Proposed Southeastern Natural Gas Pipeline Raises Concerns

An expansion to a natural gas pipeline is slated to begin construction in the fourth quarter of 2026, a project that the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) has called a “fossil fuel superhighway.” The proposed South System Expansion 4 project is a $3.5 billion pipeline expansion that would span 291 miles across Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. It has been proposed to upgrade the Southeastern United States’ energy grid, providing an additional 1.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas capacity per day. Kinder Morgan, the company presiding over the project, touts the market-driven demand for natural gas and the sustainable growth that the expansion will bring to the region. The SELC cites environmental and economic concerns, urging the federal government to take careful consideration of the adverse impacts that this pipeline expansion could have on the communities through which it passes.

Aerial view of pipeline.

Image One: Aerial view of pipeline. By: MelissaMN. Source: Adobe Stock. Asset ID#: 221316621

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Process

The project is currently under review by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which must issue a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct any interstate natural gas pipeline. FERC accepted public comments that address potential hazards, externalities, alternatives, and relevant information regarding the project until October 6th. In a joint statement of protest, several organizations, including Alabama Rivers Alliance, Blackbelt Women Rising, and Energy Alabama, pointed out potential issues with the pipeline for FERC’s consideration. NYU Policy Integrity also urged FERC to consider environmental concerns in its decision.

ƒmodiSSE4 Environmental Impact Statement

Under the National Environmental Policy Act, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) outlining the potential externalities of any project under FERC’s jurisdiction is required. The joint protest issued by Alabama Rivers Alliance, Blackbelt Women Rising, Energy Alabama, and others urges FERC to fully consider the effects of 14 new natural gas pipeline loops on water quality, endangered species, air quality, and marginalized communities in its EIS. In an outline of the project, Kinder Morgan addressed environmental concerns; they claim that the project is “committed to protecting significant cultural sites and environmentally sensitive areas.” The overview explains the environmental considerations they will make before, during, and after the project’s conclusion. It states that the field surveys will be conducted to avoid sensitive areas, environmental inspectors will monitor the project as it progresses, and land will be re-seeded and restored after completion.

The joint protest raises additional concerns. Crossing rivers and streams using open-cut methods can increase the water’s total suspended solids and damage local ecosystems. Horizontal directional drilling causes erosion. The project would require 130 million gallons of water, which would require extraction that can cause “water-shed wide ecological stress.” It also mentions that “[o]ut of the 14 compressor stations being modified as part of this Project, only one compressor unit is slated to be electric.” These non-electric compressor stations produce harmful pollutants like nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic compounds. The pipeline will also run across Alabama’s Blackbelt region, which already deals with toxic coal ash, industrial wastewater, and other environmental injustices.

Aerial shot of Alabama's Coosa River.
Image Two: Aerial shot of Alabama’s Coosa River. By: Donny Bozeman. Source: Adobe Stock. Asset ID#: 494086723

Environmental Justice and Public Health

As NYU Policy Integrity mentions, under a recent memorandum released by the Council on Environmental Quality, FERC is not required to examine environmental justice issues when considering a project’s potential harm and impact. This memorandum is in accordance with the January 2025 executive order Unleashing American Energy, signed by President Trump, which directs federal agencies to “expedite permitting approvals.” The memorandum adds that agencies “must prioritize efficiency and certainty over any other policy objectives.” However, FERC is still required to examine potential harms to the public, and the effects of the pipeline construction cannot be divorced from the local situation of the pipeline’s immediate impact area. The pipeline will cross through areas with higher concentrations of particulate matter than the national average. According to data collected from County Health Rankings and Roadmaps, the eleven Alabama counties that the project is projected to cross have an average of 8.9 micrograms per cubic meter of fine particulate matter in the air; the US average is 7.3. The prevalence of asthma among adults was also higher than the national average in each of the Alabama counties, according to 2022 CDC PLACES data. NYU Policy Integrity also lists elevated economic indicators of social vulnerability, including higher rates of poverty, near planned compressor stations. Given that the local populations already face health challenges linked to the environment, FERC’s consideration of the potential harms from the pipeline expansion should include the compounding effects of the pipeline’s construction in an area already impacted by environmental degradation.

FERC and Procedural Rights

FERC’s upcoming Environmental Impact Statement on the effects of the pipeline expansion represents environmental rights in action. Procedural rights, or the rights of people to participate in processes, are a cornerstone of environmental rights. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) defines procedural rights as “access to information, public participation, and access to justice.” These rights are important for protecting the environment and upholding the rule of law. The UN’s 2019 Environmental Rule of Law report found that civic participation in environmental decisions in the US led to innovative, cost-effective solutions by adding information to analyses and reframing issues.  The basis for these rights in international law comes from the 1992 Rio Declaration and the 1998 Aarhus Convention. The US is not a signatory to the Aarhus Convention, but the National Environmental Policy Act enshrines some of the same ideals in US law. The Environmental Impact Statement promotes public access to information, while the Joint Protest statement and NYU Policy Integrity’s report are examples of public participation. Access to justice is upheld when agencies like FERC take into consideration environmental injustices and hold companies to account.

Deregulation

Procedural and environmental rights at large may be in danger, as recent developments in US policy are clearing the path for the oil and gas industry at any cost. President Trump has championed a deregulatory agenda, notably withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and attempting to overturn the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding. The Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 countries in 2015, set goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Methane, a greenhouse gas, has a much higher global warming potential than carbon dioxide, and a recent review of scientific literature suggests that natural gas pipelines’ emission impacts have been underestimated. The EPA’s endangerment finding, released in response to the Supreme Court’s Massachusetts v. EPA ruling, found that under the Clean Air Act, the agency is required to place limits on greenhouse gas emissions. The endangerment finding treats greenhouse gases like other harmful chemical pollutants because they also endanger public health, though on a broader scale than localized pollutants.

Natural gas compressor station.
Image Three: Natural gas compressor statement. By: Olga. Source: Adobe Stock. Asset ID#: 452024190

Conclusion

The Southern Environmental Law Center opposes the South System Expansion 4 project in part because of the immediate effects on the communities located in its path, but also because it expands the reliance on natural gas while increasing energy bills for regular people. Executive director of Energy Alabama Daniel Tait claims, “Alabamians will be stuck with the bill for decades while utilities invest in fossil fuels instead of cheaper, cleaner alternatives.” However, Kinder Morgan’s vice president of public affairs, Allen Fore, argues that Alabama Power and the Southeast will benefit from the additional natural gas capacity.

As with any project on this scale, the South System Expansion 4 pipeline is controversial. It raises questions about sustainable development, corporate responsibility, and the federal regulatory process. Central to all energy developments should be the right of impacted communities to their health and well-being. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines the right to an adequate standard of living, which the SSE4 puts at risk by polluting the surrounding area. FERC should listen to public comments and ensure that the project proceeds with the best interests–and the human rights–of the communities and the environment in mind.

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.

 

Photo 1: Community health worker checking for immunization.Source: Wikimedia
Photo 1: Community health worker checking for immunization.
Source: CDC Global Health via Wikimedia Commons

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.

 

When Misogyny Goes Viral: The Digital Roots of Modern Sexism

A hooded figure sits in front of a laptop in a dark environment, backlit by faint, vertical code lines. The mood is mysterious and ominous.
ZAY WIN HTAI. (n.d.). Anonymous hacker without face typing computer laptop. Concept of hacking cybersecurity, cybercrime, cyberattack, etc. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/anonymous-hacker-without-face-typing-computer-laptop-concept-of-hacking-cybersecurity-cybercrime-cyberattack-etc/574955036

In the depths of the internet, a movement has quietly gained momentum. One that masks hostility toward women behind the guise of self-improvement and male empowerment. Known as the manosphere, this digital community includes online forums, podcasts, and influencers who promote “red-pilled” ideologies that reject feminism, question gender equality, and glorify dominance as a marker of masculinity. Though it began on obscure corners of the web, it has since widely spread into mainstream culture, shaping social attitudes, influencing algorithms, and redefining how millions of men see themselves and the women around them.

The 1999 film The Matrix featured the “red pill”, which has since become an ideology people use to describe their awakening to some previously hidden reality. Many male supremacist movements of today use this to describe their “realization” that men don’t systematically hold any power or privilege. Instead, they now know the “truth” that socially, economically, and sexually men are at the whims of women’s power. Around 2016, misogynist forums began to shift from a Red Pill to a Black Pill mentality. This belief system believes that looks are genetically determined, and that women choose sexual partners based solely on physical features, so whether a person will be in involuntary celibate or “incel” is predetermined. These ideologies have also become synonymous and adopted by far-right and white supremacist groups to describe their own versions of awakenings, whose worldviews often overlaps with male supremacist positions, such as antifeminism. The rise of the manosphere illustrates how digital platforms can undermine the broader project of equality in modern society.

To understand the manosphere’s rise, it is important to recognize the social insecurities that fuel it. Many young men today face economic instability, social isolation, and identity confusion. For some, manosphere spaces offer a sense of belonging and control in response to these insecurities. It’s done so by often framing men as victims of feminism, arguing that modern society has stripped them of purpose and authority. The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry has noted that online radicalism often begins with loneliness, frustration, or a search for community. The anonymity of the internet makes engagement seem less risky. The manosphere is no different than any other extremist movements in the sense that it provides validation for personal grievances while redirecting that frustration toward a scapegoat. The problem is that what begins as self-improvement or dating advice often escalates into hostility toward women. Influencers whose entire branding is built around themselves being an “alpha male” teach followers that emotional vulnerability is weakness and that dominance is proof of worth. This toxic masculinity promotes emotional suppression and gendered resentment. What is masked as being something meant to empower men is wrecking their mental health. Now they find themselves in spaces where misogyny thrives, leaving them less equipped, not more, to engage in healthy relationships.

The manosphere’s rapid spread cannot be explained by ideology alone, it’s also driven by digital platforms themselves. Social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, and content that provokes outrage tends to keep users scrolling longer. This has made misogyny not only visible but profitable. Research from the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that Andrew Tate’s videos were viewed over 54 million times on YouTube alone, despite his content being banned for promoting violence against women. Even after content moderation efforts, snippets of his interviews and quotes reappear through fan accounts, keeping his ideology in constant circulation. Similarly, YouTube’s recommendation system has been shown to guide users toward this kind of content once they interact with one video in the genre. This isn’t purely accidental, but rather the outcome of algorithmic bias that rewards engagement over ethics. Outrage, anger, and fear generate clicks, comments, and ad revenue. The same platforms that are used to connect people have built ecosystems that reward division.

Five people sitting on the floor, using laptops and tablets. They wear casual, colorful clothing, and their legs are crossed. Relaxed and collaborative mood.
Students with modern devices studying online indoors- Pixel-Shot, https://stock.adobe.com/images/students-with-modern-devices-studying-online-indoors/388684331

As you would probably figure, these ideas do not stay confined to screens. They spill into classrooms, workplaces, and politics. Educators have reported a noticeable rise in students, particularly boys, echoing red-pilled talking points, and engaging in misogynistic content. Young audiences become desensitized to the harm caused by gender discrimination. Manosphere language has also seeped into mainstream culture. Phrases like “high-value man,” “body count,” and “female nature” have entered everyday online conversations, often used to justify double standards or demean women’s autonomy. Podcasts, dating coaches, and influencers now preach the same narratives once confined to obscure message boards. This is proof of how digital misogyny has gone mainstream. Some women have also jumped on the bandwagon with trends such as the “trad wife” that revolve around women playing traditional roles within the home. Women have the choice to do so as they wish, but often times these women speak negatively of feminism and shame others who don’t share their beliefs. Political commentator Candace Owens has a book releasing in November of this year titled Make Him a Sandwich: Why Real Women Don’t Need Fake Feminism. She says we should destroy the feminist movement due to its toxicity that it imposes on other women. More concerningly, research from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue links online misogyny to real-world violence, including gender-based harassment and extremist acts. The 2018 Toronto van attack that killed 11 people and injured another 14, for example, was carried out by a man who identified with the incel community. His online activity revealed years of radicalization through misogynistic spaces that glorified violence against women. Digital radicalization is not an abstract issue, it poses a tangible threat to public safety, gender equality, and civic discourse.

Misogyny, whether online or offline, is fundamentally a human rights issue. It infringes upon women’s rights to safety, dignity, and participation in public life. Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that all people are entitled to rights “without distinction of any kind, such as sex.” When misogynistic ideologies are monetized and spread unchecked, they compromise that promise by turning online spaces into spaces where hostility and exclusion can thrive. UN Women and The Commission on the Status of Women has warned that technology-facilitated gender-based violence “results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological, social, political, or economic harm, or other infringements of rights and freedoms.” Despite these warnings, few countries have comprehensive frameworks addressing gendered hate speech online. In the United States, content moderation is left to the discretion of the company. Ensuring equality in the digital age requires that online platforms uphold the same human rights standards expected in other public spheres. Stronger moderation policies and support for digital literacy programs could help to counter the spread of misogynistic content.

A diverse group of women marches confidently outdoors. The leader holds a cardboard sign reading "WOMEN," while others follow with determined expressions.
Group of feminist women have protest for their rights outdoors. Source: standret, https://stock.adobe.com/images/somebody-has-to-make-move-group-of-feminist-women-have-protest-for-their-rights-outdoors/296292933

The manosphere’s rise reveals a deeper truth about the internet: technology is never neutral. The same tools that connect us can also divide, radicalize, and dehumanize. Allowing misogyny to thrive online is not just a cultural issue, it is a moral one that erodes human rights principles at their core. As users of these social media platforms, we must challenge misogynistic rhetoric when we see it. From a human rights standpoint, more media literacy should be taught within schools, and governments must enforce accountability standards that prioritize safety over profit. If we want a society that values both freedom and fairness, we need to ensure that the technology we use serve those ideals—not undermine them.

Human Rights at a Crossroads: Balancing Intervention and Sovereignty

Introduction: Conflicts as Human Rights Challenges

hand as a symbol of stopping dictatorship, resistance for democracy in Venezuela, violation of human rights
By: rjankovsky
Source: Adobe Stock
Asset ID#: 919721402

Conflicts in Ukraine and Libya highlight the complexities of upholding human rights under international law. These crises test principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (1948), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (1966), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (1966). This blog examines humanitarian intervention’s promises and pitfalls, drawing on Alan Kuperman’s 2023 analysis in Michael Goodhart’s Human Rights textbook, to inspire young readers to engage critically with global issues.

Human Rights in Conflict: Ukraine’s Test

The war in Ukraine challenges fundamental human rights, including the right to life and security (UDHR, 1948, Article 3) and health (ICESCR, 1966, Article 12). Threats to nuclear facilities exacerbate risks to civilians, while propaganda from state media undermines the right to information (ICCPR, 1966, Article 19). Economic sanctions, intended to curb aggression, often restrict access to food and medicine, violating economic, social, and cultural rights (ICESCR, 1966, Articles 11-12). This creates a dilemma: balancing accountability with humanitarian impacts requires careful policy design. The interplay of civil, political, and economic rights demands holistic strategies to protect vulnerable populations.

Interconnected Harms: Libya and Intervention’s Legacy

The 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, initially launched to protect civilians, shifted to regime change, prolonging the conflict and destabilizing the region (Kuperman, 2013). Exaggerated reports of atrocities fueled this escalation, contributing to unrest in Mali and Somalia (Kuperman, 2013). This aid also created a situation of “moral hazard” that encouraged rebels to escalate violence– essentially, they expected foreign support that would ameliorate the costs of that escalation, and so they escalated in a way they otherwise might not have done. This escalation, in turn, undermined humanitarian goals. Libya’s instability eroded both civil and political rights (e.g., security) and economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., livelihoods), highlighting the need for evidence-based, limited interventions overseen by international bodies like the UN.

The link between misinformation and intervention connects to broader human rights challenges. In both Ukraine and Libya, distorted narratives violate the right to reliable information (ICCPR, 1966, Article 19), amplifying harm and complicating accountability (Kuperman 2023).

Digital Amplification: Misinformation’s Role

Misinformation often exacerbates human rights violations in conflict zones. In Ukraine, state-driven propaganda distorts public understanding, while in Libya, overstated atrocity reports fueled intervention (Kuperman, 2013). These violations of the right to information (ICCPR, 1966, Article 19) highlight the digital age’s challenges. Institutional delays, such as late Universal Periodic Review (UPR) submissions by states like the U.S., further erode trust in global systems. Digital platforms that deliberately or accidentally spread misinformation and disinformation amplify these issues, necessitating media literacy and advocacy to protect access to truth.

Sovereignty vs. R2P: A Delicate Balance

The tension between state sovereignty and human rights protection remains central to international law. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which says that states should intervene in each other’s affairs when human rights are being egregiously violated, was endorsed by the UN in 2005. This doctrine aims to prevent atrocities, but its inconsistent application in cases like Rwanda and Syria reveals challenges. Intervention in another country violates state sovereignty, while nonintervention can mean that a genocide will continue. Clearer rules, as Ikenberry suggests, are needed to ensure interventions respect sovereignty while protecting civilians (Kuperman, 2023). Reforming R2P to prioritize evidence-based action is critical for effective global governance.

Youth Advocacy: Shaping Human Rights

Young people are vital to advancing human rights. Conflicts like Ukraine and Libya affect peers through disrupted education (ICESCR, 1966, Article 13) and suppressed speech (ICCPR, 1966, Article 19), while future careers in policy or law offer opportunities to drive change. Students can join Amnesty International’s youth networks, participate in Model UN, or amplify UPR findings on platforms like X with hashtags like #HumanRights or #R2P. By questioning narratives and advocating for accountability, youth can shape a future where human rights are upheld.

Conclusion

Conflicts in Ukraine and Libya reveal the complexities of balancing sovereignty, intervention, and human rights. Evidence-based policies, protection of information rights, and reformed R2P frameworks are essential for progress. Young advocates, equipped with critical thinking and informed by history, can drive this change through grassroots efforts and digital campaigns, ensuring human dignity prevails.

References

  • Ikenberry, G. J. (2016). Sovereignty vs. Human Rights. YouTube, University of Pennsylvania. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S534ZqxjPgg.

  • Kuperman, A. J. (2013). A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO’s Libya campaign. International Security, 38(1), 105-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13600826.2013.824513.

  • Kuperman, A. J. (2023) “Humanitarian Intervention,” in Human Rights: Theory and Practice, edited by M. Goodhart. Oxford University Press: 178-200. https://www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com/display/10.1093/hepl/9780190085469.001.0001/isbn-9780190085469-book-part-12

  • United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights.

  • United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights.

  • United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-cultural-rights.

  • United Nations General Assembly. (2005). World Summit Outcome Document (R2P Framework). https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n05/487/60/pdf/n0548760.pdf?OpenElement&_gl=1*fnd0ef*_ga*MTk4NjU4Mzg0MC4xNzU5NDI4ODQx*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*czE3NjEyNDc5MTYkbzMkZzAkdDE3NjEyNDc5MTYkajYwJGwwJGgw.

High-Income Countries Retreat from a Healthy Environment

Secretary-General António Guterres (right) meets with King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia of Sweden.
Secretary-General António Guterres (right) meets with King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia of Sweden. UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe.

Introduction

Global efforts aim to achieve net-zero CO₂ and limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2050 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2018). However, current national policies remain misaligned with this goal, with trends in several high-income countries falling short of necessary reductions (Climate Action Tracker, 2023). For example, Sweden, once a leader in climate control and environmental justice, is now retreating from its commitments. The 2024 report by the Swedish Climate Policy Council shows that recent decisions reflect a de-prioritization of national climate goals (Swedish Climate Policy Council, 2024). Meanwhile, mounting pressures to accelerate the fossil fuel phase-out at the 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) were met with diplomatic compromises that failed to commit to a full phase-out, disappointing many climate advocates (Carlin, 2024). These are not isolated developments. They signal an increasing pattern of high-income countries placing domestic economic and geopolitical priorities over environmental rights. As climate risks escalate, these decisions reflect a strategic withdrawal from global responsibility.

Legal Foundations of Environmental Justice

The right to a healthy environment is more than an aspirational claim; it is deeply rooted in international human rights law. In 1948, Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) affirmed the right to a standard of living adequate for health and wellbeing (United Nations, 1948). Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) further codified this right in 1966, obligating states actors to seek improvement in “all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene” (United Nations, 1966). The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the World Health Organization (WHO) jointly issued General Comment No. 14 in 2008, clarifying that the right to health is directly undermined by environmental degradation and must be addressed through preventative action (OHCHR & WHO, 2008).

These legal foundations, as mirrored in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), conclusively link environmental protection to human dignity and global equity. The SDGs – specifically (3) good health and well-being, (6) clean water and sanitation, (13) climate action, and (16) peace, justice, and strong institutions – reinforce the technical and practical dimensions of environmental rights (United Nations, 2015; OHCHR, n.d.). The United Nations General Assembly added to this evolving legal architecture through Resolution 76/300, which formally recognizes the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as “crucial to the enjoyment of all human rights” (United Nations General Assembly, 2022). In combination, these mechanisms establish environmental rights as enforceable obligations, central to global equity and intergenerational justice.

Policy Shifts

Faltering climate ambition echoes across the G20, the forum of world economies that coordinate global economic policy. Their 2025 declaration failed to reaffirm the 1.5°C target, reflecting a collective failure to meet Paris Agreement goals (Joint Research Centre, 2025). Just weeks after 2024 was declared the hottest year on record, the United States formally withdrew from the Paris Agreement for a second time (Human Rights Watch, 2025). Shortly after, Argentina announced plans to exit the agreement and withdrew from COP29 negotiations (Climate Cosmos, 2025). While Argentina is not classified as a high-income country, this action still denotes a further weakening of global consensus. Several other G20 countries (Australia, Japan, Canada, Italy, and South Korea) have backed out of previous net-zero pledges and multilateral obligations through delayed climate targets, reclassified fossil fuels, and suspended mitigation policies (Climate Cosmos, 2025). The United States has also seen significant cuts to climate research and clean energy programs, discontinuing more than 100 federally funded studies (Temple, 2025).

The United Kingdom, another former leader in this field, has directed funds away from climate action and toward defense and trade priorities (United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office [UK FCDO], 2025). In April of 2025, a group of civil society organizations filed a case against the French government for failing to protect citizens from foreseeable climate harms, claiming that current adaptation plans are insufficient (Jones Day, 2025). Germany’s government, while continuing to support renewable energy, has deprioritized emissions reductions in favor of industrial competitiveness (Clean Energy Wire, 2025).

These shifts in government focus are not limited to the public sector. Many of the corporations that made net-zero pledges within the past five years have begun scaling back efforts due to political and financial pressure. Major financial institutions have classified ESG backlash as a material risk, leading companies to scale back climate commitments (Conference Board, 2025). ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) is a set of criteria historically used to evaluate corporate sustainability and ethics; however, it is now criticized by conservative lawmakers and skeptical investors as politically charged or financially burdensome (Conference Board, 2025). Ioannou (2025) notes that this new backlash reflects deeper tensions surrounding corporations in the advancement of social and environmental goals. A deeper ideological repositioning can be seen through these developments. While climate justice was once a collective imperative, it is now being treated as a negotiable interest, shaped by national politics and short-term economic goals.

Secretary-General António Guterres at the Climate Summit 2025, a high-Level special event on Climate Action.
Secretary-General António Guterres at the Climate Summit 2025, a high-Level special event on Climate Action. “The science demands action. The law commands it. The economics compel it. And people are calling for it.” UN Photo/Manuel Elías.

Implications and Consequences

These policy shifts have tangible and far-reaching human consequences. As inaction continues, the risk of compounding impacts onto other human rights increases. The right to housing and security is threatened by rising climate-related displacement (Amnesty International, 2025). The right to food is at risk due to extreme weather events disrupting agricultural systems (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2025). Overall, health and well-being continue to be threatened by rising air pollution, heat stress, and vector-borne diseases (Romanello et al., 2025).

Low- to middle-income countries and Indigenous communities are disproportionately impacted, despite contributing less to climate change overall. For instance, aid cuts by Australia and the UK fail to support vulnerable nations and regional populations, limiting their ability to protect lives, livelihoods, and ecosystems (Lowy Institute, 2024; UK FCDO, 2025). This undermines the moral and legal obligations enshrined in UNGA Resolution 76/300 and the ICESCR, which have been ratified by both countries (United Nations, 1966; United Nations General Assembly, 2022).

With climate disasters escalating in frequency and severity, high-income countries are not immune to the consequences of their retreat. From wildfires in Australia and floods in Germany to storms and heatwaves in the United States, public infrastructure and economies have been strained, revealing critical gaps in disaster preparedness (Pengilley, 2025; Clean Energy Wire, 2025; Climate Central, 2025).

Aside from immediate and prolonged dangers, these events erode public trust in environmental governance. As citizens see governments scale back their climate commitments, they turn to litigation and civil disobedience to demand accountability. Globally, youth-led lawsuits have surged in 2025, seeing plaintiffs invoke their constitutional and human rights to challenge state action/inaction (Merner, 2025; Environmental Health News, 2025). Not only does this challenge the moral authority of high-income countries, but it undermines their credibility and weakens their capacity to lead on broader global challenges. Such a withdrawal is not only unjust from a human rights standpoint, but strategically shortsighted.

A view of pamphlets during the event “International Day of Sport for Development and Peace 2023: Scoring for People and the Planet”.
A view of pamphlets during the event “International Day of Sport for Development and Peace 2023: Scoring for People and the Planet”. UN Photo/Mark Garten.

Closing Reflection

More than symbolic pledges, environmental justice requires enforceable obligations, consistent funding for climate action, and consideration for the most impacted communities. High-income countries must stop viewing climate action as a zero-sum trade-off and reframe it through a shared, rights-based infrastructure of resilience. The consequences from previous retreats, from displacement to institutional erosion, must be urgently addressed. Rebuilding public trust must begin with global recommitments, inclusive governance, and transparent financing. Meeting today’s demands will require high-income countries to abandon performative pragmatism for principled action. Climate justice is not a luxury, but a prerequisite for global survival.

Morocco’s Gen Z Protests – A Fight for Human Rights

On a September night, hundreds of young Moroccans gathered outside Hassan II Hospital in Agadir. In hand? Candles for a woman who recently passed while giving birth due to delayed medical advice. Her death was not just a tragedy; instead, it was a spark that brought hundreds of Moroccan youth together, demanding better healthcare, education, and dignity.

Beginning on September 27th, 2025, hundreds of protesters stormed the streets in Rabat, Casablanca, Agadir, Meknes, and Tangier. Of these individuals, 400+ arrests have been made, and at least two have been killed. The extent of the protest makes it the most significant youth movement in Morocco since 2011.

Photo 1: Protestor getting detained in Meknes, Morocco.Credit: Yousra Bounuar

Photo 1: Protestor getting detained in Meknes, Morocco.
Credit: Yousra Bounuar

What is Gen Z?

Gen Z is made up of young individuals born between 1997 and 2012. Equipped with technological savvy, Gen Z is known to be the most digitally immersed group to date. This unique knowledge strengthens their ability to connect and elicit change.

Global Protests

The protests in Morocco come at a time when Gen Z around the world are organizing with one another. Examples around the world include Nepal, where a recent ban on social media to silence an anti-corruption campaign sparked backlash; Madagascar, where youth are demanding that the government address high levels of poverty and corruption; and Peru, where protesters are also demanding that the state fight corruption. All of this represents a historic trend of Gen Z being known as a generation that seeks momentous change.

The Beginning

The protests in Morocco represent anger towards a system stretched thin. Over the past few years, Morocco has faced myriad burdens that have impacted the community significantly. There is significant youth unemployment, with around 22.1% of youth in the country being unemployed. This limits their ability to support their families and to find opportunities that would support upward socioeconomic mobility. 

Beyond this, there are additional burdens that impact Morocco’s healthcare abilities. One is the low doctor-to-patient ratio; especially in the more southern regions, 7.8 doctors can serve around 10,000 patients, which is quite far from the WHO’s recommended ratio. This is seen in tandem with the high maternal mortality rate of women in the country, which stands at around 70 deaths per 100,000 births. Clearly, there are significant disparities that impact the health outcomes of those around the country.

Whilst all of this was happening, the state continued to invest in the FIFA 2030 World Cup stadium. This investment was significant, with billions of dirhams being allocated to build stadiums at the same time that hundreds of healthcare facilities were underfunded. 

Photo 2: Police blocking protestors in Meknes, Morrocco. Credit: Yousra Bounuar
Photo 2: Police blocking protestors in Meknes, Morrocco.
Credit: Yousra Bounuar

The Turning Point

The nuances of the burdens faced by Moroccans across the country elicited tensions that bubbled into a full-on protest, catalyzed by the death of a young expectant mother. As the vigil began, hashtags began to flood Moroccan social media. From #GenZ212 to #WeDeserveBetter, thousands were speaking out for the need for investment in the community rather than in stadiums. From education to healthcare, protestors across the country were advocating for additional resources to be funneled to communities, rather than foreign investors. These protests mobilized throughout the entire country, and, as expected, the increased presence of activists led to a corresponding rise in police presence.

Though many protesters were peaceful, armed police used armored vehicles and tear gas to impact the protestors. Videos circulated of rubber bullets and tear gas being administered to protestors. This, in combination with the detention of journalists, resulted in public disorder. The infringement of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression resulted in dangerous outcomes for many involved. With over 400 detained, 37 charged, and at least two deaths, the effects of government intervention are undeniable. It is true that, as a way to address the qualms of the young protestors, the government worked to mobilize social reforms to support development across the country, mainly in rural areas. However, this was in conjunction with the critical increase of police conducting mass arrests and abusing peaceful demonstrators.

The World Is Watching

The violation of various human rights has met with protests in Morocco. By limiting freedom of assembly and engaging in increased policing of expression with the censorship of journalists, there are many explicit violations of human rights that have occurred as a result of the protests. Additionally, the right to health and work are being violated by the underfunded healthcare facilities and unemployment crisis, which creates the need for action. As Morocco is a signatory to both the ICCPR and ICESCR, it is integral that the country upholds these rights not just on paper, but in practice as well. Right now, the current situation is rife with suppression, neglect, and censorship — in direct opposition to the mandates of the ICCPR and ICESCR.

Most recently, the United Nations Human Rights Office called for restraint. This was focused on being able to respect citizens’ right to assembly. With Morocco’s current rank as 129th out of 180 countries on the 2024 World Press Freedom Index, the crisis demonstrates the need for sustainable change in the country.

 

The Need for Reform

Morocco can work and explore ways to improve the outcomes for its country. The youth in Morocco are not calling for a revolution: they are calling for reform. With improved hospital systems and jobs that sustain families, they want a country that enforces institutions and protects and uplifts its citizenry. 

It is essential that Morocco upholds its human rights obligations over international partnerships. When working with the international community, all partners should work to ensure that sports and trade do not come at the expense of the community, accountability, and justice.

Aid Interrupted: Gaza’s Famine and the Global Sumud Flotilla

Delivery of humanitarian aid by military helicopter. Source: Adobe Stock. By: photos_adil. Asset ID#: 322148549.
Image 1: Delivery of humanitarian aid by military helicopter. Source: Adobe Stock. By: photos_adil. Asset ID#: 322148549.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)’s Article 25 and Article 22 state that every human has the right to live with dignity, have healthcare, and enjoy adequate living standards. Specifically, Article 25 affirms that all humans have the right to ample health, food, medical care, clothing, housing, etc. Similarly, Article 22 discusses how there are economic, social, and cultural rights for all people. 

In addition to the UDHR, International Humanitarian Law covers the protection of civilians, religious military personnel, medical personnel, injured soldiers, and prisoners of war. These people under the protection are to be treated humanely, even in combat. Along with that, hospitals, ambulances, and medical supplies are supposed to be protected. It is in violation of international humanitarian law to target civilian infrastructure. These laws apply to both sides, regardless of who started the conflict. 

All humans have the right to medical care, food, and water. These rights are explicitly discussed in the UDHR and protected under International Humanitarian Law. This blog will be examining the famine in Gaza and the restriction of humanitarian aid. The contents of this blog were researched and written prior to the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas in the early part of October 2025. As such, this blog will only discuss the famine in Gaza, the Global Sumud Flotilla, and Israel’s block on humanitarian aid. 

The Famine in Gaza:

Palestinians gather to receive food from charity organization. Source: Adobe Stock. By: Tayiba Photography. Asset ID#: 1489429287.
Image 2: Palestinians gather to receive food from charity organization. Source: Adobe Stock. By: Tayiba Photography. Asset ID#: 1489429287.

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) completed a famine review on the Gaza strip in August 2025. The levels of famine are measured on a scale of 1-5, with each level increasing in severity. In the case of Gaza, three phases are relevant: phase 3, phase 4, and phase 5.  Phase 3 is considered a crisis, meaning households experience gaps in food consumption and high levels of malnutrition. Phase 4 is classified as an emergency; this means that households have significant gaps in food consumption, which causes high acute malnutrition and death. Phase 5 is considered a famine. This means that families lack basic needs and food, which have caused starvation, destitution, death, and devastating levels of acute malnutrition. 

In late August of 2025, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared a Famine in Gaza, and the IPC predicted that this famine would increase exponentially within two months. Furthermore, they anticipated that around 640,000 people would experience IPC Phase 5 starvation, 1.14 million people would experience IPC Phase 4, and close to 396,000 people would experience IPC Phase 3 of starvation. These figures not only reflect a humanitarian emergency, but a systemic denial of basic rights.

In order to be classified as a famine, three requirements have to be met: acute malnutrition, extreme food deprivation, and starvation related deaths. All three of these conditions have been met in Gaza. Severe acute malnutrition, as stated by the National Library of Medicine, includes the presence of both severe wasting and oedema on both feet. 

Severe wasting means that the weight to height ratio shows extreme weight loss and/or failure to gain weight. Oedema is a condition with hyperpigmentation and swelling within the feet, indicating an extreme lack of dietary protein. When applying pressure to feet that have oedema, a dent will remain after the pressure is lifted.

In July 2025, 39% of households in Gaza reported that they go multiple days without food, and 12,000 children were reported to be acutely malnourished. Additionally, drinking water in Gaza is extremely limited and sanitation services have decreased significantly. In response to the famine, the United Nation (UN) continues to call for a ceasefire with the release of hostages in order for much needed aid to enter Gaza. 

The Global Sumud Flotilla:

Palestinian flags on the flotillas from Barcelona. Source: Adobe Stock. By Roman. Asset ID#: 1739738944.
Image 3: Palestinian flags on the flotillas from Barcelona. Source: Adobe Stock. By: Roman. Asset ID#: 1739738944.

According to the Maritime Injury Center, nearly two-thirds of the ocean waters are international, with the areas surrounding nations split into different jurisdictions and territories. Each Nation with a coast has approximately 12 nautical miles of territory from its coast. Anything beyond the 12 nautical miles is considered international waters or the high seas. The respective nations’ laws are enforceable within and only within its 12 nautical miles. 

The Global Sumud Flotilla set sail from Barcelona on August 31, 2025. The flotilla consisted of around 50 ships, traveling with the intent to deliver critical humanitarian aid to the people of the Gaza strip. The ships carried food, medicine, baby formula, and other essential humanitarian supplies. Along with the aid, various activists from different countries were on board the ships. 

After weeks of journeying, the Global Sumud Flotilla was ultimately intercepted by Israel in the beginning of October 2025. It is estimated that the first ships were stopped around 70 nautical miles from the coastline of Gaza, further than the previously established 12-mile standard. The flotilla was halted in international waters, and the activists on board were taken into Israeli custody. Under International Humanitarian Law, humanitarian aid workers are protected, in which case the detainment and mistreatment of such people is a legal violation.

Amnesty International released statements on October 7, 2025, regarding the safety of the doctors, activists, human rights defenders, and journalists that were detained during the interception. They also reported that the detainment of members of the flotilla and the blocking of humanitarian aid was an international humanitarian law violation. Israel’s interception raises questions under both maritime and humanitarian law. 

Humanitarian Aid Blockade on Gaza:

Palestinian flag in front of buildings with black smoke and fire. Source: Adobe Stock. By: diy13. Asset ID#: 662345673.
Image 4: Palestinian flag in front of buildings with black smoke and fire. Source: Adobe Stock. By: diy13. Asset ID#: 662345673.

According to Human Rights Watch, Israel’s block on humanitarian aid from entering Gaza is in violation of International Humanitarian Law. Despite the fact that Israel is a warring party in opposition to Gaza, the nation is still required to allow humanitarian aid. 

Years earlier, in 2007, Israel implemented a naval blockade on the Gaza strip after they determined the area to be under Hamas’s control. Since then, they have placed sanctions and restrictions on what is and is not allowed in Gaza, which have varied throughout the years. After Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023, which resulted in around 1,200 Israelis dead and 240 taken hostage, restrictions were strengthened. 

With the ongoing famine in the Gaza strip, humanitarian aid is essential to the survival of Gazan people, though the UN has reported an increase in restrictions and blocks on aid entering and moving within Gaza. While humanitarians have been able to distribute food to some people, it is not enough to sufficiently combat the famine. Aid movements within Gaza are being blocked, and the lack of consistency for inspection rules have created delays. 

Inconsistent inspections and outright blocks have only worsened the famine’s impact on the people of Gaza. As stated in International Humanitarian Law, a state has a legal obligation to allow the influx of humanitarian aid and blocking such aid is in violation of the law. 

Conclusion:

As of Monday, October 13, 2025, the ceasefire deal has resulted in the release of 20 Israeli hostages that were taken by Hamas in October 2023. Along with that, Palestinian detainees were released. Though the current ceasefire is fragile, there is hope that with the deal, critical humanitarian aid can enter Gaza. 

Without sufficient aid, medical care, food, water, and sanitation, the famine will continue to grow and more civilians will suffer. However, there is a small hope that with the ceasefire, Gazans will have more aid. Allowing humanitarian aid is a legal obligation. To deny and deprive people of such aid would be against the UDHR and in violation of International Humanitarian Law. 

Economy and Exploitation: The AI Industry’s Unjust Labor Practices

I remember when ChatGPT first started gaining popularity. I was a junior in high school, and everyone around me couldn’t stop marveling over its seemingly endless capabilities. The large language model could write essays, answer physics questions, and generate emails out of thin air. It felt to us, sixteen and seventeen-year-olds, like we had discovered magic – a crystal ball that did whatever you told it.

I’m writing this, three years later, to break the news that it is, unfortunately, not magic. Artificial Intelligence (AI) relies on human input at nearly every stage of its preparation and verification. From content moderation to data collection, outwardly automated AI systems require constant human intervention to ensure the algorithm runs smoothly and sensically. This intervention calls for human labor to sift through and manage a given model’s data and performance. But where does this labor come from? And what are the implications of these workers’ invisibility to the public?

Labor Source

On the surface, it appears that Big Tech companies such as OpenAI, Sama, Meta, and Google are bearing the brunt of the labor it takes to develop and operate their AI systems. A closer look reveals that the human labor these AI systems require is distributed across the globe. These massive companies employ subcontractors to hire and manage workers who will perform the countless small, repetitive tasks required. These subcontractors, looking for maximum profit, often hire workers from less developed countries where labor rights are less strictly enforced and wages are not stringently regulated. What does this mean? Cheap, exploitative labor. Those living in poverty, refugee camps, and even prisons have been performing data tasks for subcontractors like Amazon Mechanical Turk and Clickworker. The outsourcing of workers in countries such as India and Kenya by affluent businesses in mostly Western countries seems to perpetuate patterns of exploitation and colonialism and play into global wealth disparities. 

Woman in a chair looking at computer screens
Crowdsourced Woman Monitors Data. Source: Adobe Stock

Wages

On top of the larger systemic implications of wealthier countries’ outsourcing their labor to less affluent countries, the individual workers themselves often suffer human rights abuses regarding wages.

According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), wage theft is a pressing issue when it comes to crowdworkers; this is due to employers denying wages to anyone who is deemed to have completed their tasks incorrectly. Issues with software and the flagging system can result in employers withholding wages due to completed tasks being labelled as incorrectly done. In the ILO’s survey, only 12 percent of crowdworkers conceded that all of their task fulfillment rejections were justifiable, with the majority claiming that only some of them were warranted. In other instances, pay can take the form of vouchers or gift cards, some of which are deemed invalid upon use. Unexpected money transfer fees and hidden fines can also result in wages being lower than initially expected or promised. 

Woman looking at her phone and credit card in shock.
Woman Looks at Her Wages, Which Are Lower than Expected. Source: Adobe Stock

Even if outsourced workers did always get paid correctly, it usually doesn’t amount to much. According to an ILO survey, the median earnings of microworkers were 2 US dollars an hour. In one specific case in Madagascar, wages were as low as 41 cents an hour. These workers are being paid far less than a livable wage under the excuse that their work is menial and performed task-by-task. The denial of wages and the outsourcing companies’ low pay rates violate ‘equal pay for equal work’ under Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

For some in periphery countries like India and Venezuela, data microwork is people’s only source of income. Its convenience and accessibility are attractive to those who don’t have the resources to apply for typical jobs, but its wages do not pay for the decent standard of living that is outlined in the UDHR in Article 25. As one microworker from Venezuela said in an interview with the BBC, “You will not live very well, but you will eat well.” 

 

Working Conditions

In addition to low wages, crowdworkers often face human rights violations regarding working conditions, and most of them are largely unable to access methods to advocate for better treatment from their employers. For those who classify and filter data, a day at work may include flagging images of graphic content, including murder, child sexual abuse, torture, and incest. This was the case for Kenyans employed by Sama and subsequently OpenAI; workers have testified to having recurring visions of the horrors they’ve seen, describing their tasks as torturous and mentally scarring. Many requests for mental health support are denied or not fulfilled. These experiences make workers vulnerable to developing post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and emotional numbness.

 

Woman covering her face as she looks at a laptop.
Woman Looks At Disturbing Images as She Monitors Data. Source: Adobe Stock

In one instance, the subcontractor Sama shared the personal data of one crowdworker with Meta, including parts of a non-disclosure agreement and payslips. Other workers on Amazon Mechanical Turk experienced privacy violations like “sensitive information collection, manipulative data aggregation and profiling,” and methods of scamming and phishing. This arbitrary collection and abuse of workers’ private data directly violates Article 12 of the UDHR, which enshrines the protection of privacy as a human right.

The nature of crowdwork is such that individuals work remotely and digitally, granting more power to the contractors over their workers and significantly diminishing microworkers’ capacity to take collective action and compromise with employers for better conditions. This independent contractor relationship between employers and employees has weakened the ability for microworkers to unionize and bargain with their contractors. Employers are able to rate crowdworkers poorly, which often results in the rejection of workers when they attempt to find new tasks to fulfill. There are few ways for workers to review their employers’ performance in a similar way, creating an unjust power imbalance between employer and employee, and various violations of labor rights. The possible convenience of self-employment and remote work comes with surrendering basic workers’ rights, such as “safeguards against termination, minimum wage assurances, paid annual leave, and sickness benefits”. Each of these aspects of microwork denies employees the labor rights outlined in Article 23 of the UDHR, another direct violation of human rights by these outsourcing companies. 

What’s Next?

The first step to addressing the human rights violations that are facing outsourced Artificial Intelligence data microworkers is ensuring their visibility. Dismantling the narrative of Artificial Intelligence models as fully automated systems and raising awareness about the essential roles microworkers play in the preparation and validating of data can help garner public attention. Since many of these crowdworkers are employed abroad, it is also important for advocates to highlight the exploitation that these tech companies and contractors are profiting from. In addition, because these workers have little bargaining power, making their struggles visible and starting dialogue with companies on their behalf can be a crucial step towards ensuring that microworkers have access to their human and privacy rights. While research and policy continues to expand regarding AI’s impact on the labor force, it is essential that academics and lawmakers alike consider the effects on the whole production chain, including low-wage workers abroad, rather than just the middle-class domestic workforce. Finally, it is imperative that big tech businesses and the crowdsourcing companies they contract with are held publicly accountable for their practices and policies when it comes to wages, payment methods, mental health resources, working conditions, and unionization. These initiatives can begin only once the public becomes aware of the exploitation of these invisible workers. So, the next time someone throws a prompt at ChatGPT, start a conversation about how reliant AI is on human labor. Only then can we start to grant visibility to microworkers and work towards change.

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. 

The image depicts two women looking towards a shack in a Bangladesh refugee camp.
Image 1: Women in a refugee camp. Source: Adobe Stock.

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.

Democracy for Sale: Big Tech’s Silent Takeover

Democracy for Sale: Big Tech’s Silent Takeover

 
KhunKorn Studio. (n.d.). Hand human finger touch cyborg robot white 3d rendering. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/hand-human-finger-touch-cyborg-robot-white-3d-rendering/572824180

In today’s world, technology is more prevalent than ever, shaping nearly every aspect of daily life. Much of this influence can be traced back to a small group of companies known as the Magnificent Seven. Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), Nvidia, and Tesla dominate the market, drive economic growth, and lead major tech trends.  These companies have a major concentration of market power in fields such as artificial intelligence, social media, e-commerce, and digital infrastructure. Apple dominates consumer tech, Amazon controls nearly 40% of the U.S. e-commerce market, and Meta owns three of the world’s largest social platforms. This gives them immense influence over both the economy and society at large. With everything in the palm of their hands, there have been concerns raised over data privacy, misinformation, and anti-competitiveness, exemplified by issues such as the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data breach and Amazon’s AI hiring bias scandal. As users of these services, we are often forced to accept practices that negatively affect our personal rights. These practices affect basic human rights stated in articles 12 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Privacy is compromised through data tracking, expression is influenced by algorithmic bias, and consumer choice is reduced by monopolistic control.

Article 21 of the UDHR states that “Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.” This includes the right to access information. The U.S. reflects this principle through the Freedom of Information Act, which ensures transparency in public service. When these private corporations control the flow of that information, they compromise the transparency that people have a right to. By controlling things such as search results and advertising, big tech influences the information that citizens see, which can impact public opinion.

The American flag waving in front of a classical building with tall, ornate columns, conveying a sense of patriotism and grandeur.
Nomad_Soul. (n.d.). Washington DC Monuments with USA. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/washington-dc-monuments-with-usa/143177910

In 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice filed lawsuits against Apple, Amazon, Meta, and Google, alleging that they built illegal monopolies that harm consumers and suppress innovation. This resulted in an August 2024 U.S. court ruling that Google did maintain an illegal monopoly on online search and a second trial ruling in April 2025 that they had a monopoly in online advertising. One of the main arguments in these cases was Google’s relationship with Apple. Google has claimed that making its search engine the default choice on Apple devices doesn’t restrict consumer choice, since users are technically free to switch. However, the fact that Google paid Apple $18 billion in 2021 alone to remain the default search engine suggests otherwise. This appears to be a classic example of anti-competitive behavior, where companies will use tactics like buying out smaller rivals or using exclusivity contracts. These methods ensure that once these companies dominate a market, they make it nearly impossible for rivals to challenge them.

Through the usage of acquisitions, restrictive contracts, and financial power, companies are able to secure that domination. In the e-commerce market, Independent sellers who rely on Amazon’s platform are often faced with strict controls that limit their autonomy. This behavior has not gone unnoticed. Amazon’s trial is set for October 2026, and the outcome could reshape not only Amazon’s operations but the future of online retail.

Today’s concerns about tech giants mirror debates from the late 19th century. During the Gilded Age, trusts like Standard Oil used their financial power to buy out competitors, corner markets, and control prices. These practices eventually led to the Sherman Antitrust Act and landmark antitrust rulings that sought to restore competition. While researching this topic, I found myself making comparisons more than once. These digital monopolies resemble industrial trusts. Like Standard Oil, they leverage size and resources to dominate markets, eliminate competition, and limit consumer choice. From a human rights standpoint, there should be more urgency of applying antitrust principles to modern technology.

Close-up of hands using a smartphone in a dimly lit setting. The focus is on the screen and fingers, with blurred lights in the background, suggesting nighttime.
Syda Productions. (n.d.). Business, Technology and People concept – Close up of businesswoman hands with smartphone. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/business-technology-and-people-concept-close-up-of-businesswoman-hands-with-smartphone/223178955

The problem goes beyond markets. Just how Standard Oil shaped politics back then, today’s tech giants extend beyond their businesses and into the functions of government itself. Some sectors of governments outsource aspects of their work to private tech firms, blurring the line between corporate power and public authority. For example, police forces hire private hacking firms to gain access to devices. When unelected corporations wield this kind of power, accountability shifts from government officials to CEOs and shareholders. Democracy is dependent upon government responsibility and honesty, and when this is compromised, the power of the citizens is taken away.

Some companies use private technology to process data or discriminate unintentionally through algorithms. The spread of misinformation and propaganda has been given space to thrive on platforms like Facebook and YouTube. Harmful rhetoric often spreads unchecked, while some political content is selectively censored by being removed or restricting accounts. Users are exposed to unchecked information that threatens informed civic engagement. For example, during the 2020 Covid 19 pandemic, misinformation, election conspiracy theories, and anti-vaccine propaganda was rampant on social media platforms.

Four women protest holding "Love" and "Peace" signs with peace symbols. They stand united, some with fists raised, in front of a historic building.
Cultura Creative. (n.d.). Activists holding peace signs protesting in street. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/activists-holding-peace-signs-protesting-in-street/481480070

To protect human rights, there need to be accountability mechanisms and transparency requirements for digital platforms similar to those imposed on industries like food, medicine, and automobiles. Overseas, the European Union’s Digital Services Act now requires large tech platforms to disclose how their algorithms recommend content and to remove harmful misinformation quickly. This could be a potential approach that could serve as a model for U.S. regulators. Protecting democracy in this new digital age also requires a human rights stance. When companies control markets, digital infrastructure and the flow of information, they hold control over citizens’ freedom to choose. The rise of the Magnificent Seven has fueled incredible technological innovation, but their dominance is increasingly monopolistic in nature. Consumers deserve a market that rewards innovation, protects privacy, and ensures real choice. Addressing these challenges requires both awareness and advocacy. As citizens, we can push for stronger digital privacy laws and hold elected officials accountable for enforcing antitrust and transparency standards. We could also support open-source alternatives to big tech platforms. Technology is meant to serve the people, not the other way around. The history of antitrust regulation shows that concentrated corporate power can be challenged, and, for the sake of democracy and human rights, it must be.