF, should this characterisation gain official status, it not only puts Al Jazeera at risk of being banned but subjects viewers to potential prosecution under the newly adopted amendment.

Impunity and growing demands for urgent accountability

Israel’s systematic targeting of Palestinian journalists and their families, coupled with arrests and threats in the Occupied Territories, has seen a sinister campaign to silence voices in the region unfold with total impunity. But efforts to hold Israel accountable for war crimes against journalists have already begun to emerge.

Four independent investigations carried out by Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, AFP and Reuters confirmed that two deliberate Israeli strikes were responsible for the killing of Lebanese journalist Issam Abdallah and the injury of six other journalists.

“This is not the first time that Israeli forces have apparently deliberately attacked journalists, with deadly and devastating results. Those responsible need to be held to account, and it needs to be made clear that journalists and other civilians are not lawful targets.”

Ramzi Kaiss, Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch

Marking the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists, IFEX member the Palestinian Center for Development and Media Freedoms (MADA) called for the establishment of an international tribunal to prosecute those accountable for journalist killings that continues to echo with urgency, stating:

“MADA Center considers that impunity is a real danger to journalists and media professionals, the results of which became clear during the past days in which the occupation authorities went so far as to kill journalists in a way that we have never witnessed before. The lack of deterrence against the perpetrators of these crimes gives them the space to commit more crimes and commit violations without fear of punishment.”

Rights groups also joined MADA’s call for the UN to condemn Israel’s systematic targeting of Palestinian journalists and media outlets.

In Lebanon, IFEX member Maharat Foundation also marked the day by underscoring the staggering killing of journalists in recent weeks:

“The international community must seriously work on implementing treaties, resolutions, and commitments that protect journalists, while also holding their attackers and killers accountable. Otherwise, we may witness the legitimization of journalist killings and the suppression of what the UN Secretary-General referred to as collective punishment for the Palestinian people.”

At COP28: Restricted protests, censorship, and renewed persecution of Emirati activists

The UAE’s hosting of the COP28 climate summit between 30 November and 12 December put the country’s human rights record and restricted civic space under a global spotlight.

Amnesty International said rules and guidelines for protests and actions at the summit in Dubai were unusually strictly enforced by the UN. Securing approval for activities in the UN-administered “Blue Zone” was reportedly challenging, with activists risking expulsion for unauthorized actions. This included 12-year old climate activist Licypriya Kangujam from India, who was escorted out after storming the stage during an event to protest fossil fuels.

According to the group, extensive video surveillance created an intimidating atmosphere, while strict UAE laws criminalizing dissent deterred protests outside the designated UN-administered space. Tunisian climate activist Raouf Ben Mohamed said activists were warned not to call out countries by name or rally outside the conference grounds.

Pro-Palestinian protesters calling for a cease-fire and climate justice were prohibited from naming the parties involved, while activists bypassed rules banning national flags by wearing keffiyehs and holding watermelon signs to express solidarity with the Palestinians.

A protest organized by Amnesty International and HRW to call for the freedom of detained activists in the country and region was only permitted after censoring their posters. They featured cases like Egyptian-British activist Alaa Abdel Fattah and Emirati human rights defenders like Ahmed Mansoor, Khaled Al-Nuaimi, Dr. Al-Roken, Dr. Al-Mansoori and Mohamed Al-Siddiq.

While the climate talks continued, authorities held the first hearing of a case that saw new terrorism charges brought against 87 imprisoned Emiratis, including 60 activists belonging to the UAE94, as well as writer Ahmed Mansoor and academic Dr. Nasser Bin Ghaith. Already being held past their sentences, the activists could now face life imprisonment or the death penalty if convicted of these new charges.

Lebanon’s new media law

Rights groups have warned that a proposed new media law being discussed in Lebanon’s parliament poses a grave threat to freedom of expression. The Lebanese Parliament’s Administration and Justice Committee has been engaged in closed-door discussions to finalize a controversial law that, if approved, rights groups say would severely curtail press freedom and access to information.

The draft law, reviewed by the Coalition to Defend Freedom of Expression in Lebanon, upholds criminal penalties and, in certain cases, increases prison sentences and fines for insults and defamation, echoing a troubling trend where defamation laws are weaponized to silence critics.

The stifling legislation also limits journalists’ rights to form associations, permitting only one media syndicate, and obstructs public access to vital information by prohibiting the publication of government session minutes, the decisions of parliamentary committees, and investigations conducted by the Central Inspection and Administrative Inspection Department. Moreover, the draft introduces onerous fees and licensing requirements for media outlets.

“It is deeply concerning that the draft law is being privately discussed and hidden from public scrutiny, while the spotlight is fixed on the ongoing Israeli attacks in South Lebanon since October 7 – that have led to the tragic killing of at least 14 civilians,” said the Coalition to Defend Freedom of Expression in Lebanon.

Urging the parliament, the coalition called for legislative deliberations in parliamentary committees to be made public, and to allow for meaningful input from civil society on the draft media law, while ensuring the legislation meets international standards.

The post An ‘eradication’ of journalism in Palestine, and a censored global climate summit appeared first on IFEX.

The use of internet shutdowns by authoritarian regimes has emerged globally as a serious threat to freedom of expression. While commonly seen as rare in Latin America, a closer look reveals a different reality. Organisations and experts are increasingly noting various nuances and contexts in methods to interfere with internet access that are important to understand in order to identify and counter them.

The essence of a shutdown lies in the intentional disruption of communication services, making them inaccessible or unusable in a specific territory and under particular circumstances.

Shutdowns by authoritarian governments often emerge during (or before) socially sensitive situations – public protests, social unrest, or election times. The voiced justifications for imposing such shutdowns are varied. Sometimes they are cloaked in administrative or judicial orders; other times, there is no explicit directive. However, one point is consistent: an internet shutdown is never a justifiable, proportional response to a crisis.

Governments in Latin America often employ a broader strategy to interfere with access. These can range from the degradation of service quality to directly blocking specific websites. These strategies suppress freedom of expression, access to information, and the overall health of the civic space – but don’t spark the same degree of criticism as shutdowns.

Consider how this plays out in a few different countries.

In Colombia, internet disruptions and disruptions to services like social media or messaging apps occurred during the social protests of 2021. A report by Fundación Karisma titled Pistolas contra Celulares (“Guns vs. Cellphones”) documented many of these events. Movistar, a prominent Internet Service Provider (ISP) in the region, attributed the internet disruption to cable theft, which had reportedly caused a 25% internet outage, predominantly affecting the Aguablanca area. They also explained that repairs were hindered by ongoing protests. This statement was echoed by the Ministry of Information and Communication Technologies, which added vandalism into the narrative.

However, the complaints on social networks paint a different picture. The primary problem was not centered around Aguablanca, but rather in Siloe, and specifically related to mobile phone connectivity. The nature of these complaints and descriptions point to the possibility of a deliberate intervention, possibly through the use of a signal blocker, rather than infrastructure damage.

According to Carolina Botero, censorship was felt across various regions. That was the sentiment that people in Cali also shared on 4 May, where significant internet disruptions coincided with social unrest and crackdowns on protests and dozens of people were killed or injured.

The nuanced situation in Colombia stands in contrast to Cuba, where the government’s control over internet connections makes blocks and interventions more obvious (and easier). In 2021, for example, protesters and the general population faced internet and electricity cuts  as a response to the protests that marked that year in the island. During the shutdown, the government responded with an aggressive crackdown in which over 5,000 people, including 120 journalists and activists, were arrested. Many of these protesters and activists remain behind bars.

Targeted and individual cuts to communication lines also take place against dissident voices. The strategy is not new;  the government has cut individual communication lines since the early 2000s, while internet service providers blame technical difficulties.

In Paraguay, the situation presents yet another dynamic. The Coordinadora de Derechos Humanos del Paraguay (CODEHUPY) documented possible internet shutdowns in the highly militarized northern zone. Here, internet signal disruptions often precede government interventions. However, the fact that these rural areas already suffer from very low connectivity can mask the true extent of these shutdowns.

CODEHUPY’s human rights report highlighted various violations, including the use of internet shutdowns by the Task Force, particularly during security operations. These disruptions render entire areas invisible, cutting off communication and exacerbating the already severe issues of physical security and human rights violations in these regions.

In the case of Venezuela, its capacity for connectivity has been drained over the years by a variety of limitations. Local organisations like Espacio Público and Venezuela Inteligente document limitations to internet access. It is not always possible to determine whether such cuts are intentional or not, but they definitely contribute to the information desert that the Venezuelan government strengthens through other means of internet censorship, including website blocks.

Similarly to the Paraguayan case, technical limitations – that oftentimes also mean electricity cuts – make it complicated to determine a shutdown pattern. What is clear, however, is that the Venezuelan government’s efforts to limit access to information is systematic. From website blocks, to harassment against journalists and the press, to surveillance, it is clear that these censorship efforts are not only intentional, but structural and strategic.

Responses to shutdowns need to be as multifaceted as shutdowns themselves  

In this complex landscape, according to experts, the response also needs to be multi-faceted.

The situation in Colombia, particularly during the Cali protests, serves as a notable example. Amidst the confusion and lack of clear information about the internet disruptions, organisations like El Veinte, Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa (FLIP), Karisma, and ISUR adopted a legal approach by filing a tutela – a mechanism designed for the immediate protection of fundamental rights against potential violations by authorities. This action aimed to compel the government to explain the situation and take preventative measures.

The rationale behind the legal action was that the government bore responsibility for ensuring internet access. While there was no definitive evidence that the government had deliberately cut off the internet, the argument was that their heightened presence in the region and the involvement of the army in controlling public order created an obligation to maintain internet access and proactively provide information on their activities.

Despite court decisions that went against them, twice, the case was eventually selected by the Colombian Constitutional Court. A year later, the court issued a decision that partially supported the arguments of the organisations. As none of them were in Cali, the judgment was that their freedom of expression was violated due to an inability to receive information, which impacted their work as civil society organisations. For instance, FLIP couldn’t receive real-time reports of journalists being attacked, and Karisma couldn’t monitor the situation effectively.

The Constitutional Court recognised that the internet interruption affected these rights, underscoring the collective dimension of freedom of expression, which includes the right to receive and seek information.

The fight against internet shutdowns demands a collaborative approach, bringing together individuals with diverse skills and expertise. Though there may be warning signs, it very difficult to predict with certainty when and where a government might cut off internet access. This uncertainty complicates advocacy efforts. Mitigating their effects is deeply dependant on acute observation and comprehension of the phenomenon, in the region and beyond.

In brief

Violence against Mexico intensified since the last brief. In the space of only 10 days, 8 journalists were abducted and some were shot, in four different incidents.

Venezuela held a referendum as part of a campaign to reclaim the Esequibo territories from Guyana. The dispute centers on a land of 160,000-square-km (62,000-square-mile) border territory around the Esequibo river, which is mostly jungle, and an offshore area where recent discoveries of oil and gas have been made. According to local organisations, including Espacio Público, the event saw plenty of efforts around the country to limit the work of the press.

In Colombia, community-led radio stations created as part of the peace process are in peril. FLIP’s lates edition of their online magazine Páginas shares an analysis of how these projects promote peace in their territories, and the challenges they face.

The post Digging into the reality of shutdowns in the Americas: An insidious threat appeared first on IFEX.

A German court’s historic decision to convict Bai Lowe for his role in the murder of Gambian journalist Deyda Hydara, which took place almost two decades ago, is a reminder that the arc of justice can be long. Lowe, a former member of the Junglers – the infamous hit-squad that killed and tortured people under ex-dictator Yahya Jammeh – was sentenced to life imprisonment by a regional high court in Celle, Germany.

Arrested in 2021, Lowe was tried in Germany because, as Human Rights Watch explains: “the country’s laws recognise universal jurisdiction over certain serious crimes under international law, allowing for the investigation and prosecution of these crimes no matter where they were committed, and regardless of the nationality of the suspects or victims.”

Jammeh’s tyrannical rule of The Gambia for more than two decades was marked by gross human rights and freedom of expression violations ranging from threats, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and enforced disappearances, to extrajudicial killings. During the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission hearings, it was revealed that “over the 22 years, there were 140 incidents of arrests and 15 arbitrary closures of media” leading to a large number of journalists forced into exile. Many of these violations have been systematically documented by the Media Foundation for West Africa.

During this dark period, two critical questions – who killed Deyda Hydara, and where is Ebrima Manneh? – drove the advocacy strategy of the Gambia Press Union and the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA). Their work culminated in landmark rulings in the cases of Manneh, Hydara and Musa Saidykhan by the Community Court of Justice (CCJ), housed within the regional the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) body.

Togolese journalist and International Press Freedom Awardee Ferdinand Ayité speaks during the CPJ Press Freedom Awards ceremony, in New York City, USA, 16 November 2023. Michael Loccisano/Getty Images

Heavy penalty for reporting on corruption

Long-persecuted Togolese journalist Ferdinand Ayité was fittingly presented with the Committee to Protect Journalists’ (CPJ) 2023 International Press Freedom Award by Nigerian-American author Uzodinma Iweala at a ceremony in New York earlier this month.

Ayité and the publication he is a director of – L’ Alternative – have been in the Togolese government’s firing line for decades. Ayité’s partiality for critical investigative reporting and L’ Alternative’s trademark reputation for incisive coverage of corruption has drawn administrative sanctions, judicial proceedings and surveillance. Over the years, Ayité has had to deal with threats, intimidation and a legal onslaught in the form of arbitrary arrests, detentions, trumped up charges and imprisonment. His phone number has also appeared on the list of potential spyware surveillance targets in the Pegasus Project leak.

Earlier this month, Ayité and fellow journalist Isidore Kouwonou were convicted and sentenced to three years in prison and a fine of 3 million CFA francs (about USD5,000). They had international warrants issued against them after they were sentenced in absentia “on charges of ‘contempt of authority’ and ‘spreading mendacious comments on social media’”.

As Sadibou Marong, the director of Reporters Without Borders’ sub-Saharan Africa bureau, explained: “Ferdinand Ayité and Isidore Kouwonou were forced to flee their country for safety reasons, after repeatedly being arrested, intimidated and spied on by the authorities, and now they have been given prison sentences.”

The charges date back to 2021 when Ayité and the late Joel Egah, editor of the Lomé-based newspaper Fraternité, were jailed on charges of ‘insulting authority’ and ‘defamation’. They had discussed corruption allegations involving two ministers “on L’Autre Journal, a current affairs programme broadcast on L’Alternative’s YouTube channel […] The programme’s presenter, Isidore Kouwonou, was also questioned but was just placed under judicial control.”

Deadly risks for journalists in the Sahel region

Ayité’s tribute to African journalists in the Sahel region is a recognition of the threats the media contend with. The 7 November attack on four journalists travelling to a workshop from Ansongo to the city of Gao by unidentified gunmen in northern Mali is indicative of that risk.

MFWA reports that the “violent ambush led to the death of Abdoul Aziz Djibrilla from Radio Naata, while Harouna Attini, host of Radio Alafia sustained injuries and fellow colleagues Saleck Ag Jiddou, the director of Radio Coton, and radio host Moustaph Koné, were taken hostage.”

A report by RSF provides empirical evidence of these perilous conditions, pointing out that: “to be a journalist in the Sahel means enduring the growing presence of radical armed groups who do not hesitate to kill reporters or kidnap them and use them as bargaining chips. It means knowing how to cope with new military governments which, after taking power in coups, impose their own concept of journalism and issue “patriotic directives”.

Militarisation of information in Burkina Faso

A new law passed in Burkina Faso transforms the country’s media regulator – the Superior Council for Communication (CSC) – in a form and manner that has a far-reaching and adverse impact on the media.

“Passed unanimously by the Transitional Legislative Assembly on 21 November, the law reorganises the way the CSC functions and marks another step towards the “patriotic” news coverage sought by Captain Ibrahim Traoré, the president of Burkina Faso’s military junta.”

In addition to granting the head of state the power to appoint the head of the CSC, it also allows the regulator to monitor social media accounts and, as MFWA reports: “the authority to seize equipment and close down media houses, while Article (63), allows the regulator to order suspension of broadcast activities, and to temporarily or permanently withdraw press cards.”

The democratic decline in the country is being reinforced by additional actions by the junta, which is forcefully conscripting journalists and critics into the army. According to monitoring by the MFWA, Issaka Lingani (who is regularly featured on BF1 TV’s political programme, “Presse Echos”) and Yacouba Ladji Bama (an investigative reporter and founding editor of the online news website Bam Yinga) were summoned to a military base to be trained and deployed for the counter-terrorism operations against Jihadist rebels. Bama and Yinga responded by joining forces with a blogger and an activist – Rasmané Zinaba and Bassirou Badjo – to file an urgent petition contesting the conscription. The administrative court of Ouagadougou rejected the petition.

International Day to End Impunity messages zone in on demands for safety and justice

• A consistent theme running through the IDEI messages from IFEX members this year focused on bringing about accountability for crimes committed against journalists, and renewed pleas for a safer environment.
• Media Rights Agenda (MRA) expressed concern that: “ … in spite of numerous and frequently recurring cases of attacks against journalists in Nigeria, with at least 19 journalists killed over the years, no one has ever been charged with any crime for such attacks or punished for such offenses, …”
• The International Press Centre (IPC), Lagos-Nigeria bolstered MRA’s request, asking for “urgent but thorough investigations into the documented cases of crimes against journalists so that perpetrators can be held accountable.”
• The Gambia Press Union (GPU) emphasised how the “failure to bring perpetrators of crimes against Gambian journalists to justice, has helped sustained a cycle of violence against journalists for 29 years.”
• The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) recalled the killing of Joki in Lesotho, and pointed out that while several people have been arrested for the crime, ” …. some journalists continued to receive threats online that they would meet the same fate” as the murdered journalist.
• The Association for Media Development In South Sudan (AMDISS) reiterated its “call to the transitional government of national unity to launch investigations into the killing of journalists in the country since the outbreak of civil war in 2013.”
• The MFWA urged the media to shed its inertia with regard to the issue of the safety of journalists, which has manifested in their failure to follow-up on violations to ensure the prosecution of perpetrators of attacks on journalists.
• The Human Rights Journalists Network of Uganda underscored: “the indispensable role of public leadership in safeguarding press freedom and the protection of journalists. Public leaders hold a responsibility to foster an environment in which journalists can operate without fear, coercion, or violence.”

In brief

The arrest of Walfadjri press group’s journalist Pape Sané on charges of false news is another example of Senegal’s crackdown on critical journalism. The arrest relates to Sané’s Facebook page, where he discussed the replacement of the high commander of the gendarmerie. If convicted of disseminating false news, Sané could face up to three years in prison and a fine under Senegal’s penal code.

In Togo, reporting on the theft of 400 million FCFA (a little over USD600,000) from the housing minister’s earned journalists Loic Lawson and Anani Sossou an unwarranted stint in prison.

Alagie Bora Sisawo, a culture and society talk show co-host on Kerr Fatou, was awarded D500,000 (USD8,168) in damages, after Gambia’s high court ruled that his rights had been violated by the police. “The court found that Sissawo’s detention by the police from 4 October to 10 October was unlawful and a breach of his fundamental right.”

Ghanaian journalist Nichola Morkah was assaulted and arrested by soldiers for recording the impounding of an illegal vehicle operation, during which police clashed with members of the public. “The MFWA is demanding that the police investigate the matter and bring the perpetrators to book.”

The post An award for Ayité…. and the long arc of justice in a month of tragedy and triumph appeared first on IFEX.

Impunity undermines media freedom and democracy

The brazen killing of Filipino radio host Juan Jumalon during a live broadcast inside his home studio on 5 November showed how impunity continues to threaten the safety and security of journalists in the Philippines. He was the fourth journalist killed under the government of Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who became president on 30 June 2022. Over the past year, the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines has documented 101 attacks against the media, including cases of extrajudicial killings, harassment, death threats, denial of coverage, online intimidation, censorship, and the filing of cyber libel and libel charges.

The killing of Jumalon took place a few weeks before the anniversary of the 2009 Ampatuan massacre, whose victims included 32 journalists. IFEX member Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility summarised the status of the 14-year-old case and called for continued vigilance.

“Only 117 of 197 accused were tried; 44 were convicted. 80 others are yet to be sentenced; of which 75, still at large. Convictions can still be overturned in the process of an appeal. Constant vigilance is needed.”

In China, citizen journalist and activist Sun Lin was killed after reportedly being beaten by the police inside his home. Prior to the incident, he had been sharing social media videos about anti-Xi Jinping protests during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in San Francisco.

“This gruesome murder is a direct consequence of the Chinese regime’s paranoia, which leads its leaders to see an enemy of the state in every independent media or journalist, and therefore exposes them to systematic retribution.”

Cédric Alviani, RSF Asia-Pacific bureau director

An important takeaway from these impunity cases is that ensuring the safety of journalists is essential to strengthen accountability in a democracy. This is especially crucial during an election period since voters and the public in general need access to verified information. Concerned over the state of impunity ahead of the January 2024 elections, Pakistan Press Foundation has called on the Pakistan government to create an “open, restriction-free, and safe environment” in order for the media to effectively fulfill their work.

India’s biggest data breach

IFEX member SFLC.in urged authorities in India to investigate and provide the public with adequate information about the reported data breach involving the Indian Council of Medial Research (ICMR). The reported leak of COVID-19 test details affected 815 million registered users of ICMR. SFLC.in warned that the country’s biggest data breach “underscores the risks associated with centralized data collection, especially when it involves sensitive information.”

On a related privacy concern, SFLC.in also called for an independent probe into the notification sent by Apple that the phones of several opposition legislators and critical journalists were targeted by state-sponsored attackers. SFLC.in noted that the “weaponization of such spyware to quell dissent” undermines democracy.

Nepal bans TikTok

The decision of authorities in Nepal to ban popular social media platform TikTok was criticized by civil society groups and digital rights advocates who described the action as “untimely and arbitrary” and said that it “seriously attacks the basic principles of democracy, weakens civil liberties, and undermines the rule of law.”

In a signed statement, they added that “by banning TikTok blanketly, the government’s intention appears to be to block a platform of communication and expression, limiting the opportunities of Nepalese citizens to engage in online conversations, share their views, and participate in the global digital community.”

IFEX member Freedom Forum also called out the government for issuing a new directive intended to regulate social networking sites. It also assailed a government order prohibiting public assemblies in Kathmandu Valley – Maitighar Mandal for 27 days in an apparent attempt to prevent the opposition from staging protests in the area.

“Non-transparent measure of Tiktok regulation and prohibitory order on public spaces have direct impact on citizens’ rights of free speech and freedom of assembly and association, which are against the constitution and democratic norms,” said Freedom Forum’s Executive Chief Taranath Dahal.

Bangladesh: Ten thousand activists arrested since 28 October

In Bangladesh, a massive protest organized by the opposition on 28 October led to violent clashes with the police and members of the ruling party. In response, protesters called for a three-day strike, which was also violently dispersed by security forces. It was followed by a mass crackdown targeting members and leaders of the main opposition party. At least 10,000 opposition activists have been arrested and a bigger number face politically-motivated charges. During the protest, almost 30 journalists were attacked by the protesters, members of the ruling party, and the police.

The escalating violence reflects the political crisis ahead of the January 2024 general election. Human Rights Watch (HRW) underscored the need to uphold freedom of expression in order to realize a free and fair electoral process.

“A free election is impossible when the government stifles free expression and systematically incapacitates the opposition, critics, and activists through arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearance, harassment, and intimidation,” said Julia Bleckner, senior Asia researcher at HRW

In brief: Country reports by IFEX members

In Malaysia, the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) reviewed the reform agenda of the Anwar Ibrahim government, which came to power a year ago. CIJ acknowledged several laudable initiatives of the government, such as the legislation endorsing the people’s right to information and the preparation for the establishment of a media council. But it also highlighted the continued use of repressive laws like the Sedition Act to suppress free speech.

In Cambodia, the latest report of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, which covered the period between September 2022 and August 2023, pointed out that the government “continued its worrying trend of over-policing free speech and silencing critical voices, a repression that was exacerbated ahead of the July 2023 general election.” It monitored how state officials filed legal actions against 16 journalists and 100 human rights defenders. It also documented the license revocation of five independent media outlets.

In Sri Lanka, Free Media Movement recorded 88 press freedom incidents and violations during the first seven months of the year. Most of the cases pertain to the safety, security, and legal challenges faced by journalists.

In Afghanistan, the Afghanistan Journalists Center documented a total of 75 incidents violating media freedom from March to November this year. It urged the Taliban “to revise their media policy, refrain from imposing unjustified and extra-legal demands on journalists and media, and provide an environment to work without fear and free from self-censorship.”

In China, a year has passed since the White Paper protests, which saw thousands of citizens gathering in urban centers to condemn the harsh COVID-19 policies and lockdown measures of the government. Yaqiu Wang of Freedom House wrote about how authorities suppressed attempts to commemorate the movement. “Words and names associated with the protests continue to be banned online, protest sites are cordoned off by police, and those who participated in 2022 still face police harassment.”

New and noteworthy from the Digital Rights Foundation

IFEX member Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) has unveiled several initiatives promoting digital rights, women empowerment, and gender equity in Pakistan.

• It relaunched “Ab Aur Nahin”, an online legal and counselor support service designed for survivors of harassment. It connects women to pro bono lawyers who are ready to assist in cases involving gender-based violence.
• It signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Deputy Commissioner of the Lahore District Administration to collaborate on a series of digital safety and literacy sessions for young adults.
• It announced the release of a Disinformation WhatsApp Tipline enjoining the public to document and report instances of gendered disinformation.
• DRF’s feminist e-magazine 50/50 has a new edition themed “Election Illusions: Deepfakes & Disinformation in Pakistan”, which explores the impact of AI and its ethical use ahead of the 2024 elections.
• Finally, it published a series of animated videos on social media depicting the stories of individuals facing online harassment. Meet Aiza, a 14-year-old student who is constantly harassed; Kumar, who is trolled because of his political beliefs and religion; and Laila, a Trans Tiktoker who shared her experience in fighting cyber harassment.

The post A massive data breach, a TikTok ban, a mass crackdown, and ‘overpolicing free speech’ appeared first on IFEX.