Asia – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sentenced to Death

An illustration of Bangladesh with protest against the 30% quota. — Image 1: Illustration, students killed in Bangladesh, Quota reform movement/anti-quota protest. Source Adobe Express. By Nasima. Asset ID: 902673984

More than a year ago, in 2024, a student-lead protest turned violent, after armed forces began attacking. Recently, the former Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, and her Minister of Home Affairs, Asadduzzaman Khan Kamal, were accused of crimes against humanity. Both were found guilty of these crimes on November 17, 2025 by the International Crime Tribunal of Bangladesh. Those in attendance cheered as the verdict was announced; many had been personally affect by the violent attacks on the protest, either by injury or having lost a loved one. The seats meant for Hasina and Kamal remained empty throughout the entirety of the trial. This did little to stifle the pure excitement that filled the walls, inside and outside, as the words death penalty fell from Justice Md Golam Mortuza Mozumder’s lips. For their crimes against humanity, both of the accused are condemned to the ultimate punishment: death.

It is worth noting that the death penalty directly undermines the right to life and the right to not experience inhumane punishment. These rights are outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The first, right to life, is discussed in Article 3 of the UDHR and the second, no inhumane punishment, is talked about in Article 5 of the UDHR.

The three week student-led protests in 2024 ended in violence and the death of hundreds of students. The protests were against the reinstatement of a 30% quota that reserved government positions for family members of veterans from Bangladesh’s independence war. In a blog post titled The Awaiting Arrest Warrant of Bangladesh, Tamanna Patel offered an in-depth evaluation of the protests, the escalation of violence, and Hasina’s resignation of power. Building on this, this blog will briefly discuss the events that occurred during the protest, the aftermath of the protest, and Hasina and Kamal’s trial, verdict, and sentencing.

The History and Allegations

Dhanmondi, Dhaka Bangladesh burning cars after Hasina fell from power, August 5th, 2024. Source: Adobe Express. By Tanbin Asset ID: 956192001 — Image 2: Dhanmondi, Dhaka Bangladesh, burning cars after Hasina fell from power, August 5th, 2024. Source: Adobe Express. By Tanbin Asset ID: 956192001

What started as a peaceful protest on July 15th, 2024 by Dhaka University students quickly turned deadly when armed forces began attacking protesters. Batons were swung, guns raised, and tear gas fired into the crowds by members of the Bangladesh Chatra League (BCL) and later by the police. The steadily increasing death toll fueled the discontent amongst protesters. After the country went offline for five days, the death toll rose to 200 and the arrested to a minimum of 2,500.

According to Article 41 of the United Nation (UN) Charter, the Security Council has the right to conduct international tribunals and put those who are accused of heinous crimes, such as crimes against humanity, on trial. In the aftermath of the protests, the International Crimes Tribunal of Bangladesh was tasked with bringing a case forward against Hasina, Kamal, and the former police chief Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, all of whom played a hand in ordering Bangladesh’s armed forces to use lethal weapon against students during the protests. The attacks on protesters with lethal weapons are considered crimes against humanity. Because of their involvement, all three of the accused were tried for the crime of purposely targeting civilians.

The Trial, Verdict, and Sentencing

The Bangladesh flag against a blue sky. — Image 3: The national flag of Bangladesh against a blue sky. Source: Adobe Express. By GDMatthews. Asset ID: 515525562

The following elements must be met for a crime to be considered a “crime against humanity.” The first is that “the perpetrator killed one or more persons.” In the case of Hasina, Kamal, and Al-Mamun, their orders to use lethal weapons on protesters, which resulted in mass casualties, fulfills the requirement for the first element. The second is that the crimes were “committed as part of a systematic or widespread attack directed against a civilian population.” The student protesters would be the civilian population, and the multiple attacks at various protests across the country within a short time period could be seen as systematic or widespread attacks. The final element is that “conduct was part of or intended … to be part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population.“ For this tribunal, it was essential that the intent behind the attacks on the protesters be proven to be systematic or widespread.

The prosecution’s closing statements on October 16th, 2025 reiterated the severity of the crimes against humanity that Hasina and Kamal committed and called for both to receive the death penalty. The prosecution stated that due to orders by Hasina and Kamal, widespread, systematic attacks were carried out. One of the main arguments supporting this assertion was that members of the Awami League —supporters of Hasina– joined the police in violently attacking student protesters.

The defense, on the other hand, stated that the violence was not widespread, arguing that if it had been, it would have occurred throughout the entirety of Bangladesh. The defense attorney stated that there were not enough witnesses to the violence across the country and that it is possible that some of the videos of violence could be AI. The prosecution team had 54 witnesses and the defense had none. In addition, the defense attorney brought into question the validity of the former chief of police, Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun’s, testimony, as he could just be throwing the blame onto the other two accused.

Experts at the Atlantic Council, a think tank, note that this sentencing might further increase division within Bangladesh. With elections quickly approaching, the former ruling party, Awami League, has essentially been banned from running. Because of this, the possibility of further violence is a valid concern. For some, the death penalty is critical for holding the government accountable. Others believe the sentencing is not justice and will only work to further polarize the people of Bangladesh.

Undoubtedly, this verdict and sentencing have offered the families and friends of those killed in the protest some form of comfort. For many closely affected by the aftermath of the 2024 protests, this is justice. For others, the speed of the trial, absence of the defendants, and the banning of the Awami League from national elections make the tribunals seem politically motivated. While Hasina and Kamal received the death penalty, the former chief of police received only five years in prison. Although he did testify against the two leaders, there is a significant gap in the severity of the punishments. With Hasina and Kamal remaining in India, it is not yet clear whether they will be extradited by the Indian government. Dhaka (where the government of Bangladesh is located) has implemented an extradition treaty, but New Delhi responded that they will do what benefits the people of Bangladesh the most.

Conclusion

Although the fairness of the trial has been brought into question, the consequences of the armed forces attacking student protestors remains. It is evident the people of Bangladesh desire governmental change and accountability for its past actions. Using lethal weapons on civilians is a crime against humanity. For now, Hasina and Kamal have not been extradited, and it is uncertain whether or not their punishment will occur. Indeed, the punishment in itself can be viewed as a human rights violation. While their crimes undoubtedly undermined human life, so too does their sentencing undermine their right to life. It is a vicious cycle of violence that occurs when the death penalty is used. Regardless of their punishment, there is little that can be said to justify such a use of force. Only time will tell whether or not those responsible for such crimes will be punished.

Tackling Tuberculosis in Pakistan

In the cold winter of Punjab, Pakistan, we see families spending their weekends with their families and loved ones. However, this was a different day for Adnan Saeed and Rizwan Saeed. Traveling around an hour to Faisalabad Pakistan, they spent their day waiting in line for a promise: a tuberculosis screening and test. Amongst tens of other women, men, and children, they waited patiently in line to get an opportunity for clarity. Adnan’s brother had unfortunately passed away which made this personal; getting clarity for a test about his symptoms will help him improve his outcomes.

His story is one of many. Camps, hosted by Mercy Corps or other humanitarian organizations, help mobilize care to people living in the most underrepresented areas of Pakistan. As a way to provide community-focused care, women, children, and the elderly can bypass barriers to care and receive the information needed to change their health outcomes. These camps serve everyone, free of charge; as trusted entities in the community, working in collaboration with teachers and religious leaders, they are able to elicit sustainable change. The need for these camps represent an unmet need in the country and the burden of tuberculosis.

What is Tuberculosis?

Tuberculosis (TB) is a serious bacterial infection that primarily impacts the lungs. This disease is preventable and treatable, but it remains one of the leading causes of death worldwide. This burden impacts many different countries, but it has an especially heavy burden on Pakistan. As of 2021, Pakistan ranks 6th in the world for the most TB cases. The country itself has an overburdened health system and widespread poverty; this fuels the current public health crisis, impacting the most vulnerable.

One intervention that can possibly combat TB is Directly Observed Therapy (DOT), where healthcare providers supervise their patients while they are taking their medicine. This helps improve adherence long term. Despite its proven success, DOT is implemented in only 3% of clinics in Pakistan, compared to 25% of clinics in India. By working to expand DOT through the region, treatment adherence would improve significantly.

The Impact of TB

TB is caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis and has particularly severe outcomes for immunocompromised individuals. Alarmingly, two-thirds of the global TB burden is concentrated in the Eastern Mediterranean region, with Pakistan at the center. With 1.5 million people in Pakistan living with TB currently, and over 500,000 TB cases each year, there is reason for concern

In the context of TB, multidrug-resistant (MD) TB impacts many — around 15,000 patients annually to be exact, making Pakistan the 5th highest in the world for MDR. Without interventions like DOT being easily accessible to the most vulnerable, poor adherence is practically guaranteed, which further drives this issue.

The Most Vulnerable: Whom TB Impacts

TB does not discriminate, as it is a viral disease. However, some groups are disproportionately burdened by TB. Upending global trends, women in Pakistan account for slightly more cases than men. This is the result of social stigma discouraging women from seeking healthcare which then compounds disparities and further delays treatment.

In Pakistan’s Dir Valley, the disease is prevalent among those who are 21-40 years old. Oftentimes, TB spreads due to social factors like workplace contact and urban environment. The general trend across the world is that those living below the poverty line experience greater prevalence rates compared to others.

Beyond demographic factors, geography impacts the distribution of the disease in Pakistan. Punjab accounts for 51% of cases of Multi Drug Resistance (MDR) TB, followed by Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Punjab’s dense population and industrial landscape foster conditions that accelerate TB transmission.

Male and Female Participants setting on chairs in a Hall of a local hotel listening lectures of experts regarding TB control awareness campaign.Source: Flickr — Male and Female Participants setting on chairs in a Hall of a local hotel listening lectures of experts regarding TB control awareness campaign.
Source: Ground Report on Flickr

Risk Factors for TB

There are many risk factors that drive TB in Pakistan. This ranges from urbanization to poverty; considering the latter, around 20% of the population is living under poverty. This results in many individuals not having access to sanitation, ventilation, nor adequate access to housing, all driving TB development.

Biological factors also contribute to the development of TB; research suggests that having diabetes can double the risk of TB. This is key for Pakistan as around 26% of adults in Pakistan have diabetes, which presents as a comorbidity that further worsens TB outcomes.

Acting Now

TB has a negative financial impact in Pakistan, as well. Economically, the cost of TB is staggering. In the US, treatment for one patient can cost up to USD $ 23,000, including medical care and follow-ups. Prevention, in contrast, can cost as little as USD $17. This treatment cost can close off opportunities for the patient and their families. In Nigeria, around a 24.9% income loss is reported for many households who have a TB patient; for an already vulnerable family, this expands their financial hardships and puts them in a position of vulnerability.

In order to address TB in Pakistan, DOT needs to be mobilized effectively. Through subsidies for private collaborations with companies, while concurrently increasing educational campaigns, DOT can be mobilized through the entire country. By not only improving patient outcomes, but motivating conversations around normalizing prevention resources, scaling up TB prevention and intentional treatment would ameliorate the TB crisis. Working to support TB control in Pakistan can accelerate international progress in addressing TB and reducing its negative impact, promoting the human right to health for all.

Former Filipino President Duterte Charged with Crimes Against Humanity

Rodrigo Duterte, former president of the Philippines for six years, led a notorious war on drugs throughout his tenure. This led to the murder of at least 6,000 drug users, sellers and manufacturers, although the real number could be much higher. Many were killed without trial, and Duterte is now being held in the ICC court for charges linked to murders during his time as Governor and President.

Duterte’s War on Drugs

Protesters standing with signs in their hands reading: "Duterte: Stop Killing People Who Use Drugs" — Protesters against Duterte’s violent War on Drugs Source: VOCAL-NY (Voices Of Community Activists & Leaders), CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Angelo Lafuente, a 23-year-old repairman, was seized in a police raid of his neighborhood at 4 p.m. on August 18, 2016. Mere hours later, he was reported dead to his family, who was given images of his body with gunshot wounds. Although people saw him being taken by police, the shooting was blamed on unknown gunmen. This is only one of over six thousand who have died during Duterte’s War on Drugs, although some warn the true number of casualties could run much higher.

Duterte’s emphatic anti-drug rhetoric was often seen as encouragement for police agencies to kill drug users. Indeed, Duterte himself said that he hired a death squad during his time as mayor of Davao and that he told police to encourage suspects to fight back so they could justify killings as self-defense.

Duterte and his supporters also went after opponents to the war on drugs so that no meaningful resistance remained. The most vocal and powerful critic of Duterte, Senator Leila de Lima, was removed from her chair on the Senate Committee for Justice and Human Rights in September of 2016. This move came shortly after she called for an investigation into the rampant drug war killings. The hearings themselves prompted even further pushback from Duterte’s crowd, with Duterte himself going so far as to say de Lima should “hang herself” and then arresting her in February 2017 for violating the Dangerous Drugs Act.

ICC Charges

The International Crime Court at the Hague, where Duterte is currently being held awaiting trial — The International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague, Netherlands, where Duterte is currently awaiting trial. Source: Tony Webster, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Duterte’s presidency ended in 2022, and the ICC filed for an arrest warrant against him in February of 2025 for the crimes against humanity including murder, torture and rape. The warrant was officially issued in March, and Duterte was arrested pursuant the warrant by authorities in the Philippines before being surrendered to the ICC.

Officially, Duterte has been charged 3 times: the first charge is with regards to his time as mayor of Davao and his involvement in the murder of 19 people between 2013 and 2016. His second charge is during his time of presidency with the murder of 14 high value targets across the Philippines, while his third charge is from the murder and attempted murder of 45 people in operations related to clearing out villages and evidence.

In his testimony in front of the Senate, Duterte admitted to and defended his Drug War, while also emphasizing that he never asked his police force to murder suspects directly but instead to encourage fighting back so killings could be justified as self-defense. This hearing was impactful, as Duterte was finally required to explain his actions and involvement in the violence around his country.

Testimony was heard from family members of those killed, and the accused were allowed in the court to face Duterte. Duterte offered no apologies for his involvement in the war on drugs.

Political Impact and Infighting

Current Philippine President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. — Current Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. Source: Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

There are issues with the ongoing trial, including that Duterte still holds considerable power, and regardless of how legitimate the trial is, it may be perceived in the Philippines as more of a political maneuver than a means for justice and accountability. Also, interestingly, by surrendering Duterte to international courts, the Philippines is no longer able to pursue him within their own jurisdiction.

The current president of the Philippines, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., could have easily ignored the ICC warrant for Duterte’s arrest and decided not surrender him. It seems entirely possible that Marcos Jr. decided to give up Duterte because of recent bad blood between Marcos Jr. and Duterte. This feud happened because while Duterte and his allies helped current President Marcos Jr. secure his position in 2022, they have since begun criticizing his rule, with Duterte himself calling him a “weak leader” and publicly criticizing him.

While having the chance to put Duterte on trial is a large step forward for the ICC, this is only possible because of the willingness of the Philippines to cooperate. Duterte still has considerable popularity and political power in the Philippines, and he was even elected mayor of Davao again in May, despite being held in prison. Given his current popularity and the clash between large political figures in the Philippines, many politicians are remaining quiet or reserved with their remarks about the current situation.

Rodrigo Duterte speaking into a microphone at a podium — Former President Rodrigo Duterte giving a speech during his presidency Source: PCOO EDP, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Holding Duterte accountable for his actions is a huge accomplishment for the ICC, and time will tell what effects this will have on the international scale. While we have seen that there is some accountability and power through the ICC, there are also many questions about the impacts this will have on the Filipino political landscape. The hearing for Duterte has been postponed due to his poor health, but the trial shows that there is still hope for justice and answers for those affected by the war on drugs.

UN Conference on Rohingya: Spotlight on a Forgotten People

The Rohingya, a stateless Muslim ethnic minority, have been the victims of a decades-long ethnic cleansing campaign. Their native country, Myanmar, does not recognize them as citizens; because of this, they are denied basic rights. In 2017, over 742,000 Rohingya were forcibly displaced to refugee camps in neighboring Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, following mass killings and attacks on their villages. More have been displaced after a 2021 military coup and subsequent civil war.

UN’s High-Level Conference on Rohingya Muslims and Other Minorities in Myanmar

On September 30, 2025, the UN held a conference on the Rohingya population, which hosted speakers including Rohingya leader Lucky Karim, the Bangladesh interim leader Muhammad Yunus, and Wai Wai Nu, the executive director of the Women’s Peace Network-Myanmar. Speakers urged the international community to take immediate action for the protection of the Rohingya people. The impacts of aid cuts, the necessity of sanctions on Myanmar, and the importance of immediate repatriation of Rohingya to their homeland were discussed.

Background: A Long History, 2017 mass expulsion, and Ongoing Civil War

Ethnic tensions between the Rohingya minority and the Buddhist majority ethnic groups existed long before the 2017 mass exodus of Rohingya to Bangladesh. In 1982, Myanmar’s government denied the Rohingyas’ status as an ethnic group, making them stateless. In 2017, following Rohingya militant attacks on police outposts, Myanmar’s troops and local mobs attacked and burned Rohingya villages, killing 6,700 Rohingya and perpetrating sexual violence on women and girls.

Following these atrocities, cases were filed in the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on behalf of the Rohingya, which are still pending. Most Rohingya fled to Bangladesh as refugees, where over a million remain in refugee camps.

In 2021, civil war broke out following a military coup in Myanmar. After years of an unsteady power-sharing agreement between the military and democratically elected leaders, the military declared the 2020 election, won by the National League for Democracy (NLD), illegitimate. Myriad forces opposed the military junta, forming pro-democracy coalitions and ethnic rebel militant groups, like the Arakan Army.

The Arakan Army currently controls most of the Rakhine State and the Myanmar-Bangladesh border. Rohingya are caught in the middle of the civil war. Rohingya have reported massive restrictions on freedoms under the Arakan Army control, and other human rights abuses like extrajudicial killings and forced labor.

The image depicts a run-down refugee camp in Bangladesh — Image 2: Rohingya refugee camp in Cox’s Bazaar, Bangladesh. Source: Adobe Stock.

Displacement in Bangladesh

Over one million Rohingya now live in dire conditions in refugee camps in Bangladesh. They rely almost entirely on international humanitarian aid and are largely unable to find work. Bangladesh’s interim leader, Yunus, told the UN during the Conference that Bangladesh is “forced to bear huge financial, social and environmental costs” due to the refugee crisis. Following aid cuts, particularly those made by the Trump administration to USAID, non-emergency medical care and food resources provided by the World Food Program were drastically reduced, exacerbating an already grim situation. At the Conference, the US pledged $60 million to support Rohingya refugees while urging other governments and organizations to step up.

Repatriation

While the Bangladeshi government and the Rohingya themselves hope for repatriation back to Myanmar, the conditions are still too hostile for immediate return. Both the military junta and Arakan Army are accused of grave human rights abuses against Rohingya, and if the Rohingya returned, their situation might be even more dangerous than in the poorly funded Bangladeshi camps. A Human Rights Watch investigation revealed that the Arakan Army has committed widespread arson on Rohingya villages and stoked ethnic tensions by unlawfully recruiting Rohingya men and boys.

Rohingya representatives at the UN Conference stated their need for international protection to make progress toward the Rohingyas’ return to Myanmar. Rofik Husson, Founder of the Arakan Youth Peace Network, reiterated the wish of Rohingyas to live in their “ancestral homeland with safety and security.” He added that the issue of Rohingya repatriation and safety is a “test for this Assembly and a test for humanity itself.”

While the chances of repatriation to Myanmar remain slim, other actions must be taken to improve the situation of Rohingya refugees. Funding shortfalls, limited mobility, and a lack of formal education have cost the Rohingya their freedom and livelihoods.

Conference Shortfalls, Outside Solutions

UN Representative Statements: UN delegates from across the world offered different perspectives on the Rohingya situation, as outlined by the United Nations’ press release regarding the Conference. Myanmar’s delegate to the UN urged the international community to reject the military junta’s planned December election as illegitimate, stating that the military is the root of Myanmar’s crisis. The representative of Poland condemned the employment of advanced military technologies on civilians, while Türkiye’s representative urged Myanmar to comply with the International Court of Justice. China’s delegate warned against politicizing human rights and called for dialogue between Bangladesh and Myanmar.

Few concrete commitments were made at the Conference for improving the Rohingyas’ situation, other than international aid offered by the US and UK, which still does not bridge the funding gap required to create decent and stable conditions within the Cox’s Bazar camps. The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization suggested some solutions to the international community following the conference. These include:

Reduce mobility restrictions to allow for development and reduce aid dependency within Cox’s Bazar camps

Regional states recognize Rohingya as refugees and ensure refugees do not return to Myanmar under detrimental conditions (also called non-refoulement)

Refer the Myanmar situation to the ICC while U.N. member states prosecute individual perpetrators under the principle of universal jurisdiction

Impose an embargo on military supplies to Myanmar and reject the military junta as illegitimate

Rohingya Perspectives on Their History and Future

Perhaps the most powerful and illuminating moments from the Conference came from the Rohingya representatives themselves, however. The first Rohingya to attend New York University, Maung Sawyeddollah, emphasized the international community’s role in empowering the Rohingya community, particularly through higher education. He urged universities to give lifelines to Rohingya students, who lack access to formal education in refugee camps. “It’s not a big burden for a university to offer one or two scholarships to Rohingya students in an academic year,” Sawyeddollah stated.

Lucky Karim recounted fleeing Myanmar in 2017 to Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, and then her return to the camp years later. She stressed that the genocide of the Rohingya is not an isolated event. It did not begin or end with the 2017 mass expulsion to Bangladesh, stating, “Rohingya have been refugees to Bangladesh numerous times, even before 2017, and we keep going back and forth to Myanmar, and it’s never been sustainable.”

Karim spoke of the conditions she returned to earlier this year in Cox’s Bazar, where aid cuts shut down healthcare facilities, and new arrivals were forced to share already overcrowded shelters. Her hope is for a stable and permanent repatriation of Rohingya refugees to the Rakhine state.

Despite the powerful statements from Rohingya leaders, some noted that no Rohingya who currently reside in the Cox’s Bazar camps were present at the Conference. Some officials cited logistical obstacles, but the Rohingya lamented that the voices of those within the camps were not heard.

The image depicts a child playing on the fence of the Bangladesh refugee camp. — Image 3: Child climbs fence at refugee camp. Source: Adobe Stock.

Unanswered Questions and the International Community’s Role

There is much to be done for Rohingya refugees and those still living in Myanmar. Converging crises prevent effective solutions, and the wider conflict within the region overshadows the Rohingyas’ plight. The UN Conference put an international spotlight on the situation of forgotten people; however, few tangible commitments were made at the Conference. To relieve the suffering of the Rohingya, substantial action should be taken to prevent widespread atrocities by the Myanmar military, and the international community should materially invest in Rohingya development, education, and opportunities.

The Pending Impeachment in South Korea

It is May of 1980. It was already the 6th and last day of the Gwangju citizens resisting the military coup of the dictator Chun Doo-hwan. Having faced massacres, executions, military forces, and endless indiscriminate and inhumane firings aimed at them, it was unity and dedication that held them strong. After this 6th day, however, their protest will be put to an end by military tanks and an uncalculated count of casualties.

It is now March 2025, but just three months ago, on that same massacre site, the largest Gwangju newspapers blocked their newsrooms in a hurry to print copies and throw them out the windows in case paratroopers force in, as they did in 1980. A surviving child of May 1980, now in her 70s, tells others of her generation to risk their lives on the front lines to protect the younger generations on a social media platform, X.

Details of the Gwangju Uprising tragedies remain unknown to this day; however, the current events of modern-day South Korea are open for the world to see.

The Day of Chaos

At 10:30 p.m. (KST) on December 3rd, 2024, Yoon Suk-yeol, the president of South Korea, left a televised address to the public, and for the first time in 44 years, martial law was declared in the country. A decree that suspended freedoms of speech, assembly, and press, as well as all political activities, warranted arrests and rights in the face of military authority and decisions. This decree inevitably challenged and threatened the human rights and freedoms of Korean citizens. According to Yoon, the justifications for this choice are efforts by the opposition party to impeach his cabinet and obstruct the government budget, as well as vague communist threats from North Korea. Justifications that Human Rights Watch refers to as “ludicrous”.

By 10:42 p.m., an emergency meeting was called by the National Assembly, the only body that could overturn martial law. However, before the entry gates would close at 11:04 p.m., armed military special forces lined up outside in order to arrest political leaders and prevent a majority vote from overturning the decree. In the face of fear, uncertainty, and potential violence, the South Korean population, once again, came together. Many rushed out of their homes in the middle of the cold December night towards the National Assembly to clasp hands, create a barricade against soldiers and large military vehicles, and provide passage to the political officials.

Image 1: Military special forces at the National Assembly on December 3rd. | Source: Yahoo Images

A 63-year-old, Lee Hyun-gyu, stated, “I experienced martial law in 1979…I spent three and a half hours at the rally to block this from happening again to the next generation”. The night of December 3rd quickly ignited memories of May 1980 in many of the older generation. Memories of violence, pain, grief, and loss aimed to attain pure and blind compliance. Memories of having their well-being, lives, autonomy, and basic rights stolen. Memories they refused to let themselves or others live through again.

A spokesperson for an opposition party, Ahn Gwi-ryeong, grabbed and pushed away the barrel of a weapon pointed at her and yelled, “Are you not ashamed? Are you not ashamed?”. An act of courage that quickly became a viral video.

With the support of the general public, 190 lawmakers were able to enter the building in time and overturned martial law under Article 77 of the constitution unanimously, including members of Yoon’s own party. A few days later, the matter was finally addressed.

Impeachment

On December 11th, Yoon addressed the night in his speech and denied giving orders to prevent the lifting of martial law. In contradiction, Colonel Kin Hyun-tae, leader of the special forces stationed on the night of the 3rd, states he received orders to stop at least 150 National Assembly members from entering, the exact number needed to overturn martial law, from senior commanders. Cho Ji-ho, the national police force head, states he was asked to locate and detain 15 people, including political leaders, by the armed forces. The former deputy director of the National Intelligence Service states he received an order to arrest several political leaders, broadcasters, a union official, a judge who previously ruled in favor of Yoon’s opponent, and a former chief justice of the Constitutional Court.

Image 2: Yoon Suk-yeol giving a speech. | Source: Yahoo Images

On December 14th, a motion for impeachment was passed. Although Yoon continues to preside over the presidential seat, he has lost his powers. The motion was passed with the charges of ordering military and police forces to prevent voting that would overturn martial law, aiming to take over the National Election Committee, and arresting political and judicial leaders. Beginning on the 14th, the Constitutional Court has 180 days to move forward with the impeachment based upon a series of hearings.

The Trial Begins

Yoon did not show up for the first hearing on January 14th due to health concerns, according to his lawyer. His absence ended the hearing in four minutes. The following day, Yoon became the first president of the nation to have been detained. After hours of questioning, he was taken directly from his residence by anti-corruption officials under charges of insurrection and abuse of power.

Since then, the sitting president has been present at the following hearings, and he continues to deny any tampering attempts on the voting of December 3rd despite military witnesses and statements that say otherwise.

Moving Forward

As we’ve moved through February, final hearings have been undergone, with a ruling expected in mid- or late March. Impeachment will require the favor of six out of the eight Constitutional Court judges. And if impeachment is the decision, an election must occur within 60 days. We hope that the final decision will lead to the restoration of the nation’s economic, social, and political crisis since the failed martial law.

December 3rd was a night of fright that ignited feelings of uncertainty and fear. An attempt to compromise the human rights of the South Korean population under vague justifications. Hence, it is important to acknowledge the actions of that night to prevent another. There are various methods of support you can consider. This includes keeping yourself updated on the ongoing events, supporting civic groups such as Global Candlelight Action that have held peaceful rallies, and spreading awareness on the impeachment trials and the role of the Constitutional Court.

Though these efforts may seem minor, they can showcase tremendous support and concern for the rights of the South Korean population.

Thailand’s Uyghur Crisis: A Decade of Detention and Desperation

Forty-eight Uyghur men have been held in detention facilities throughout Thailand for more than ten years. Trapped in a diplomatic limbo that perfectly captures the clash of international politics, human rights violations, and the suffering of an oppressed minority. These men, who are members of a Muslim ethnic group from China’s Xinjiang province that speaks Turkic, left their country in search of safety from systemic persecution. But rather than escaping to safety, they now risk being forcibly deported back to a government notorious for its cruel treatment of Uyghurs.

Image 1: 150 Uyghurs and supporters protested in Berlin after July 2009 Ürümqi riots. Source: Claudia Himmelreich, Creative Commons

Who Are the Uyghurs?

The northwest Chinese province of Xinjiang is home to the Uyghurs, who are an ethnic minority whose population is predominately Muslim. International human rights organizations have repeatedly reported serious violations in Xinjiang, such as forced labor, mass detentions, cultural erasure, and even accusations of genocide. The so-called “re-education camps” in China have imprisoned more than a million Uyghurs and subjected them to psychological abuse, forced sterilization, and indoctrination.

Many Uyghurs have left China in search of safety, often going across Southeast Asia in dangerous conditions. Thailand’s close proximity has made it a popular transit country. However, many Uyghurs have been held in overcrowded facilities indefinitely instead of being granted refuge.

Thailand’s Role: A Decade of Detention

Nearly 350 Uyghurs, including women and children, were detained by Thai police in 2014 under the pretense of being “illegal immigrants.” Some, most notably the forty-eight men, were left behind in Thailand. Others were later sent to Turkey, a country that shares cultural and theological similarities with the Uyghurs. The individuals detained in Thailand have suffered horrendous conditions in prison over the years, with no access to healthcare, sunlight, or legal protection.

When Thai authorities forced the captives to sign “voluntary return” forms in January 2025, their situation worsened. In a desperate protest against their protracted incarceration and impending deportation, the Uyghurs refused to comply and on January 10 began a hunger strike.

Fears of Refoulement

Human rights organizations are incensed by the idea of sending these men to China. The cornerstone of international refugee law, the principle of non-refoulement, would be broken by such acts, according to Human Rights Watch and other groups. Countries are not allowed to send people back to places where they risk threats of torture, cruel treatment, or persecution under the principle of non-refoulement.

There is little uncertainty on the fate of deported Uyghurs given China’s history in Xinjiang. Prior examples have shown that repatriated individuals are subject to substantial prison sentences, forced confessions, and immediate detention. “Deporting these men to China would be a death sentence. Thailand must resist political pressure and prioritize human rights.” said Elaine Pearson, Asia Director for Human Rights Watch, urging Thailand to honor its international obligations.

Thailand’s Political Calculations

A larger battle to achieve a balance between national policies, international commitments, and geopolitical influences is seen in Thailand’s treatment of the Uyghur captives. Thailand has historically refrained from ratifying the 1951 Refugee Convention due to worries about illegal immigration and sovereignty, and the nation’s dependence on Chinese commerce and investment makes it more difficult for it to stand firmly against Beijing.

Despite widespread outrage, Thailand deported 109 Uyghurs to China in 2015. Chinese state media aired videos of deportees arriving in shackles and clearly distressed. The incident showed the impact of China’s global reach while also drawing harsh criticism from the UN and other international organizations.

Image 2: Child’s play – Uyghur children in old town Kashgar, China. Source: Sherpas 428, Creative Commons

Hunger Strike

The severe physical and psychological effects of indefinite incarceration are brought to light by the ongoing hunger strike. Hunger strikes, which represent the captives’ desperation, have long been used as a nonviolent protest tactic. Prolonged hunger strikes can cause organ failure, permanent health problems, and even death, according to medical professionals. However, for many Uyghurs, the risks of being detained or deported forcibly are greater than the risks of protesting.

The detainees’ relatives have pleaded with Thai authorities to step in. In an impassioned appeal, a relative of one detained stated, “They are not criminals; they are victims… Sending them back to China is the same as signing their death warrants.”

International Responses

The plight of Thailand’s Uyghur prisoners has drawn attention from throughout the world. Foreign governments and advocacy organizations have called on Thailand to free the inmates and give them safe transportation to third countries that are prepared to take them in. Turkey is still a possible destination because of its sizable Uyghur diaspora. These attempts are complicated, however, given political tensions between Beijing and Ankara.

International human rights standards are being broken by Thailand’s ongoing detention of the Uyghurs. Even though Thailand is not a member to the Refugee Convention, the UNHCR has reminded it of its duties under customary international law to prevent refoulement.

Broader Implications

Thailand’s Uyghur crisis is not an isolated event; rather, it is a part of a wider trend of Southeast Asian nations facing refugee challenges. Regarding their handling of Uyghur asylum seekers, Malaysia and Indonesia have also come under fire, frequently pointing to Chinese diplomatic pressure and domestic security concerns.

Furthermore, Thailand’s actions established a concerning precedent. Global human rights frameworks are weakened if strong countries like China can apply enough pressure to compel weaker states to violate international rules. It also calls into question how international organizations hold nations responsible.

A Path Forward

The ongoing crisis calls for immediate action to protect the rights and lives of the detained Uyghurs. Here are some thoughts on how they should proceed:

Release and Resettlement: Thailand should release the detainees and work with international organizations to facilitate their resettlement in third countries willing to accept them, such as Turkey or Canada.

Strengthened Legal Protections: Thailand should consider ratifying the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, thereby aligning its policies with international human rights standards.

Increased International Pressure: The global community, particularly Western nations, should intensify diplomatic efforts to prevent deportations and ensure the detainees’ safety.

Monitoring and Transparency: Independent observers should be granted access to monitor the conditions of Uyghur detainees in Thailand to ensure compliance with human rights norms.

Addressing Root Causes: The international community needs to hold China accountable for its actions in Xinjiang, addressing the root causes that force Uyghurs to flee their homeland.

Looking Ahead

The situation of the forty-eight Uyghur men who are being held captive in Thailand serves as an alarming example of the human cost of international indifference and geopolitical scheming. Unless Thailand and the international world step in, these people, who escaped unspeakable oppression, now face a bleak future. Respecting the values of refugee protection and human rights is not only a moral obligation but also a test of our shared humanity.

There is, nevertheless, hope for a solution that puts human rights and international collaboration first, even though the situation is still grave. Thailand can establish a standard for treating refugees humanely and solidify its standing as a responsible global actor if it takes the appropriate actions. The future of the Uyghur captives is in jeopardy, but a fair resolution is hopefully achievable with enough advocacy.

The Abuse of Facial Recognition Technology in the Hong Kong Protests

Overview

Facial recognition technology has become a powerful tool in the last ten years, with uses ranging from improved security to personalized customer experiences. However, concerns about its potential for abuse have been voiced worldwide. This has not been more apparent than during Hong Kong’s pro-democracy demonstrations in 2019. The state used sophisticated monitoring techniques to suppress dissent, leaving protesters to contend with a nightmarish reality. This article will explore the use of facial recognition technology during these events, the protesters’ responses, and the broader civil liberties implications.

Facial Recognition Technology as a Tool for Suppression

By analyzing a person’s facial traits with extensive databases, face recognition technology helps police identify individuals. Although the technology is supposedly employed for public safety, its darker side was brought to light during the protests in Hong Kong. During the demonstrations, the semi-autonomous province was also able to utilize facial recognition technology, which the Chinese government has been known to use to track its citizens.

The protesters were aware that participating could result in arrests or other consequences, like being barred from future work or school opportunities. There was reason to be concerned; according to reports, officials monitored and identified participants using facial recognition cameras placed across the city. Due to fear for their safety, many were discouraged from joining the movement.

Authorities allegedly deployed law enforcement to protest hotspots using real-time video data alongside overt monitoring. This made it possible to crack down quickly, which deterred involvement even more. The protesters’ awareness of these strategies intensified the tense environment and emphasized the dangers of criticizing their government.

Protesters’ Countermeasures Against Surveillance

Understanding the risks posed by facial recognition technology, protesters adopted innovative and sometimes unconventional tactics to shield their identities. Three key countermeasures stood out:

Face Coverings and Laser Pointers

Protesters used masks, goggles, and other facial coverings to obscure their identities. This method effectively counteract facial recognition technology, which relies on unobstructed views of key facial landmarks. To further disrupt surveillance, they employed handheld laser pointers aimed at cameras, which blurred the recorded footage. This tactic was particularly effective in public areas heavily monitored by government-operated cameras.

These measures gained even more importance when the Hong Kong government enacted a ban on face coverings during protests in October 2019. The move was seen as an attempt to weaken the protesters’ ability to avoid identification, forcing them to weigh the risk of legal penalties against their need for anonymity.

Image 2: Skyscrapers in Hong Kong with student protestors camping in the road. Flickr.com.

Dismantling “Smart” Lampposts

Another tactic involved physically dismantling infrastructure suspected of housing surveillance tools. Protesters targeted “smart” lampposts, which were equipped with cameras and sensors capable of collecting data. In August 2019, demonstrators tore down these lampposts in Kowloon, suspecting they were being used for facial recognition and other surveillance purposes. This act of resistance underscored the deep mistrust between protesters and authorities. These lampposts became symbolic targets in the fight against surveillance.

By removing these lampposts, protesters sent a powerful message against the encroachment of state surveillance into public spaces. The act also demonstrated the lengths ordinary citizens were willing to go to protect their freedoms in the face of technological oppression.

Umbrellas and Creative Shields

Umbrellas, a defining symbol of Hong Kong’s earlier Umbrella Movement in 2014, made a resurgence as tools for privacy. Protesters used them to block cameras from capturing their faces, forming makeshift shields during confrontations. Umbrellas were especially useful in densely monitored urban areas. This method combined practicality with a symbolic nod to the city’s history of resistance.

Protesters also adapted other everyday items for use against surveillance. Aluminum foil, reflective materials, and even thermal blankets were used to obscure heat signatures and reflect camera images. These creative solutions highlighted the ingenuity of the demonstrators as they adapted to an ever-evolving surveillance landscape.

The Broader Implications of Surveillance Technology

The events in Hong Kong serve as a cautionary tale about the unchecked use of facial recognition technology. While the technology can offer benefits to law enforcement and public safety, its misuse can severely curtail civil liberties. Below are some of the broader implications:

Erosion of Privacy

The pervasive use of facial recognition technology threatens the fundamental right to privacy. In Hong Kong, protesters’ every move was potentially monitored, creating an environment of constant surveillance. Such practices set a dangerous precedent for governments worldwide, particularly in authoritarian regimes where dissent is often criminalized.

Suppression of Free Speech

The fear of identification and subsequent retaliation stifles free expression. In Hong Kong, many potential protesters chose to stay home rather than risk being identified by facial recognition systems. This undermines the principles of democracy and freedom of speech, cornerstones of any free society.

The suppression of free speech extends beyond the immediate protest environment. Surveillance tools can be used to identify individuals who post dissenting opinions online or participate in virtual activism. The integration of online and offline surveillance poses a new level of threat to freedom of expression in the digital age.

Exportation of Surveillance Tools

China’s use of facial recognition technology in Hong Kong is part of a broader trend of exporting such tools to other countries. Nations with authoritarian tendencies may adopt similar methods, enabling the global spread of surveillance states. The Hong Kong protests highlight the urgent need for international regulation and oversight.

Furthermore, the proliferation of surveillance technology raises questions about its commercialization. Private companies developing these tools often operate with minimal oversight, making it easier for governments to acquire and misuse them. Addressing this issue requires not only legal reforms but also greater ethical accountability within the tech industry.

Calls for Regulation and Ethical Use

The Hong Kong protests have amplified calls for stricter regulations governing the use of facial recognition technology. Advocates argue for a global framework that balances the benefits of the technology with protections for individual rights. Key recommendations include:

–Transparency: Governments and organizations should disclose how facial recognition data is collected, stored, and used.

–Accountability: Mechanisms should be in place to prevent misuse and hold violators accountable.

–Consent: Individuals should have the right to opt out of facial recognition systems where feasible.

–Independent Oversight: Third-party audits can ensure compliance with ethical standards.

These measures require international cooperation and enforcement to be effective. A united global stance against the misuse of facial recognition technology can help ensure that it is used responsibly and ethically.

Moving Forward

The 2019 Hong Kong protests revealed the double-edged nature of facial recognition technology. While it holds promise for improving security and convenience, its misuse can have devastating consequences for individual freedoms and democratic movements. The countermeasures adopted by protesters, from face coverings to dismantling surveillance infrastructure, reflect a broader struggle for privacy and autonomy in an increasingly monitored world.

As facial recognition technology continues to evolve, the lessons from Hong Kong serve as a reminder of the need for vigilance. By advocating for ethical practices and robust regulations, society can harness the benefits of this powerful tool while safeguarding the rights and freedoms that define us. The time to act is now, before surveillance becomes an irreversible norm.

The Hong Kong protests are not just a localized struggle; they are a symbol of resistance against the encroachment of state power through technology. The courage of these protesters underscores the universal importance of privacy, freedom, and democracy in the face of technological oppression.

Japan’s Public Health Diplomacy: A Pillar for Advancing Global Human Rights

When thinking about Japan, remembrance of its rich history and culture may come to mind. However, unknown to most is Japan’s role on the global stage for public health diplomacy. Ranging from international development to research investments, Japan has contributed to the expansion of health as a fundamental right, as stated by Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Japan’s commitment to human rights is prominent through expanding global health equity, prioritizing universal access, improving technological innovation, and assisting with disaster relief.

Background of Japan’s Public Health Diplomacy

Public health diplomacy is the use of diplomatic channels and strategies to help address global health challenges. This ranges from the development of multilateral partnerships, domestic offices, funding opportunities, and more; with the main focus on addressing health issues, any avenue can be explored to address the nuances. The cultural foundation of Japan emphasizes its role as an international power; Japan’s ethos of wa, meaning harmony, and omotenashi, meaning hospitality, has further accelerated its role in space.

Japan’s emergence as a global health power began after World War II when it was developing its own healthcare infrastructure. In 1922, the Health Insurance Act was developed; this was in parallel to the German social insurance model that was managed jointly between employers and employees. In 1961, under this act, Japan finally achieved a universal healthcare system. This was done by developing the same fee schedules for all plans and requiring providers to maintain equity through contained costs. To further support underrepresented communities, subsidies were available for elderly people and children.

The strong domestic foundation developed by Japan opened up an opportunity for it to serve as a global leader as well. Since joining the WHO (World Health Organization) in 1956, it has contributed millions of dollars, giving over US$ 218 million in the 2020-2021 year to the WHO and US$ 50 million to the Contingency Fund for Emergencies; it has mobilized a lot of financial support, which has then supported humanitarian crisis in countries across the world.

Photo 1: Photo of Japan Medical Assistance Team jacket.Source: Flickr — Photo 1: Photo of Japan Medical Assistance Team jacket.
Source: Flickr

Japan’s Current Initiatives

With the successful implementation of universal health coverage, Japan has been a leader in mobilizing it in other countries. One way it has done so was through the 2017 UHC (Universal Healthcare) Forum in Tokyo. This forum, organized in collaboration with JICA (Japanese International Cooperation Agency), UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund), and the World Bank Group, discussed the urgency of making progress towards universal health coverage by engaging over 40 countries to motivate action towards equity for all communities. Beyond that of programmatic support, the World Bank-Japan Joint UHC Initiative has developed the analytics needed to contribute to the progress towards international UHC. This support has also been tried through bilateral collaborations; for example, Myanmar received around US$ 19 million in universal health coverage support from Japan, helping build its international health portfolio. With universal health coverage, health equities can be reduced across the globe.

Beyond that of universal health coverage, Japan has contributed to the development of valuable maternal and child health initiatives across the globe. Through programs and partnerships with entities like JICA, people can receive the training they need to support women and children who are systematically vulnerable communities. An example of their specific support is noted in Cambodia; by providing financial support and programmatic avenues, maternal mortality rates decreased significantly from the increased training for midwives and the improved clinics.

Even beyond that of the Asian continent, Japan has worked to develop programs in Africa to improve maternal health outcomes. An example of this is the Safe Motherhood program in Kenya. The program, developed in 1987, helped reduce maternal mortality by 50% in the country. Analyzing maternal and child healthcare is foundational to achieving gender equality and prioritizing sustainable development.

Japan is also strong in mobilizing support for disease relief and recovery assistance. The Japan Disaster Medical Assistance Teams have been trained to address domestic and international issues; rooted in Japan’s own history in disaster relief, their role on the global stage is prominent. For example, after the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, Japan provided over US$ 320 million in support that was mobilized as emergency assistance after the earthquake or in development assistance; this ranged from providing emergency relief goods, like jerry cans, to assisting with rehabilitating the water supply system. Another example is the US$ 500 million pledge to assist with the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami; the multilateral support to all impacted countries was integral to their redevelopment and solidified Japan’s role as a key actor in global health diplomacy, helping restore health services to ensure affected populations are able to come back to their normal health levels.

Japan’s Model for Success

Japan is a leader in global health diplomacy and can share many insights with other nations and entities to improve their presence on the global stage as well. Despite domestic challenges of aging populations and criticisms for low refugee intake, their holistic approach is a strong suit. By combining technological innovations, hospitality, and multilateralism, they have been able to provide culturally sensitive care to countries around the world. As they contribute to work in health diplomacy, it is valuable to underline all efforts with the continued advocacy for health as a fundamental human right, addressing challenges that might exist proactively. By working to play their role, Japan has improved not only the health but the lives of millions of people across the world.

Pro-Democracy Activist Jimmy Lai’s Case and The History of Hong Kong

A man standing in front of Hong Kong protesters pointing out. — Image 1: A man standing in front of Hong Kong protesters pointing up to the sky. Source: Yahoo Image.

In recent years, many freedoms of Hong Kong citizens have been stripped away. Once a British colony now under the rule of Beijing, legislation has restricted the voice of its journalists and activists.

Critiques of the Hong Kong and Chinese government are met with an iron fist. New laws such as the National Security Law and Article 23 law have limited what can and cannot be said in public and media. Consequently, activist such as Jimmy Lai have fallen victim to these new laws.

Historical Background of Hong Kong, The National Security Law, and Article 23

Image 2: Protesters in Hong Kong. Source: Yahoo Image.

Britain acquired Hong Kong after the first Opium War with China, under the Treaty of Nanjing 1842. Negotiations of Hong Kong took place in 1984, with the signing of the Joint Declaration. In 1990, the Basic Law was completed which served as a mini-constitution for Hong Kong. The former British Colony was officially turned back over to the People’s Republic of China on July 1, 1997.

Beijing had promised Hong Kong a “One Country, Two Systems” rule and to continue their political practices for 50 more years. However, after an economic crisis in Hong Kong, Beijing sought to implement strict regulations in 2003. The National Security Law was proposed to be added to the Basic Law, but half a million Hong Kong citizens marched in protest. The bill was unable to be passed due to the pushback.

Despite citizens’ displeasure with the proposal in 2003, 17 years later, the National Security Law was put into place. This has heavily restricted many freedoms that people in Hong Kong partook in previously. The crackdown of this law came in the form of dozens of activists being arrested. In recent years, the recognition of the Tiananmen Square Massacre has been censored. With that, people are no longer permitted to hold vigils in memory of those who died during the protest. Beijing has frequently been exercising their authority to interpret the Basic Law in Hong Kong.

The Basic Laws are similar to a mini-constitution for Hong Kong. The Nationals Security Law (NSL) was passed in 2020. This heavily restricts Hong Konger’s rights to protests and freedom of speech and expression. Because of this new law, the Hong Kong government was able to pass Article 23. This article, officially called Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, creates new offenses, heavier prison sentences, and stronger enforcement for violations of national security. The law adopts mainland China’s definition of “State security threats” and “State secrets” which encompasses almost anything. The law is up for interpretation, but only the interpretation of the Hong Kong government and Beijing.

Who is Jimmy Lai? What is he charged with?

Image 3: Jimmy Lai standing with police officer holding his arm. Source: Yahoo Image.

Jimmy Lai first came to Hong Kong in 1961 at the age of 12. After having fled from Communist China, Lai had arrived at a colonized Hong Kong. Because of its national status at the time, he is considered a British National. As a child, Lai worked as a child laborer in a clothing factory, persevering through years of working in harsh conditions. By 1981, Lai opened a chain clothing store called Giordano. Through this Jimmy Lai became extremely successful.

As a result of the events at the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Lai began to dedicate his life to activism for human rights (see my blog post about China for an in-depth look into the Tiananmen Square Massacre and its influence on activists in Hong Kong and China). In 1995, he opened a newspaper called Apple Daily. Frequently, this pro-democracy media outlet would criticize the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

On August 10, 2020, Jimmy Lai was arrested and in December 2020, he was charged with three counts of foreign collusion and one charge for sedition. For four years, Lai has been detained in the conditions that violate many human rights. According to Amnesty International, Lai has been subjected to solitary confinement and is allowed outside for less than an hour a day.

Jimmy Lai’s international legal team has reported that Lai, a Catholic, has been denied his freedom to practice his religion. In an interview conducted by Nick Schifrin, International Human Rights Lawyer, Caoilfhionn Gallagher said, “He’s also a devout Roman Catholic being denied access to the sacrament of holy communion.” While his legal team continues to fight for his release, Gallagher emphasizes the imperative danger that Lai is in of losing his life.

Lai’s son, Sebastien Lai, also spoke out about his father. In the interview, he worries about the passing of his father while in prison. Sebastien said that his ultimate goal was to see his father out of prison before his death. Despite their best hopes the chances of the case against Jimmy Lai being dropped are slim. Sebastien reflects on the memory of his father, “My memory of my father is always of this man smiling, because he knew that, despite all of this, he was doing the right thing.” This quote summarizes the kind of person Jimmy Lai is. One that fights for his freedoms and the freedoms of the people around him. Lai had not hesitated, in any of the times he was released on bail, to continue to attend Tiananmen vigils and stand up for democracy and freedom of speech.

The Lai Trial and November 20th Resumption Update

Image 4: Jimmy Lai in handcuffs being escorted. Source: Yahoo Image.

The long awaited trial of pro-democracy advocate, Jimmy Lai, began on December 18, 2023. Lai had been held in custody awaiting his trial for over 1,000 days due to delays from Beijing over their interpretation of the national security law. Beijing ultimately decided that Lai would not be allowed his choice of a British lawyer.

A trial that was only supposed to last 80 days, ran until June 11, 2024. The court was unable to have the mid-trial submission until July 24-25. Since then, the court has been adjourned until November 20, 2024.

In another case, Hong Kong rejected Jimmy Lai’s request for a jury trial in early October 2024. This was in response to Jimmy Lai bringing a case against Ta Kung Pao, a pro-Bejing newspaper, in November 2020. Ta Kung Pao had published defamatory statements regarding Lai in June 2020. In the article, Ta Kung Pao accused Lai of trying to escape and create chaos within Hong Kong. Unfortunately, Judge Queeny Au Yeung rejected Lai’s request, stating that the legal documents needed further in-depth examination.

The court case for the national security trial resumed on November 20 with the testimony of Lai. In the charges of collusion with foreign forces, Lai pleaded not guilty. Hong Kong’s Prosecutor Anthony Chau insisted that Lai was asking other countries, specifically the United States, to impose sanctions and encourage hostilities against Hong Kong and China.

In his first court testimony, Lai stated that it was not his intention to manipulate foreign policy in the United States to be hostile towards China and Hong Kong. This was in response to the prosecution bringing forth evidence of Lai’s “collusion with foreign forces” in a meeting he had with Vice President Mike Pence and secretary of state Mike Pompeo during Donald J. Trump’s presidency in July 2019.

Lai said that all he did was answer honestly of what was happening in Hong Kong when asked. In relation to his newspaper Apple Daily, Lai denies advocating for Hong Kong’s independence. He also reiterated that any conversations held with Officials from other countries were strictly professional. Lai further stated that the National Security Law would bring about the end of free speech in Hong Kong.

Conclusion: What is the international reaction? What can be done to help Lai and others?

The trial will continue throughout November while the rest of the world awaits the fate of Jimmy Lai. Amnesty International continues to call for the release of Jimmy Lai. Both the U.K. and the U.S. have criticized Beijing for the imprisonment of Lai. Beijing in response, has condemned the U.S. on its involvement with a “threat to the security of Hong Kong and China.” They have also stated that the U.K. should stay out of all legal processes.

“Support Jimmy Lai” is an online website that has been keeping track of Lai’s case. On the website they provide case updates and a timeline of Lai’s life. They ask people to show support by using the hashtag #FreeJimmyLai. If you would like to donate to the cause or for more information check out “Support Jimmy Lai.”

Karoshi: The Problems with Japan’s Work Culture

A colorful, busy street in Osaka, Japan. — Image 1: Dotonbori Street in Osaka, Japan, Source: Yahoo Images

Japan is famous for its blend of traditional and modern customs, rich culture, and revolutionized technologies. The country has drawn in millions of foreign nationals for its high quality of life, safety, and efficient public transport—but perhaps especially for its employment opportunities.

About 3% of Japan’s workforce consists of foreign workers, having quadrupled in the past 15 years to 2.05 million. On the other hand, Japan’s population has been shrinking, with a steadily declining birth rate and rapid aging. There are many proposed causes for this crisis, including dwindling marriage rates, but it is worth noting the socioeconomic pressures that stem from high living costs, unfavorable job prospects, and a rigid corporate environment.

The labor shortage that Japan faces poses a major threat to its economy—and its historically unforgiving work culture likely plays a big role.

Work Culture in Japan

Work is a highly valued aspect of life in Japan, and with it comes the concept of company loyalty. This can be demonstrated by working many hours overtime; these hours are expected and sometimes even contracted. According to data by Japan’s health ministry, 10.1% of men and 4.2% of women worked over sixty hours a week in 2022.

Tim Craig, a researcher of Japanese culture, said that there is a certain social pressure associated with working overtime hours: “If they go home early, then their colleagues will (a) look askance at them, and (b) have to work more to cover for them. Either way, it’s not a good feeling.”

While Japan’s 2018 Workstyle Reform Act outlawed working more than 45 hours of overtime in a single month, it’s not uncommon for companies to force their employees to hide their true working hours or for employees to even do so of their own accord.

Additionally, only 7% of companies give their employees the legally mandated one day off per week. Japan has been trying to push a four-day work week since 2021, but it will take much more to entirely dismantle the deep-rooted idea that employees must give all of themselves to their company in order to thrive—Panasonic, one of the country’s leading companies, offered the option to 63,000 employees, and only 150 opted in.

A man asleep in a chair in an empty subway stop. — Image 2: A man asleep in a subway station, Source: Yahoo Images

Some companies employ shady business practices, operating what lawyers and academics call a “bait-and-switch” policy: employers will advertise a seemingly normal full-time position with reasonable working hours. The prospective employee is then offered a non-regular contract with longer hours and no overtime pay. If the employee refuses the job, companies might tell them that they will be given regular contracts after around six months. Younger applicants and women are particularly vulnerable due to a lack of experience or settling while trying to re-enter the workforce.

Another common issue is power harassment, which a reported third of the workforce has experienced. This is a common form of workplace harassment that has garnered attention across the past several decades and specifically involves someone in a higher position of power bullying a lower-ranking employee.

In 2020, the Power Harassment Prevention Act took effect, which outlines six types of power harassment, requires companies to take proper action against allegations of harassment, and ensures that workers aren’t dismissed for submitting complaints. However, Nikkei Asia reported in 2021 that complaints about workplace abuse had climbed to 88,000 cases a year, more than tripling in the past 15 years.

While these circumstances are not specific to Japan, they have certainly contributed to a phenomenon that was first identified there: karoshi, or death by overworking.

The History of Karoshi

Karoshi was first recognized in the 1970s and is a sociomedical term used to refer to fatalities or disabilities caused by cardiovascular attacks that are ultimately work-related. This includes strokes, cardiac arrest, and myocardial infarctions. The International Labour Organization’s case study into the phenomenon outlines the following typical case of karoshi: “Mr. A worked at a major snack food processing company for as long as 110 hours a week (not a month) and died from a heart attack at the age of 34. His death was approved as work-related by the Labour Standards Office.”

Related to karoshi is karojisatsu, which is suicide from overwork and stressful working conditions. This issue became prominent in the late 1980s—an economic recession during that decade forced employees who had managed to keep their jobs to work harder for longer hours to compensate.

Factors like repetitive tasks, interpersonal conflicts, inadequate rewards, employment insecurity, inability to meet company goals, forced resignation, and bullying create a psychological burden that has led countless workers to take their own lives. Japan’s white paper report revealed that in 2022, 2,968 people died by suicide linked to karoshi, an increase from 1,935 in 2021.

Hiroshi Kawahito, a workplace accident lawyer, told the Pulitzer Center in 2023 that he has worked on around 1,000 cases of karoshi during a 45-year-period, and despite repeated efforts by the Japanese government to combat suicide rates, he has not identified a significant change in the number of cases.

A group of Japanese citizens protesting karoshi on a street in Tokyo. — Image 3: A “No More Karoshi” protest in Tokyo in 2018, Source: Yahoo Images

He did note two concerning shifts over the course of his career: that karoshi-related suicide has become more common than cardiovascular attack, and that about 20% of his cases are now women, as they have begun to enter the workforce and experience sexual harassment at an overwhelming rate compared to their male counterparts.

A recent case of Kawahito’s from September 2023 involves the suicide of a 25-year-old actress from the musical theater company Takarazuka Revue, who was overworked and bullied by senior members. She logged a total of 437 hours in the final month of her life, of which 277 were overtime.

According to Kawahito, the actress worked without any days off for a month and a half and barely slept more than a few hours a night. Two years earlier, she suffered burns when a senior member pressed a hair iron against her forehead and faced immense pressure from the company. Kawahito claimed that “excessive work and power harassment damaged her physical and mental health, leading to her suicide.”

Governmental Response

Suicide was considered a taboo topic in Japan for decades; families affected were left with no outlet to cope with their loss. However, in 2006, more than 100,000 signatures were collected to push for legislation on suicide prevention, which led to The Basic Act of Suicide Countermeasures that went into effect the same year.

This act takes a three-pronged approach: social systems, local cooperation, and personal support creating relevant laws like the Act on Mental Health and Welfare. It provides support via relevant agencies at local and community levels, including hotlines and consultation services.

In 2016, the Basic Act was amended to require all prefectures and municipalities to establish local suicide prevention plans based on regional data collected by the National Police Agency. The General Principles of the Basic Act are also updated every five years to reflect current trends in suicide data.

The Work Style Reform Act of 2018 aims to promote a healthier work environment, setting overtime limits and establishing paid annual leave, as well as offering free consulting services and subsidies from the labor ministry. This has motivated the push for the four-day workweek, part of the ministry’s “innovating how we work” campaign.

Change might happen slowly in a society where values surrounding dedication and sacrifice are so deeply ingrained in its working population, but it is happening; between 2006 and 2022, the suicide rate has fallen by more than 35%. Efforts by the government to deter karoshi and combat the falling birth rate are in full swing and hope for a better future in Japan is still on the horizon.