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 Leaguesupporters 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. 

When Children Are Treated as Adults: How One Alabama Teen Inspired My Fight for Justice

Girl behind bars.
Girl behind bars. By Nejron Photo; Adobe Stock. File #: 32689299

I did not enter the world of juvenile justice reform through textbooks, research questions, or curiosity about public policy. I entered it through a child. A girl I first met when she was just fourteen years old, wide-eyed, quiet, and already carrying a lifetime of burdens on her small frame. I was assigned as her CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocate) at a time when her life was marked by instability, poverty, and trauma. She was living in conditions most adults would find impossible, yet she still greeted me each week with a hesitant smile, a mix of hope and uncertainty in her eyes. Her resilience was unmistakable, even if she didn’t yet recognize it in herself.

Over the years, I watched her survive circumstances that would flatten most adults. She moved between unsafe living situations, often unsure where she would sleep or whether she would eat. She navigated school while juggling the chaos around her. She experienced loss, betrayal, and instability. And yet she showed up. She tried. She hoped. She fought to stay afloat.

Nothing in those early years prepared me for what would come next.

At sixteen, through a series of events, she was just present when a crime occurred. One she did not commit, did not plan, and did not anticipate. But in Alabama, presence is enough to catapult a child into the adult criminal system. Under Alabama’s automatic transfer statute, Ala. Code § 12-15-203, youth charged with certain offenses are moved to adult court entirely by default, without judicial evaluation and without any meaningful consideration of developmental maturity, trauma history, or the child’s actual involvement.

The law did not acknowledge her age, her vulnerability, her role in the event, or her long history of surviving poverty, abuse, and instability. It simply swept her into the adult system as if she were fully responsible for the incident and for her own survival. Overnight, she went from being a child in need of care to being treated as an adult offender. She was taken to an adult county jail, where her new reality consisted of four concrete walls, metal doors, and the unrelenting loneliness that comes from being a minor in a facility designed for grown men.

 

Child behind bars.
Child behind bars. By Tinnakorn; Adobe Stock. File #: 691836996

Because the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) requires strict “sight and sound separation” between minors and adults, and because most Alabama jails have no youth-specific housing units, she was placed into what the facility calls “protective custody.” In reality, this translated into solitary confinement. She spends nearly every hour of every day alone. No peers. No programming. No classroom. No sunlight. No meaningful human contact.

Not for days. Not for weeks. But for over an entire year.

Even now, writing those words feels unreal. A child, my former CASA child, has spent more than a year in near total isolation because Alabama does not have the infrastructure to house minors safely in adult jails. And it was this experience – witnessing her slow unraveling under the weight of isolation – that pushed me into research and now advocacy.

But the research came after the heartbreak.
She was the beginning, and she remains the reason.

Understanding the System That Failed Her

When I began researching how a child like her could be locked in an adult jail for over a year, the data was overwhelming. In 2023 alone, an estimated 2,513 youth under age eighteen were held in adult jails and prisons in the United States, according to The Sentencing Project. Alabama is not an outlier — it is fully participating in this national trend of treating children as adults based on the offense they are charged with, rather than who they are developmentally.

The more I learned about solitary confinement, the more horrified I became.
And yet none of it surprised me, not after watching what it is doing to her.

A young woman in handcuffs.
A young woman in handcuffs. By Nutlegal; Adobe Stock. File #: 259270712

Human Rights Watch reports that youth held in solitary confinement are 19 times more likely to attempt suicide than their peers in general populations. The United Nations Mandela Rules explicitly prohibit solitary confinement for anyone under eighteen, identifying it as a form of torture. The ACLU has documented the widespread use of isolation for youth in jails due to Prison Rape Elimination Act compliance limitations. And reports from the Prison Policy Initiative and the Equal Justice Initiative show that children in adult facilities face elevated risks of physical assault, sexual violence, psychological decline, and self-harm.

Developmental science aligns with these findings. Decades of work by scholars such as Laurence Steinberg show that adolescent brains are not fully developed — especially the regions governing impulse control, long-term planning, and risk assessment — but are exceptionally responsive to rehabilitation and growth.

Yet Alabama’s transfer laws ignore this entire body of scientific knowledge.

Even more troubling, youth transferred to adult court are 34% more likely to reoffend than youth who remain in the juvenile system. Adult criminal processing actively harms public safety.

Meanwhile, evidence-based juvenile programs, such as family therapy, restorative justice practices, and community-centered interventions, can reduce recidivism by up to 40%.

Everything we know about youth development suggests that rehabilitation, not punishment, protects communities.

Everything we know about juvenile justice suggests that children should never be housed in adult jails.

Everything we know about solitary confinement suggests that no human, let alone a child, should endure it.

And yet here she was, enduring it.

What Isolation Does to a Child

It is one thing to read the research. It is another to watch a child absorb its consequences.

When I visit her, she tries to be brave. She sees me on the video monitor and forces herself to smile, though the strain shows in her eyes. She tells me about the silence in the jail at night, the way it wraps around her like a heavy blanket. She talks about missing school — math class, of all things — and how she used to dream about graduating. She describes the fear, the uncertainty, the way days blend into each other until she loses track of time entirely.

She has asked me more than once if anyone remembers she is only seventeen.
She wonders whether her life outside those walls still exists.
She apologizes for crying — apologizes for being scared, as if fear is a defect rather than a reasonable response to months of isolation.

Watching her navigate the psychological toll of solitary confinement is one of the most difficult experiences I have had as an advocate. The changes have been slow, subtle, and painful: her posture tenser, her voice quieter, her expressions more guarded, her hope more fragile.

Children are resilient, but resilience has limits.
Solitary confinement breaks adults.
What it does to children is indescribable.

A woman in despair.
A woman in despair. By yupachingping; Adobe Stock. File #: 246747604

Why Alabama Must Reform Its Juvenile Transfer Laws

The more I researched, the more I understood that her story is not an exception; it is a predictable outcome of Alabama’s laws.

Ending this harm requires several critical reforms:

  1. Eliminate automatic transfer.

A child’s fate should not be decided by statute alone. Judges must be empowered to consider the full context — trauma history, level of involvement, mental health, maturity, and the circumstances of the offense.

  1. Ban housing minors in adult jails.

Other states have already taken this step. Alabama must follow.

  1. End juvenile solitary confinement.

Solitary confinement is not a protective measure; it is a human rights violation.

  1. Expand access to juvenile rehabilitation programs.

The science is clear: youth rehabilitation supports public safety far more effectively than punishment.

  1. Increase statewide transparency.

Alabama must track how many minors are transferred, how they are housed, and how long they remain in adult facilities. Without data, there can be no accountability.

She Deserves Justice

I am writing a policy brief because of her.
I studied this policy landscape because of her.
I advocate for systemic change because of her.

Her story is woven into every sentence of my research, every recommendation I’ve made, every argument I’ve formed. She is the reason I cannot walk away from this fight, not when I’ve witnessed what the system does to the children most in need of protection.

She deserves safety.
She deserves support.
She deserves a justice system that recognizes her humanity.

And she is not alone. There are countless children in Alabama — many living in poverty, many from marginalized communities, many without stable adult support — who are forced into adult systems that were never designed for them.

Their stories matter.
Their lives matter.
And the system must change.

Light falling over a girl's eyes.
Light falling over a girl’s eyes. By stivog; Adobe Stock. File #: 422569932

What You Can Do

If you believe that children deserve dignity, fairness, and protection, here are ways to support change:

  • Support organizations working to reform youth justice in Alabama:
    Equal Justice Initiative, Alabama Appleseed, ACLU of Alabama, or me — I can use all the help I can get.
  • Share this story to help build awareness.
  • Contact state legislators and demand an end to automatic transfer and juvenile solitary confinement.
  • Become a CASA and advocate for children whose voices are often ignored.
  • Vote in local elections, especially for district attorneys, sheriffs, and judges — leaders whose decisions directly impact youth.

Conclusion: Children Are Not Adults—Alabama’s Laws Must Reflect This Truth

The science is clear, the research is clear, and the human impact is undeniable.
Children are developmentally different. Children are vulnerable. And, in my opinion, children deserve grace, understanding, and second chances.

When we place children in adult jails, when we isolate them for months, when we treat them as if they are beyond repair, we do more than violate their rights—we violate our own values as a society.

The 17-year-old girl I have advocated for over the past three years is a reminder of what is at stake. She is not a statistic. She is not a file number. She is a child — a child whose life, dignity, and future must matter as much as any adult’s.

She is the beginning of my story in this work, and she remains at its heart.
Her experience makes it impossible to ignore the urgency of reform.
And her resilience makes it impossible to lose hope.

Alabama can do better.
Alabama must do better.
And children like her are counting on us to make sure it happens.

Woman behind bars
Woman behind bars; By primipil; Adobe Stock. File #: 524235023

AI in Mental Health Diagnostics

Digital cloud earth floating on neon data circle grid in cyberspace particle wave.
Image 1: Digital cloud earth floating on neon data circle grid in cyberspace particle wave. Adobe Express Stock Images. ZETHA_WORK. #425579329

In recent years, the promise of artificial intelligence (AI) in mental-health care has grown rapidly. AI systems now assist in screening for depression or anxiety, help design treatment plans, and analyze huge volumes of patient data. However, emerging evidence shows that these systems are not neutral: they can embed and amplify bias, threaten rights to equality and non‐discrimination, and have psychological consequences for individuals. We’ll be examining how and why bias arises in AI applications for mental health, the human rights implications, and what psychological effects these developments may carry.

The Rise of AI in Mental Health

AI’s application in mental health is appealing. Many people worldwide lack timely access to mental-health professionals, and AI systems promise scale, cost-efficiency, and new capabilities, like detecting subtle speech or behavioral patterns, that might identify issues earlier. For example, algorithms trained on speech patterns aim to flag depression or PTSD in users.

In principle, this could extend care to underserved populations and reduce the global burden of mental illness. But the technology is emerging in a context of longstanding disparities in mental health care; differences in who is diagnosed, who receives care, and who gets quality treatment.

How Bias Enters AI-based Mental Health Tools

Bias in AI systems does not begin with the algorithm alone; it often starts with the data. Historical and structural inequities, under-representation of certain demographic groups, and sensor or model limitations can all embed biased patterns that then get automated.

A recent systematic review notes major ethical issues in AI interventions for mental health and well‐being: “privacy and confidentiality, informed consent, bias and fairness, transparency and accountability, autonomy and human agency, and safety and efficacy.”

In the mental health screening context, a study from the University of Colorado found that tools screening speech for depression or anxiety performed less well for women and people of non‐white racial identity because of differences in speech patterns and model training bias. A separate study of four large language models (LLMs) found that for otherwise identical hypothetical psychiatric cases, treatment recommendations differed when the patient was identified (explicitly or implicitly) as African American, suggesting racial bias.

These disparities matter: if a diagnostic tool is less accurate for certain groups, those groups may receive delayed or improper care or be misdiagnosed. From a rights perspective, this raises issues of equality and non-discrimination. Every individual has a right to healthcare of acceptable quality, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic status, or other status.

Human Rights Implications

Right to health and equitable access

Under human rights law, states have obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill the right to health. That includes ensuring mental health services are available, accessible, acceptable and of quality. If AI tools become widespread but are biased against certain groups, the quality and accessibility of care will differ, and that violates the equality dimension of the right to health.

Right to non-discrimination

The principle of non-discrimination is foundational: individuals should not face less favorable treatment due to race, gender, language, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, or other prohibited grounds. If an AI mental health tool systematically under-detects problems among women or ethnic minorities or over-targets mental-health evaluation for other groups, discrimination is implicated. For instance, a study found LGBTQIA+ individuals were much more likely to be recommended mental health assessments by AI tools than was clinically indicated based on socioeconomic or demographic profile.

Right to privacy, autonomy and dignity

Mental health data is deeply personal. The use of AI to screen, predict or recommend treatment based on speech, text or behavior engages issues of privacy and autonomy. Individuals must be able to consent, understand how their data is used, challenge decisions, and access human oversight. The systematic review flagged “autonomy and human agency” as core ethical considerations.

Accountability and due process

When decisions about screening, diagnosis, or intervention are influenced by opaque algorithms, accountability becomes unclear. Who is responsible if an AI tool fails or produces biased recommendations? The software developer? The clinician? The institution? This ambiguity can undermine rights to remedy and oversight. The “Canada Protocol” checklist for AI in suicide prevention emphasized the need for clear lines of accountability in AI-driven mental health systems.

Differential labeling and stigma

When AI systems target certain groups disproportionately, for example, recommending mental health assessments for lower-income or LGBTQIA+ individuals when not clinically indicated, it may reinforce stigma. Being singled out for mental health screening based on demographic profile rather than actual need can produce feelings of being pathologized or surveilled.

Bias in therapeutic relationship

Mental health care depends heavily on the relationship between a person and their clinician. Trust, empathy, and feeling understood often determine how effective treatment will be. When someone believes their provider truly listens and treats them fairly, they’re more likely to engage and improve. But if technology or bias undermines that sense of understanding, people may withdraw from care or lose confidence in the system.

Reduced effectiveness or misdiagnosis

If an AI tool under-detects depression among certain groups, like women or ethnic minorities, and that leads to delayed treatment, then the psychological impact of possible longer suffering, increased severity, and reduced hope is real and harm-producing. One study found that AI treatment recommendations were inferior when race was indicated, particularly for schizophrenia cases.

These psychological effects show that bias in AI is not just a technical defect; it can ripple into lived experience, identity, mental health trajectories, and rights realization.

Chatbot conversation Ai Artificial Intelligence technology online customer service.
Image 2: Chatbot conversation with AI technology online customer service. Adobe Express Stock Images. khunkornStudio.
#567681994

Why AI Bias Persists and What Makes Mental Health AI Especially Vulnerable

Data limitations and under-representation

Training data often reflect historical care patterns, which may under-sample certain groups or encode socio-cultural norms that do not generalize. The University of Colorado study highlighted that speech-based AI tools failed to generalize across gender and racial variation.

Hidden variables and social determinants

One perspective argues that disparities in algorithmic performance arise not simply from race labels but also from un-modelled variables, such as racism-related stress, generational trauma, poverty, and language differences, all of which affect mental health profiles but may not be captured in datasets.

Psychology of diagnostic decision-making

Mental health diagnosis is not purely objective; it involves interpretation, cultural nuance, and relational trust. AI tools often cannot replicate that nuance and may misinterpret behaviors or speech patterns that differ culturally. That raises a psychological dimension: people from different backgrounds may present differently, and a one-size-fits-all tool may misclassify them.

Moving Toward Rights-Respecting AI in Mental Health

Given the stakes for rights and psychology, what should stakeholders do? Below are guiding principles anchored in human rights considerations and psychological realities:

  1. Inclusive and representative datasets
    AI developers should ensure that training and validation data reflect diverse populations across race, gender, language, culture, and socioeconomic status. Without this, bias will persist. Datasets should also capture social determinants of mental health, such as poverty, trauma, and discrimination, rather than assuming clinical presentations are uniform.
  2. Transparency, explainability, and human oversight
    Patients and clinicians should know if an AI tool is being used and how it functions, and they should remain able to challenge its outputs. Human clinicians must retain decision-making responsibility; AI should augment, not replace, human judgement, especially in mental-health care.
  3. Bias-testing and ongoing evaluation
    AI tools should be tested for fairness and performance across demographic groups before deployment, and, once deployed, they should be continuously monitored. One large study found that AI recommendations varied significantly by race, gender, and income.
    Also, mitigation techniques are emerging to reduce bias in speech- or behavior-based models.
  4. Rights to remedy and accountability
    When AI-driven systems produce harmful or discriminatory outcomes, individuals must have paths to redress. Clear accountability must be established among developers, providers, and institutions. Regulatory frameworks should reflect human rights standards: non-discrimination, equal treatment, and access to care of quality.
  5. Psychological safety and dignity
    Mental health tools must respect the dignity of individuals, allow for cultural nuance, and avoid pathologizing individuals based purely on demographic algorithms. The design of AI tools should consider psychological impacts: does this tool enhance trust, reduce stigma, and facilitate care, or does it increase anxiety, self-doubt, or disengagement?
  6. Translate rights into policy and practice
    States and professional bodies should integrate guidelines for AI in mental health into regulation, licensing, and accreditation structures. Civil society engagement, which includes patient voices, mental-health advocates, and rights organizations, is critical to shaping responsible implementation.

Looking Ahead: Opportunities and Risks

AI has enormous potential to improve access to mental health care, personalize care, and detect risks earlier than ever before. But, as with many new technologies, the impacts will not be equal by default. Without a proactive focus on bias, human rights, and psychological nuance, we risk a two-tier system: those who benefit versus those left behind or harmed.

In a favorable scenario, AI tools become transparent and inclusive, and they empower both clinicians and patients. They support, rather than supplant, human judgement; they recognize diversity of presentation; they strengthen trust and equity in mental health care.
In a less favorable scenario, AI solidifies existing disparities, misdiagnoses or omits vulnerable groups, and erodes trust in mental-health systems, compounding rights violations with psychological harm.

The path that materializes will depend on choices made today: how we design AI tools, how we regulate them, and how we embed rights and psychological insight into their use. For people seeking mental health support, equity and dignity must remain at the heart of innovation.

Conclusion

The use of AI in mental health diagnostics offers promise, but it also invites serious rights-based scrutiny. From equality of access and non-discrimination to privacy, dignity and psychological safety, the human rights stakes are real and urgent. Psychologists, technologists, clinicians, regulators and rights advocates must work together to ensure that AI supports mental health for all, not just for some. When bias is allowed to persist, the consequences are not only technical, but they’re also human.

“I Didn’t Know It Had a Name”: Understanding Labor Trafficking — and How to Spot It

AdobeStock_136448884 - Maid changing pillows during housekeepingBy Robert Kneschke
AdobeStock_136448884 – Maid changing pillows during housekeeping By Robert Kneschke

When Rosa* arrived to clean guest rooms at a popular beach hotel, the recruiter’s promises still echoed: “$12 an hour, free housing, and a chance to learn English.” Her temporary work visa had cost thousands in “fees,” which the recruiter said she could repay from her first months of wages. But the free housing was a crowded motel room with six other women. The “fees” kept growing. Her passport was locked in a supervisor’s desk “for safety.” Twelve-hour shifts stretched into sixteen. If she complained, the supervisor reminded her that she “owed” the company and could be sent home in debt, or reported to immigration. Rosa wasn’t chained. She could walk to and from work. Yet every part of her life, documents, debt, threats, and isolation, was controlled.

Rosa didn’t know it had a name. It does: labor trafficking.

What is labor trafficking?

Under U.S. law, labor trafficking (also called forced labor) occurs when someone obtains another person’s labor or services through force, fraud, or coercion. This includes threats of serious harm, schemes, abuse of legal process (for example, threatening deportation), or withholding documents and wages to compel work. 

Globally, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates 27.6 million people are in forced labor on any given day. A 2021 report estimated that 50 million people are in “modern slavery,” which also includes forced marriage.  In 2024, the ILO reported that illegal profits from forced labor in the private economy reached $236 billion annually, a 37% increase over a decade; this is evidence that coercion is lucrative for traffickers and intermediaries. 

AdobeStock_36854977. Black Businessman holding black bag full money. By RODWORKS
AdobeStock_36854977. Businessman holding a bag full of money. By RODWORKS

How does it happen? The “means” traffickers use

The ILO identifies 11 indicators that commonly appear in forced labor situations. You rarely need all 11 to determine risk; one or more strong indicators can be enough to signal danger. These are abuse of vulnerability, deception, restriction of movement, isolation, physical or sexual violence, intimidation and threats, retention of identity documents, withholding wages, debt bondage, abusive working and living conditions, and excessive overtime. 

Rosa’s story shows several in practice:

  • Debt bondage via unlawful recruitment fees and deductions.
  • Withholding documents (passport confiscation).
  • Threats and abuse of legal process (“We’ll call immigration”).
  • Excessive overtime and abusive conditions.

These tactics can entrap anyone, citizens and migrants, men and women, adults and youth.

AdobeStock_321877815-1. Man putting smartphone, passport and money into safe. By New Africa
AdobeStock_321877815-1. Man putting smartphone, passport and money into safe. By New Africa

Where labor trafficking shows up (it’s closer than you think)

Contrary to the myth that labor trafficking only happens “somewhere else,” it also occurs in wealthy countries, including the United States, across both hidden and highly visible industries. 

  1. Agriculture, forestry, and food processing: Seasonal, remote worksites and complex contracting chains create risk. Temporary visa programs (such as H-2A for agriculture and H-2B for non-agricultural seasonal work) can be both lifelines and levers for coercion when employers or labor brokers retaliate or threaten to withhold visa renewals. The Hotline data and policy research from Polaris Project detail cases involving wage theft, unsafe housing, and retaliation.
  2. Hospitality, cleaning, and landscaping: Hotels, resorts, commercial cleaning, and landscaping often rely on subcontractors and staffing agencies, which can obscure who is responsible for wages, safety, and housing. The National Human Trafficking Hotline has identified hundreds of potential victims linked to hospitality supply chains.
  3. Construction and manufacturing: Long hours, dangerous sites, and layers of subcontracting elevate the risk of coercion, document retention, and threats. The ILO’s indicators surface repeatedly in these sectors.
  4. Domestic work and caregiving: Workers in private homes can be isolated from the public and regulators, leaving them vulnerable to withheld wages, restricted movement, and threats. The ILO’s global estimates include millions of cases of domestic work under forced labor.
  5. Seafood and global supply chains: Beyond U.S. borders, supply chains can mask the use of forced labor in fishing, seafood processing, apparel, electronics, and more. The U.S. Department of Labor’s List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor is a sobering catalog, as it lists 204 goods from 82 countries (as of Sept. 5, 2024). Policymakers and purchasers use it to identify high-risk imports and improve due diligence.
AdobeStock_573441418. Exhausted little girl sitting on floor concrete wall background. child labor and exploitation
AdobeStock_573441418.  Exhausted little girl sitting on floor – labor exploitation. By AungMyo

State action and import bans

In recent years, the U.S. has restricted imports tied to forced labor under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) and other authorities, adding companies to enforcement lists and blocking imports in sectors such as footwear, aluminum, and seafood. These steps matter because cutting off profits reduces incentives to exploit. 

Common threads: What to watch for

While every case is unique, patterns repeat:

  1. Recruitment fees and debt: Workers are charged unlawful or inflated fees by recruiters. Debts balloon through deductions for housing, equipment, or transport, paid back through labor; the worker can’t freely leave.
  2. Document confiscation: Passports, IDs, or visas are held “for safekeeping,” removing mobility and increasing fear.
  3. Threats and abuse of legal process: Supervisors threaten deportation, blacklisting, or calling the police if workers complain.
  4. Isolation: Workers are transported to remote sites, housed on-site, or told not to speak to neighbors, customers, or inspectors.
  5. Wage theft and excessive overtime: Unpaid overtime, below-minimum wages, or pay withheld until a season ends.
  6. Subcontracting opacity: When multiple entities sit between the worker and the brand, accountability gets murky, and traffickers exploit the gaps.

Who is at risk?

Anyone facing economic hardship, discrimination, or a lack of legal protections can be targeted. Migrant workers, especially those whose visas tie them to a single employer, can be especially vulnerable to coercion. Data from the National Human Trafficking Hotline’s analysis shows thousands of victims holding temporary visas at the time of their abuse. 

But vulnerability isn’t limited to migrants. Youth aging out of care, people in debt or homelessness, and disaster-displaced families are at an elevated risk of labor exploitation. Traffickers prey on need, not nationality.

AdobeStock_265465062. Teenage girl with other homeless people receiving food.By New Africa
AdobeStock_265465062. Teenage girl with other homeless people receiving food. By New Africa

How is labor trafficking different from “regular” workplace abuse?

Workplace violations (like unpaid overtime) are serious and enforceable through agencies like the U.S. Department of Labor, but they are not all trafficking. Trafficking involves a compelling mechanism (force, fraud, or coercion) that deprives a worker of a meaningful choice to leave. If you see indicators like debt bondage, document confiscation, or threats of serious harm or deportation, you may be looking at forced labor, which is a crime. 

What progress looks like

Governments, companies, and civil society have tools to reduce risk:

But the profit motive remains powerful, given the staggering $236B in illegal profits stemming from forced labor, so vigilance and reporting are critical. 

AdobeStock_475597494.jpeg. "Ban goods made with forced labor " By AndriiKoval
AdobeStock_475597494.jpeg. “Ban goods made with forced labor ” By AndriiKoval

How you can help (even if you’re not sure it’s trafficking)

You don’t have to decide whether a situation is “definitely” trafficking. If you notice multiple indicators, such as debts used to control, threats, confiscated documents, isolation, abusive conditions, withheld wages, or excessive overtime, say something. Trained specialists can sort out whether it’s a labor law violation, trafficking, or both, and connect people to help.

In the United States

  • National Human Trafficking Hotline – 1-888-373-7888 (24/7), text “BEFREE” (233733), or online report/chat: humantraffickinghotline.org. (The hotline is supported by Health and Human Services and is transitioning operators; the number and channels remain active.)
  • DHS Blue Campaign / ICE HSI Tip Line – To reach federal law enforcement directly about suspected trafficking or smuggling: 1-866-347-2423 or submit an online tip.
  • U.S. Department of Labor, Wage & Hour Division (WHD) – For wage theft, child labor, or overtime violations that may overlap with trafficking: 1-866-4-US-WAGE (1-866-487-9243) or file a complaint online.
  • OSHA – For unsafe or abusive working conditions posing imminent danger: 1-800-321-OSHA (6742).
  • 911 – If someone is in immediate danger.

If you’re an employer or community leader, post these numbers in break rooms, faith centers, and shelters—and ensure reporting won’t trigger retaliation.

Bringing it back to Rosa

One winter night, a guest slipped Rosa a folded flyer with a number and the words: “You have rights.” She called during her only free hour. The advocate didn’t ask her to be certain; they asked about indicators, debt, documents, threats, wages, and hours, and created a safety plan. Law enforcement and labor investigators coordinated with a local nonprofit. Rosa got her passport back, moved into safe housing, recovered wages, and started English classes. She still cleans rooms, but now she does it on her own terms, and she keeps extra copies of that number in her apron pocket.

AdobeStock_239599722.jpeg. Young chambermaid with clean towels in bedroomBy New Africa
AdobeStock_239599722.jpeg. Young chambermaid with clean towels in bedroom By New Africa

If you or someone you know might be experiencing labor trafficking:

You don’t need to be sure. Calling could be the beginning of someone’s freedom.

Unchained hands raised to the sky
AdobeStock_54553304. Formerly tied hands raised to the sky. By Marina

*The name and story used are a representation of labor trafficking victims.

Neurorights and Mental Privacy

Neurons cells concept, whitehoune, #170601825
Image 1: Conceptual illustration of neuron cells, whitehoune, Adobe Express Stock Images, #170601825

As neuroscience and commercial neurotechnology advance, a new human-rights conversation is emerging: who controls the contents of the mind? This question, framed as “neurorights,” aims to protect mental privacy, personal identity, and cognitive liberty as technologies that can read, interpret, or modulate brain activity move from labs into clinics and consumer markets.

Imagine a person using a sleek, wireless headband marketed to boost productivity. The device measures tiny electrical signals from their scalp, brainwaves that reflect attention, stress, and fatigue levels. This neural data is sent to a companion app that promises personalized “focus insights.” Yet behind the scenes, that same data can be stored, analyzed, and even shared with advertisers or insurers who want to predict behavioral patterns. Similar EEG-based devices are already used in classrooms, workplaces, and wellness programs, raising questions about who owns the data produced directly by our brains and how it might shape future decisions about employment, education, or mental health.

What are neurorights?

“Neurorights” is an umbrella term for proposed protections covering mental privacy (control over access to one’s neural data), cognitive liberty (the freedom to think without undue intrusion or manipulation), mental integrity (protection from harmful interference with brain function), and fair access to cognitive enhancements. Advocates argue these protections are needed because neural signals, unlike most data, are deeply tied to personal identity, emotion, and thought.

Why human rights framing matters

Framing these issues as human-rights questions does more than add vocabulary; it shifts the burden from optional ethics to enforceable obligations. Rights language foregrounds duties of states and powerful actors (companies, employers, security services) A rights framework also helps center vulnerability. People detained in criminal justice systems, psychiatric patients, low-income communities, and marginalized groups may face disproportionate risks of coercive or exploitative uses of neurotechnology.

The psychological stakes concerning selfhood

Psychology offers essential insights into why neural intrusions are psychologically distinct from other privacy breaches. Anticipated or actual access to one’s neural signals can change behavior, prompting self-censorship, anxiety about inner experiences, or altered identity narratives as people adapt to the possibility that their private mental states might be exposed, interpreted, or changed.

Moreover, interventions that modulate mood, memory, or decision-making, whether therapeutic or commercial, reach into capacities that underpin agency and moral responsibility. Psychology research shows that perceived loss of agency can undermine motivation, increase helplessness, and disrupt social relationships; applied at scale, these individual effects could reshape community life and civic participation.

Current technologies and real-world uses

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), invasive implants, noninvasive electroencephalography (EEG) headsets, and machine-learning models that decode neural patterns are no longer just speculative. Companies developing clinical implants aimed at restoring lost motor function and consumer devices marketed for wellness, focus, or gaming generate neural data that, if mishandled, could reveal health conditions, emotional states, or behavioral tendencies.

Reports and investigations have raised alarms about both safety and governance, questioning lab practices, clinical oversight, and whether companies adequately protect highly sensitive neural signals. Meanwhile, policymakers and researchers are documenting opaque data practices among consumer neurotech firms and urging regulators to treat neural data as especially sensitive.

Where governments and institutions are acting

Latin America has been a notable early mover on neurorights. Chile passed constitutional protections and subsequent legislation explicitly recognizing rights tied to mental privacy and brain integrity, signaling a precautionary approach to neurotechnology governance. Regional advocacy and legal scholarship have spread the debate through Mexico, Brazil, and other jurisdictions.

Outside Latin America, regulatory efforts differ. Subnational privacy laws in places like Colorado have moved to include neural or biological data under sensitive-data protections, and U.S. senators have urged federal scrutiny of how companies handle brain data. At the international level, UNESCO and other bodies are mapping ethical frameworks for neurotech and its impact on freedom of thought and personal identity.

Psychological harms and social inequality

Human-rights concern about neurotech is not simply theoretical. Psychological harms from intrusive neurotechnology can include sustained anxiety about mental privacy, identity disruption if neural signatures are used to label or stigmatize people, and coerced behavioral modification in institutional settings.

These harms are likely to be unequally distributed, with some groups facing fewer safeguards and greater exposure to surveillance or coercion. Rights-based governance should therefore combine privacy protections with equity measures, ensuring safeguards are accessible to those most at risk.

Human brain illustration, Adobe Express Stock Images, Hein Nouwens, #141669980
Image 2: Human brain illustration, Adobe Express Stock Images, Hein Nouwens, #141669980

Benefits and risks

After discussing so many potential risks of neurotech, it’s important to acknowledge that this technology also has legitimate benefits: neurotechnologies offer therapeutic promise for paralysis, severe depression, epilepsy, and other conditions where traditional treatments fall short. The human-rights approach is not about halting innovation; it’s about steering it so benefits don’t come at the cost of fundamental freedoms, dignity, or mental integrity.

Principles for rights-respecting governance

Based on human-rights norms and psychological science, several practical principles can help guide policy and practice:

  1. Mental-privacy-first data rules. Neural data should be treated as inherently sensitive, requiring explicit, revocable, and informed consent for collection, use, and sharing, plus clear limits on secondary uses.
  2. Strong procedural safeguards in clinical research. Trials for invasive devices must meet rigorous safety, animal-welfare, and informed-consent standards to protect participants’ welfare and dignity.
  3. Transparency and oversight for commercial neurotech. Companies should disclose data flows, model-training practices, and any commercial sharing of neural signals, and independent audits and enforceable penalties should deter misuse.
  4. Protection against coercion. Employment, school, or criminal-justice settings should be barred from coercively requiring neural monitoring or interventions without robust legal protections and judicial oversight.
  5. Equity and access. Policies should avoid creating two-tier systems where only affluent groups receive safe, beneficial neurotech while others suffer surveillance or low-quality interventions; public health pathways for safe therapeutic access are essential.
  6. Legal recognition of cognitive liberties. Where feasible, codifying protections for mental privacy and mental integrity, at least as part of sensitive-data regimes and health-privacy laws, creates enforceable rights rather than aspirational principles.

What psychology researchers can do

Psychologists and behavioral scientists are well placed to measure and communicate the human impacts of neurorights policy choices. Empirical studies can probe how perceived neural surveillance influences stress, self-concept, and social behavior; intervention trials can test consent processes and mental-privacy safeguards; and qualitative work can amplify vulnerable groups’ lived experiences.

What civil society and rights advocates should watch

Advocates should monitor corporate data practices and any opaque sharing of neural signals, laws that would allow state access to neural data for security or law-enforcement purposes without adequate safeguards, and the commercialization of consumer BCIs that escape medical regulation yet collect deeply personal neural information. Public interest litigation, public education campaigns, and multi-stakeholder policy forums can help shape accountable pathways.

A cautious optimism

The rise of neurorights shows that society can respond proactively to emerging technologies. Chile’s early steps and subnational privacy laws signal that legal systems can adapt to protect inner life, and UNESCO and scientific communities are actively debating ethical frameworks. But these steps are the beginning, not a solution. Meaningful protection requires global attention, interdisciplinary research, and enforceable rules that place human dignity and psychological well-being at the center.

Conclusion

Neurotechnology promises real benefits for health and human flourishing, but it also raises unprecedented questions about mental privacy and the boundaries of state and corporate power. A human-rights approach, guided by psychological evidence about identity, agency, and harm, offers a way to balance innovation with dignity. Protecting the privacy and integrity of our minds is not just technical policy; it’s a defense of what it means to be a person.

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.

“Hidden in Plain Sight”: Child Sex Trafficking in Alabama

On a humid summer morning in 2025, investigators in Bibb County, Alabama, followed a tip to a property behind a small home in the city of Brent. They say they discovered an underground bunker that had been repurposed into a site of horrific abuse involving at least 10 children, ages 3 to 15. Seven individuals, some of them related to the victims, were arrested on charges that included human trafficking, rape, sexual torture, and kidnapping. The sheriff called it the worst case he had seen in three decades, and more arrests could still come as the investigation develops.

Adobe Stock. File #: 297986967; ‘Shadows in a dark black room.’ By Светлана Евграфова

Stories like this are shocking, but they are not isolated. Sex trafficking thrives in secrecy and shame, and it depends on community silence to survive. This post explains what sex trafficking is under federal and Alabama law, how recent state legislation increased penalties, what warning signs look like in everyday settings, and exactly how to report concerns safely.

What the Law Means by “Sex Trafficking”

Federal law (TVPA & 18 U.S.C. § 1591)

The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) is the main federal law to fight human trafficking. It created programs to prevent trafficking, protect survivors, and prosecute traffickers. A key part of this law is 18 U.S.C. § 1591, which makes sex trafficking a serious federal crime. It says that anyone who recruits, transports, or profits from someone in sex trafficking, especially minors, or adults forced by fraud, threats, or coercion, can face very long prison sentences and hefty fines. The law focuses on both holding traffickers accountable and assisting survivors in rebuilding their lives. Importantly, force, fraud, or coercion does not need to be proven when the victim is under 18. That is the bright line of federal law: a child cannot consent to commercial sex.

Adobe Stock. File #: 298570791; ‘Stop child abuse. Human is not a product.’ By AtjananC.

Alabama makes human trafficking a serious crime under its criminal code.

  • First-degree trafficking (Ala. Code § 13A-6-152): This covers forcing someone into sexual servitude or exploiting a minor for sex.
  • Second-degree trafficking (Ala. Code § 13A-6-153): This includes recruiting, transporting, or making money from trafficking, even if the person isn’t directly exploiting the victim.

In April 2024, Alabama passed the “Sound of Freedom Act” (HB 42). This law increased penalties: if someone is convicted of first-degree trafficking involving a minor, they must receive a life sentence, making the punishment even stronger than the usual Class A felony.

Before HB 42, Alabama’s Class A felonies carried 10–99 years or life. The new law removes judicial discretion for minor-victim cases by requiring at least life imprisonment upon conviction for first-degree trafficking.

Adobe Stock; File #209721316; ‘Offender criminal locked in jail’. By methaphum

Why “Coercion” Isn’t Always What You Think

In the public imagination, trafficking looks like kidnapping by strangers. Sometimes it is. More often, it looks like grooming and manipulation by someone the child knows, an older “boyfriend,” a family member, a family acquaintance, someone who offers rides, cash, substances, or a place to crash. Under both federal and Alabama law, proof of force, fraud, or coercion is not required when the victim is under 18, because the law recognizes how easily minors can be exploited.

Where Sex Trafficking Hides—And the Red Flags

Trafficking can occur in short-term rentals, hotels, truck stops, private residences, and online (through social media, gaming platforms, and messaging apps). No community is immune – rural, suburban, and urban areas all see cases. You may notice a child who:

  • Is suddenly disengaged from school and activities
  • Has unexplained injuries
  • Has new “friends” and gifts
  • Has an adult who answers for them
  • Has restricted movement
  • Has signs of deprivation
  • Appears coached in what to say.
Adobe Stock: File #:176601576. Woman sitting on bed in room with light from window. By yupachingping

Educators, coaches, healthcare providers, youth pastors, and even neighbors are often the first to spot concerns. Alabama’s recent case in Bibb County proves that abuse networks can be family-linked and community-embedded, not organized by only outsiders. Trust your instincts; the law backs you up when you report in good faith.

If You See Something: How to Report in Alabama

  • Immediate danger? Call 911.
  • Children (under 18): In Alabama, make a report to your county Department of Human Resources (DHR) or local law enforcement. DHR maintains a county-by-county contact directory and guidance on how to report child abuse/neglect.
  • National Human Trafficking Hotline (24/7): 1-888-373-7888, text 233733 (BeFree), or chat online. Advocates provide confidential help and can connect callers to local services.

A note for mandated reporters:

Alabama’s mandated reporting law (Ala. Code § 26-14-3) requires many professionals, including teachers, healthcare workers, counselors, clergy, and others, to report suspected child abuse or neglect immediately. When in doubt, report; you do not have to prove trafficking to act.

What “Safe Harbor” Means for Children

Across the U.S., Safe Harbor policies aim to treat exploited minors as victims who need services, not as offenders. While states differ in how these protections are implemented, the core idea is consistent: a child who has been bought and sold should receive trauma-informed care and not face prosecution for acts stemming from exploitation. If you work with youth, be aware that Alabama’s human trafficking statutes align with this child-protection lens, and service providers can help navigate options.

A Real Case, Real Lessons

Return to Bibb County. According to reports, some victims in the alleged bunker case were kept underground, drugged, and “sold” to abusers; one suspect is accused of distributing child sexual abuse material. Community members later asked how this could have continued for years without intervention. The uncomfortable answer: it’s easy to miss what you’re not looking for, and it’s hard to report what you can’t imagine happening. That’s why awareness, clear reporting pathways, and strong laws all matter.

Adobe Stock: File #: 495335081 ‘Hidden in plain sight. Closeup shot of a beautiful young womans eye’. By Marco v.d Merwe/peopleimages.com

Practical Steps You Can Take This Week

  1. Save the Hotline: Put 1-888-373-7888 in your phone under “Human Trafficking Hotline.” Please share it with colleagues and students in age-appropriate ways.
  2. Know your local contact: Look up your county DHR reporting number and bookmark it. If you work in a school or clinic, post it in staff areas.
  3. Review indicators: Spend 10 minutes with DHS’s Blue Campaign indicators and guidance for identifying victims. Consider how these apply in your setting (classroom, clinic, church, etc.).
  4. Clarify your duty to report: If you’re a mandated reporter, review Alabama’s summary materials and your organization’s internal protocol to be prepared before a crisis.
  5. Combat myths: Remember, children cannot consent to commercial sex, and proof of force or violence is not required for a child sex trafficking case under federal law.

Bottom Line

Sex trafficking can surface anywhere—including small Alabama towns. Federal law treats any commercial sexual exploitation of a minor as trafficking, full stop; Alabama now backs that stance with one of the harshest penalties in the country when the victim is a child. Awareness is not enough unless it’s paired with action: see the signs, make the call, and let the system take care of the rest.

Adobe Express Stock Images. File #: 300469288; ‘IT’S TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT’. By New Africa

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.

Gendered Vulnerability in Afghanistan’s Earthquake Crisis

 

Earthquakes destruction in Afghanistan.
Image 1: Afghanistan earthquake’s destruction. Source: Yahoo Images.

Recently, two large-scale earthquakes hit Afghanistan, furthering the dire humanitarian crisis. Earthquakes with magnitudes of 6.0 to 6.2 are likely to cause significant damage in largely populated areas. The first, which was a magnitude of 6.0, occurred on August 31. This resulted in around 2,000 deaths, caused thousands to sustain injuries, and damaged health facilities and homes. Unfortunately, four days later, the second earthquake hit, this one being a 6.2 magnitude earthquake. 

In the aftereffects of natural disasters, the people most affected are women and children. In Afghanistan, where women’s rights are being heavily restricted, their ability to access humanitarian aid is limited. Previously, in October 2023, two 6.3 magnitude earthquakes hit Afghanistan. This event and its effects on the women and children was written about in a blog by Delisha. If you would like to read about that, check out her blog, Deadly Earthquake in Afghanistan Magnifies Gender Apartheid Under Taliban Control. For an overview of women’s rights violations in Afghanistan, read my previous blog, A Woman’s World in Afghanistan: An Update on Women’s Rights Violations in Afghanistan. 

For this blog, we will be looking at the most recent earthquake, its effects on women and children, and the humanitarian aid response. Throughout this blog, keep in mind a couple of articles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Article 18 relates to women’s freedom of movement and Article 25, right to food, clothing, housing, and medical care. Throughout the Taliban’s recent reign, these rights have continuously been violated. Frequent earthquakes have furthered the humanitarian crisis and highlighted women’s rights issues. 

The Devastating Effects of Earthquakes in Afghanistan 

Traditional Afghan Homes
Image 2: Traditional Afghan Homes. Source: Yahoo Images.

On average, earthquakes kill around 560 people every year in Afghanistan, making it a common natural disaster. The country sits between the Eurasian tectonic plate and the Indian plate, hence why earthquakes are so frequent. The common house in rural Afghanistan is made out of mudbrick, wood, and stone. With frequent earthquakes each year, this causes significant damage and destruction to many homes. 

The Kunar region has been especially affected by the recent earthquakes. Located in the northeastern area of Afghanistan, bordering Pakistan, this remote area had many of their homes destroyed. In response to the destruction, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has provided medical aid to areas like Kunar. Although they are providing support and medical aid, many people still struggle with food security due to the loss of livestock (goats and cows) during the earthquakes. 

Along with the ICRC, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) has been offering food, shelter, and medical aid. After the initial earthquakes, around 85% of those interviewed by IRC had no shelter to sleep in. All of their homes had been destroyed. On average, $80 million in damage occurs every year in Afghanistan due to earthquakes. Because of the recent cutback on humanitarian aid from foreign entities and the rising restrictions on women and girls, the crisis continues to grow.

Women’s Struggles Amidst the Aftermath of Earthquakes

Humanitarian aid distribution in Afghanistan.
Image 3: Humanitarian aid distribution in Afghanistan. Source: Yahoo Images.

The Kunar region has experienced high levels of destruction. As the weather gets colder, the need for more aid becomes increasingly imperative. Around 50% of Afghanistan’s population relies on food aid, but the restriction of movement within Afghanistan makes it difficult for people to gain access to humanitarian aid, including food and medical supplies. These restrictions have made it almost impossible for women and girls to receive this aid, a problem compounded by the fact that 422 health facilities have either closed or have been suspended.

The majority of people injured or killed during the earthquakes were women and girls. Women and girls are not allowed to be in public without a male escort. However, with homes destroyed and sometimes the men and/or sons being killed in the earthquakes, women are left with little means to survive. This makes it difficult to find services or to receive medical aid. 

UN Women is currently appealing for $2.5 million to increase the number of women-led response teams helping in Afghanistan, boost access to services, and create a 6-to-12 month emergency response. This would allow for more critical materials, such as blankets, clothing, and cooking utensils, to be distributed amongst families that remain in temporary shelters. It would also create spaces that women and girls can meet and receive aid. 

The Taliban’s Gender-based Persecution

Afghan women standing in line with Burkas on.
Image 4: Afghan women standing in a line. Source: Yahoo Images.

Since the Taliban took over control of Afghanistan in 2021, the rights of women and girls have been stripped away. Journalists have been detained, and anyone who would oppose the regime has been silenced. 

Donor governments, such as the United States of America, have made significant cuts to aid. Neighboring countries, like Iran and Pakistan, have returned millions of refugees, causing the number of displaced people in Afghanistan to grow. 

As stated in a recent post of mine, women and girls are not allowed to be educated past the sixth grade. Women are also not allowed to attend university, have jobs, leave the house without a male relative, or visit public spaces. 

De facto security has prevented Afghan women workers from entering into the UN Compound in Kabul, Afghanistan. Recently, security had been placed in front of multiple UN entrances to monitor people entering. The Taliban has also restricted women national staff from traveling into the country. Interfering with UN missions is a violation of international law

As such, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant on July 8, 2025 for the arrests of Haibatullah Akhundeadal (the Taliban’s leader) and Abdul Hakim Haqqani (the Taliban’s chief justice). The charge of the crime is gender-based persecution, which is a crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity are large-scale crimes against civilians. This includes torture, sexual violence, apartheid, and in this case, gender-based persecution

This issue of gender-based persecution in Afghanistan has long limited women from receiving aid when disaster hits. It is important that Afghan women’s rights issues continue to get international attention. This way their struggles and fights do not go unnoticed. 

What You Can Do

Entire villages have been destroyed, thousands of people have died, and even more have been injured and displaced. Women and girls’ access to humanitarian aid is limited and hinges on whether or not they have a male relative to escort them or if there are female humanitarian aid workers. Organizations like the International Refugee Committee (IRC), UN Women, and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) have been working to provide aid to the areas most affected by the earthquakes. If you want to help and are able, you can look into donating to any of these organizations. 

Human Rights Concerns at Tesla’s Texas Gigafactory 

 Overview 

The Austin, Texas-based Tesla Gigafactory is regarded as a pillar of innovation, pushing the boundaries in sustainable production and economic expansion. However, serious human rights issues have emerged behind the news of economic revival and technical advancement. These problems, which range from claims of discrimination and labor exploitation to infractions of workplace safety, expose a concerning aspect of Tesla’s operations. As a leader in renewable energy and technology, Tesla needs to maintain ethical business standards in its establishments, particularly as public scrutiny increases.  

red tesla vehicle fob supercharger
Image 1: Red Tesla vehicle fob supercharger. Source: Yahoo! Images

 

Workplace Safety Concerns 

Workplace safety is one of the Gigafactory’s most urgent human rights issues. After discovering that four employees at the Austin site had been exposed to dangerous chemicals without the appropriate training or safety precautions, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) penalized Tesla close to $7,000 in November 2024. Hexavalent chromium, an extremely hazardous material that can cause cancer, damage to the kidneys, and serious respiratory problems, was being handled by the workers. OSHA claims that workers in the Cybertruck body area were exposed to significant health hazards because they lacked the necessary training to handle hazardous materials.  

Apart from this offense, Tesla is also being investigated for the August 2024 worker death that was recorded at the facility. Even though the incident’s specifics are unknown until OSHA’s investigation is finished, it raises more concerns about the factory’s safety procedures and supervision. This is not an isolated problem for Tesla; the firm has been repeatedly criticized for its record on workplace safety in several locations, which suggests a systemicissue.  

Employee reports present a worrisome image. Workers have complained that safety instruction is either hurried or superficial, with little focus on long-term precautions. Some believe that speed and output are given precedence over worker safety due to Tesla’s focus on increasing production for vehicles such as the Cybertruck. This conflict between safety and efficiency draws attention to a crucial area where Tesla’s company operations deviate from ethical standards.  

Wage Theft and Exploitation 

Widespread criticism has also been directed at labor violations that occurred during the Texas Gigafactorydevelopment. A Texas-based nonprofit group called the Workers Defense Project complained to the U.S. Department of Labor in November 2022 on behalf of construction workers employedat the facility. According to the allegations, employees were sometimes not paid at all and were not paid for overtime. Contractors are also accused of giving employees phony safety training certifications, which essentially left them unprepared for the dangers they encountered on the job site. 

These labor violations reflect a larger problem with supply chain management at Tesla. Tesla indirectly supports exploitative activities by using subcontractors who compromise workers’ protections. Under the possibility of losing their jobs, construction workers, many of whom are immigrants, said they felt pressured into dangerous working conditions. In addition to breaking labor regulations, such actions also go against fundamental human rights values, which place an emphasis on treating employees fairly and with dignity.  

The problem is made worse by the contractors’ lack of responsibility. Employees who tried to report dangerous working conditions or wage fraud frequently faced retaliation or disregard. This cycle of exploitation shows how urgently Tesla must strengthen its oversight of its contractors to guarantee compliance with ethical standards and labor laws.  

Environmental Hazards and Worker Safety 

Although the Austin Gigafactory’s environmental practiceshave come under fire, Tesla’s dedication to sustainability is a fundamental component of its brand identity. There were rumors in November 2024 that a broken furnace door had exposed the facility’s employees to temperatures as high as 100 degrees Fahrenheit. According to reports, this problem lasted for months as Model Y manufacturing ramped up, seriously affecting worker comfort and safety. 

Additionally, Tesla was accused by a whistleblower of manipulating furnace operations to pass emissions tests. This manipulation prompted wider environmental concerns in addition to putting workers at risk of exposure to dangerous pollutants. Tesla’s public pledge to sustainability and environmental responsibility is compromised when it uses unethical means to satisfy regulatory requirements.  

These environmental risks exacerbate an already difficult and, at times, dangerous work environment for employees. Reports of excessive temperatures, chemical fume exposure, and insufficient ventilation reveal a pattern of carelessness that endangers workers. In addition to harming employees, these circumstances damage Tesla’s standing as a leader in environmentally friendly technology.  

Tesla car production factory
 Image 2: Tesla car production factory. Source: Yahoo! Images 

Allegations of (Potential) Racial Discrimination 

Claims of racial discrimination have also sparked criticism of Tesla’s workplace culture. Although its facility in Fremont, California, has received a lot of attention, its challenges are representative of largerissues that could affect its operations in Texas. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued Tesla in September 2023, claiming that Black workers at the Fremont facility experienced widespread racial harassment. The lawsuit described instances of graffiti, racial epithets, and a toxic workplace where complaints were frequently disregarded. Workers who reported such instances were subject to retribution, which included negative employment changes and terminations.  

Even though these claims are specific to Tesla’s California plant, they raise important concerns about the company’s work environment and whether the Texas Gigafactory is engaging in similar activities. According to reports from former workers, Tesla’s leadership has had difficulty addressing concerns of equity and inclusivity within the company. Such claims reveal a stark discrepancy between a company’s internal procedures and public image, which is concerning for a forward-thinking business.  

Broader Implications for Human Rights 

The human rights violations at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Texas are not isolated events; rather, they are a part of a wider trend of unethical behavior by the business. Communities like Austin have benefited economically from Tesla’s quick growth and innovation-focused approach, but worker safety, ethical labor standards, and environmental responsibility shouldn’t be sacrificed for these advantages.  

Furthermore, the significance of Tesla’s actionsis increased by itsinfluence. Being one of the most well-known businesses in the world, Tesla sets the standard for how big businesses can balance innovation and morality. Tesla runs the danger of damaging its reputation and alienating both staff and customers if it doesn’t sufficiently address thesehuman rights issues.  

Steps Toward Ethical Practices 

Tesla must take swift action to change the way it operates and address theseconcerns. First and foremost, the business needs to make a stronger commitment to workplace safety by putting in place comprehensive training programs and making sure that all workers, whether they are contracted or directly employed, have enough protection. Regular audits are part of this to find and fix safety hazards before they cancause harm.  

Labor practices also need to see substantial reform. Tesla needs to hold contractors accountable for wage theft and other violations by implementing stricter oversight mechanisms. Ensuring that workers are paid fairly and on time is not just a legal obligation, but a moral imperative.  

Environmental responsibility must be prioritized as well. Tesla’s innovative reputation relies on its commitment to sustainability, and this should extend to its factory operations. Adhering to environmental regulations and maintaining transparency in emissions testing are important steps toward rebuilding trust.  

Finally, fostering an inclusive workplace culture is essential for addressing allegations of discrimination. Tesla would benefit from establishing clear channels for employees to report harassment and discrimination without fear of retaliation. Regular training on diversity and inclusion can also help create a more equitable environment for all workers.  

Conclusion 

These major concerns at Tesla’s Texas Gigafactory are a sobering reminder of the ethical challenges accompanying rapid industrial growth. From workplace safety violations to wage theft and allegations of discrimination, these issues stress the gaps in Tesla’s operations that demand immediate attention. Given its influence, Tesla has a unique opportunity to set an example for ethical corporate practices.  

By addressing these concerns head-on, Tesla can ensure that its growth benefits its bottom line and the workers and communities contributing to its success. Ultimately, the true measure of Tesla’s impact will be its technological achievements and its commitment to upholding the fundamental rights and dignity of its workforce.