Tag: protest

The Toll of Iran’s Women‑Led Rights Movement: A Psychological Standpoint

Woman Life Freedom
Image 1: “Woman Life Freedom” The slogan highlights courage and persistence in the global struggle for equality and justice. Source: Adobe Stock #1657149359

On September 16, 2022, the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Jina Amini while in the custody of Iran’s morality police ignited a nationwide uprising. What began as protests over hijab enforcement evolved into a broader demand for freedom and justice under the slogan “Woman, Life, Freedom.” But beyond the political stakes, this movement has unleashed profound psychological consequences for individuals and society; it is a crisis at the intersection of human rights and mental health.

An Overview of the Crisis

Women in Iran began revolting after the death of 22-year-old Mahsa (Jina) Amini, who was arrested by the country’s “morality police” in September 2022 for allegedly wearing her hijab too loosely. Witnesses reported that she was beaten in custody, and she died shortly afterward, becoming a symbol of the everyday oppression that Iranian women face under strict mandatory hijab laws and decades of state surveillance, harassment, and punishment. Her death ignited widespread anger, leading women and girls to remove their hijabs, cut their hair, and protest the broader system of gender-based control. This outrage quickly expanded beyond Amini herself, sparking one of the largest protest movements in Iran’s recent history and drawing nationwide support.

The protests triggered by Amini’s death were among the largest Iran had seen in decades, spreading to more than 150 cities. State repression followed swiftly: reports indicate that security forces used lethal force, detained thousands, and committed acts of torture and sexual violence against protesters. A UN fact-finding mission later concluded that many of these violations may amount to crimes against humanity, including murder, imprisonment, torture, and persecution, particularly targeting women. Despite international outcry, accountability has been limited, and the psychological wounds continue to deepen.

The Weaponization of Psychiatry

One of the most chilling psychological tactics used by the Iranian regime against participants in the recent protests is the involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of dissenters. Authorities have publicly admitted that some student protesters were sent to “psychological institutes” during and after the protests, not for genuine mental illness, but as a tool to “re-educate” them.

In one particularly disturbing case, Ahoo Daryaei, a doctoral student who protested by partially removing her hijab in public, was reportedly forcefully disappeared and likely sent to a psychiatric hospital. Labeling protest behavior as “madness” isn’t just stigmatizing; it’s a deliberate form of repression rooted in misusing mental health institutions. Psychiatrists inside and outside Iran have condemned this practice as a gross violation of human rights.

Trauma, Anxiety, and Depression

The violence of the crackdown and the constant threat to safety have caused widespread psychological trauma. But even those not visibly injured describe deep emotional scars.

In interviews and counseling settings, psychologists report a surge in anxiety and depression among young women across Iran. A female psychotherapist described how girls in small towns, once relatively isolated, entered into a state of “heightened awareness” after Amini’s death, but also into frustration and internal conflict:

“This newfound awareness has disrupted their previous state of relative comfort … tension and conflict within their families have become an added burden …”

These emotional struggles are compounded by the fact that some girls feel guilty or disloyal to their families when they defy expectations, which is a significant psychological burden. On a broader level, the constant surveillance, repression, and societal division fuels pervasive fear. A published analysis of Iran’s protests noted that protest-related trauma is not just physical but deeply psychological, affecting individuals’ ability to trust, belong, and imagine a safer future.

Collective Psychology: Identity, Resilience & Social Change

Despite the repression, the movement has fostered powerful collective resilience and identity. Psychologically, protests like these are often rooted in social identity theory: people come together around a shared sense of injustice (in this case, gender-based oppression and state violence) and develop strong bonds that motivate collective action.

One manifestation of this is the growing refusal of women to wear the hijab, which is becoming seen as a normalized act of civil disobedience. This symbolic rejection has become a form of psychological resistance. Rather than waiting for external change, many Iranians are asserting internal agency and self-determination.

This quiet revolution isn’t risk-free. Protesters face brutality, arrest, and psychological harm. But for many, the act of defiance itself is a source of empowerment and a way to reshape their own sense of identity, purpose, and belonging in a context that so blatantly denies them autonomy.

Iranian woman protesting
Image 2: Iranian woman protesting. Source: Adobe Stock, Mumpitz, #543171718

Intergenerational Effects & the Future

The mental health impacts of the crackdown are likely to have long-term, intergenerational consequences. Children and teenagers exposed to violence, either directly or via their families, may carry trauma that affects their development, academic performance, and relationships. For some, the protests represent a break from generational patterns of silence or submission, but that break comes with a cost.

Moreover, the lack of institutional accountability, as documented by Human Rights Watch and the UN, compounds the trauma. Without justice or recognition, survivors may struggle to process their experiences, leading to lasting emotional scars. Yet, there is hope: the persistence of the movement, even in the face of brutal repression, suggests that for many Iranians, psychological healing and human-rights change are intertwined. The continued refusal to comply, the daily acts of resistance, and the communal memory of trauma may all serve as foundations for a future built on dignity and freedom.

Why This Is a Human Rights and Mental Health Crisis

From a human-rights perspective, what’s happening in Iran is not just political suppression, but also a systematic campaign of gendered persecution, psychological control, and enforced conformity. The UN mission concluded that many of the regime’s actions amounted to crimes against humanity, including persecution, torture, and sexual violence.

Psychologically, the use of psychiatric institutions to silence dissenters violates fundamental principles of autonomy and mental integrity. Even more, the widespread trauma threatens social cohesion, sense of identity, and collective well-being. The mental health crisis is not a side effect, it’s central to the human rights violations. Without addressing both the physical and psychological consequences, the wounds of this movement will remain unhealed, and the foundation for meaningful justice and reform will be unstable.

What Needs to Happen

Addressing this crisis requires coordinated action on multiple fronts. International accountability and support are essential, with bodies like the UN and international courts pressing for justice, accountability, and reparations for victims of repression, while countries with universal jurisdiction consider investigating human rights abuses, including psychological repression. Mental health infrastructure and aid must also be expanded, with support from international organizations to provide trauma counseling and remote psychosocial assistance to Iranians both inside and outside the country who lack safe access to care. Protecting dissenters from psychiatric abuse is critical; international psychiatry associations should condemn involuntary hospitalizations of protesters and provide clear guidelines for safeguarding patients’ rights, while diplomatic or economic pressure could be directed at institutions complicit in these abuses. Finally, empowering local and global solidarity is vital: amplifying the voices of Iranian activists, particularly women, and supporting cultural forms of resistance such as music, art, and storytelling can promote healing, identity formation, and collective resilience.

Conclusion

The “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran is more than a political uprising; it’s a psychological battleground. The regime’s brutal crackdown is not only a violation of bodily rights but of mental integrity. People are being traumatized, surveilled, pathologized, and denied justice. Yet in the face of repression, they are also cultivating a new collective identity, resilience, and purpose. Understanding this crisis through a psychological lens is essential. It reminds us that human rights are not abstract ideals; they are woven into our mental well-being, our capacity to heal, to resist, and to imagine a freer future.

Breaking the Huddle: How Domestic Violence Touches Every Alabama Classroom

Breaking the Huddle: How Domestic Violence Touches Every Alabama Classroom

Aggression in the family, man beating up his wife. Domestic violence concept.
Aggression in the family, man beating up his wife. Domestic violence concept.By: doidam10. Source: Adobe Stock. Asset ID#: 229549647

Domestic violence is not simply a distant tragedy or a headline attached to famous names—it’s a daily crisis with real victims in every Alabama community. Shortly after Christmas 2024, former NFL star Marcell Dareus was arrested in Hoover after a violent altercation. This event of early 2025, underscores how quickly intimate relationships can turn dangerous. This incident isn’t exceptional; it reflects a pattern that plays out in neighborhoods across the state, affecting classmates, coworkers, and friends. Understanding this reality isn’t optional for college students; it’s essential for building safer campuses and futures.

Domestic violence is a human rights violation disguised as a “private matter.” International law and human rights frameworks are clear: everyone has the right to live free from violence, fear, and discrimination. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) guarantees, in Article 3, the right to “life, liberty and security of person.” Article 5 further prohibits “torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Survivors of domestic violence are entitled to protection, safety, and access to justice under both U.S. law and international treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

A Crisis Next Door: The Local Reality

For many, domestic violence may seem like a private matter that happens behind closed doors, far removed from campus life. But the truth is, it’s happening in your neighborhood—maybe even in your residence hall. The case of Marcell Dareus, a 34-year-old celebrity athlete, and the woman he harmed, is only one of thousands of incidents reported each year in Alabama. This incident is a sobering reminder that abuse can escalate from arguments to physical violence in mere moments.

Picture this: It’s 2 a.m., one week after Christmas. In a quiet Hoover subdivision, just minutes from UAB’s campus, a well-known athlete shoves his partner to the ground and smashes her car with a metal object. The victim could easily be your lab partner, a friend from your sorority, or the barista who knows your coffee order by heart. The physical injuries may heal, but the psychological trauma—fear, anxiety, distrust—can linger for years. And for every headline-grabbing case, countless more go unreported, leaving survivors to navigate their pain in silence.

When we ask, “Why does this matter to me?” the answer is simple: domestic violence is not limited by age, class, or background. If you think it could never touch your world, consider that four in ten women and one in four men will experience intimate partner violence in their lifetimes. The odds are overwhelming that someone you know—maybe even someone you love—is a survivor.

The Numbers Lawmakers Can’t Ignore

The statistics surrounding domestic violence in Alabama and the US are both staggering and deeply personal. Domestic violence is cited as a top cause of homelessness for women, and it costs billions of dollars nationwide, with one estimate saying that intimate partner violence costs $5.8 billion annually nationwide. This figure includes $4.2 billion for medical costs for physical assault and $1.75 billion in lost productivity. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research estimates the cost of domestic violence at $9.3 billion (2017 dollars), which includes intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and stalking, with medical and lost wages as core components of these costs. For Alabama, extrapolations from Youth Today’s national $3.6 trillion lifetime estimate suggest that state costs are in the low billions. That’s a staggering sum that drains resources from schools, hospitals, and public safety initiatives—money that could otherwise go toward scholarships, better facilities, or improved mental health services.

Every minute, 24 Americans become victims of intimate partner violence, amounting to over 12 million people every year. These aren’t just statistics; they are stories of dreams deferred, educations interrupted, and futures derailed. The consequences ripple outward: children witnessing violence at home are more likely to struggle academically, develop emotional disorders, and, in some cases, perpetuate the cycle of abuse as adults. The link between domestic violence and future criminal behavior is undeniable.

The country’s legal landscape has only made things worse for those at risk of domestic violence. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow states to ban abortion has, according to experts, raised the likelihood that women will be subjected to intimate partner violence. When women lose reproductive autonomy, abusers gain more power, trapping partners in dangerous, sometimes deadly relationships. Domestic violence can be considered a human rights violation, and Alabama’s numbers show just how entrenched the problem is.

Taking Action: Your Role in the Playbook

If you think there’s nothing you can do, think again. Staying silent keeps domestic violence alive; speaking up can end it. Students are uniquely positioned to notice the warning signs—changes in a friend’s mood, unexplained injuries, sudden withdrawal from activities—and offer support. The most important thing you can do is believe survivors, connect them with campus and community resources, and, if necessary, call for help.

There are also events happening throughout Alabama to raise awareness and provide support. On October 24th in Tuscaloosa, the Purple Purse Drive collected donations for survivors. And in September in Birmingham, Safe Bar training was offered at 20 bars to help staff recognize and respond to abuse. These events are more than just calendar entries—they’re opportunities to get involved and save lives.

Conclusion: Your 60-Second Play Call

Domestic violence is not “someone else’s problem.” It is the roommate who flinches at loud noises, the teammate hiding bruises, the future nurse who can’t study because home isn’t safe. Every student in Alabama has the power—and the responsibility—to break the silence.

  1. Post #RollAwayFromViolence on social media and tag @ALCADV to raise awareness.
  2. Vote – some candidates’ domestic violence prevention plans are available at Vote411.org
  3. The huddle is broken. Now make the tackle.

Need help now?

  • National DV Hotline: 1-800-799-7233
  • Alabama 24/7: 1-800-650-6522
  • Text “START” to 88788

Roll Tide—and roll away from violence.

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.

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.

The Abuse of Facial Recognition Technology in the Hong Kong Protests 

Overview

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

Hong Kong protestor wearing a gas mask.
Image 2: Hong Kong protestor wearing a gas mask. Pexels.com

Facial Recognition Technology as a Tool for Suppression 

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

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

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

Protesters’ Countermeasures Against Surveillance 

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

  1. Face Coverings and Laser Pointers

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

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

Skyscrapers in Hong Kong with student protestors camping in the road.
Image 2: Skyscrapers in Hong Kong with student protestors camping in the road. Flickr.com.
  1. Dismantling “Smart” Lampposts

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

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

  1. Umbrellas and Creative Shields

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

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

The Broader Implications of Surveillance Technology 

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

  1. Erosion of Privacy

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

  1. Suppression of Free Speech

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

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

  1. Exportation of Surveillance Tools

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

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

Calls for Regulation and Ethical Use 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Moving Forward 

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

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

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

Behind the Ballot: Corruption, Repression, and Hope in the 2024 Venezuelan Elections

This year, a handful of elections were scheduled. At least 27 countries, including Algeria, Senegal, Pakistan, and Venezuela, held their presidential elections. Because of the varying political climates, let’s visit the most recent Venezuelan elections, which illustrate human rights violations in the form of voter intimidation and political persecution. The development of the events raises questions about the validity of the results and the corruption of the powers of the state. Amid widespread despair, NGOs like Foro Penal, a Venezuelan group offering legal aid to victims of state repression, and international bodies such as Human Rights Watch and the Carter Center are investigating irregularities and violations.

Challenges to Maduro’s Presidency and Popularity

Facing crippling inflation, electricity blackouts, and water and food scarcity, the Venezuelan people had been waiting for a leadership change. Although still appealing to the love people had for former president Hugo Chavez, President Maduro Moros had been increasingly losing popular support.

At the beginning of his term, Chavez gained public trust through social programs addressing inequality, such as adult literacy, health care, and infrastructure. The programs were meant to address the gap between the rich and the poor, a hot issue among voters. His “revolution“ of the old system set up by the administration of Carlos Perez Jimenez was mildly disrupted by a Human Rights Watch report exposing corruption. Nevertheless, his charisma and the benefits he provided kept his supporters loyal.

In 2013, Chavez appointed Maduro as his successor. Disguised as a blessing, Maduro had inherited institutions that were corrupted and allowed him to enrich himself and stay in power. However, years of inflation and poverty eroded Maduro’s connection to the Chavez revolution. As a result, many pro-Chavez supporters have lost confidence in Maduro and continue to mourn the late president, as AP reported.

While his popularity decreased, a new leader had been working to gain the people’s support. Maria Corina Machado, a former member of the national assembly, won a primary election in 2023. Appealing to free the country and grabbing onto the growing dislike for Maduro, Machado became the face of the Democratic Unitary Platform (DUP), an alliance of trade unions, political parties, and former officials.

However, in January 2024, the highest court in Venezuela banned opposition leader Machado from running for the presidency. The ban keeps Machado from participating in any elections for 15 years. The Supreme Court made the decision based on financial irregularities claimed to have happened while Machado served in the legislature. This obstacle is among many presented to political figures who pose a threat to Maduro’s regime. After failing to appoint a replacement for a while, a new candidate was put in the front of the opposition campaign. Edmundo Gonzalez, a former diplomat, became the new candidate of the DUP.

Months Leading to Election Day

Venezuelans outside the country went out to register, uncertain of what turn the elections would take; however, they encountered significant obstacles.

The New York Times reports that Venezuelans living abroad were affected by long waiting times, rejection, and confusing instructions across several countries, including Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Spain. People arrived at consulates as early as 4 a.m., only to face rejection due to suspended registrations.

In addition to the unexplained delays, voters were met with unexpected registration requirements. Before, only a Venezuelan identification, expired or not, was valid for registration. However, as part of the new requirements being enforced, a Venezuelan passport and proof of residency or legal permanence in the host country were needed. This created obstacles, as many Venezuelans in countries like Colombia or the U.S. lack permanent residency despite having other legal documents, such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

National filling out an applications with his passport
Image 1: National filling out a form with his passport at hand. Source: Yahoo Images

What’s more, the government only allowed a 29-day registration period, which differs greatly from the year-round period allowed in the past. However, in countries where diplomatic relations are broken, and embassies and consulates are closed (like the U.S.) Venezuelans can’t register to vote.

As a result of these events, millions of Venezuelans couldn’t vote. Between 3.5 million and 5.5 million Venezuelans who live abroad were eligible to vote, but only about 69,000 were registered.

Election Day – July 28th, 2024

Venezuelans inside the country went to cast their votes at their designated stations. Throughout the morning, locals and the Carter Center mission—sent on June 29th—observed several violations.

Violence and Voter Intimidation

According to electoral rules, a witness is allowed to observe the tally count. People loyal to the ruling party intimidated witnesses and forced them to stay at home or leave their posts halfway through the election.

New York Times (NYT) reported that, in the capital, Caracas, a journalist observed men blocking access to one of the voting centers. Adding to the tension, voters were not allowed entry until over an hour after the poll was supposed to open. Similarly, in the city of Cumaná, about 50 armed police and National Guard officers stood outside with their helmets and armor in what seemed to be a show of power. Over in the city of Maturín, a woman was shot when men on motorcycles drove by a line of voters.

Changing Voting Locations

The NYT also disclosed that constituents’ voting locations were changed without a previous announcement. A worker of the Venezuelan Electoral Observatory, Carlos Medina, stated that the voting stations for 17,000 Venezuelans changed at the last minute. This is the case for Sonia Gomez, a voter who went to vote after verifying her polling site on the electoral council website. However, upon arrival, the workers told her she was registered elsewhere.

National casting their paper vote. Source: Yahoo Images
Image 2: National casting their paper vote. Source: Yahoo Images

Aftermath

Refusal to Disclose Paper Tallies

In Venezuela, votes are counted digitally by the Consejo Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Council) or CNE and verified using paper tallies collected at each voting station. Some officials in certain locations refused to disclose their paper tallies.

With the digital count, Maduro’s administration celebrated their victory, claiming 51% of votes. On the other hand, the opposition released data showing that Edmundo Gonzalez had received 67% of the vote. According to Machado, the opposition’s numbers came from voting machine tallies that were scanned and calculated.

In response to the allegations made by the opposition on corrupt and ridged elections, Maduro requested the Supreme Court give its expert opinion on the results. It is important to mention that the Supreme Court, closely tied to Maduro’s administration, had previously upheld Machado’s ban. Although the court backed him up, Maduro promised to release the tallies on the CNE website. However, the website has remained inaccessible since the events of July 28th.

Politically Driven Detentions

After the CNE announced Maduro’s victory, Venezuelan protested in the streets. However, they were met with brutal repression by state authorities. Videos circulating on social media showed police and military brutality directed at protesters. Human Rights Watch analyzed these videos, corroborating reports of detentions and deaths. While about 2,400 people were detained during protests, Foro Penal—a Venezuelan NGO that provides legal support for victims of arbitrary detention—claims that the police arrested electoral witnesses at their homes. These events have fueled arguments for election fraud. Most of the detainees are being charged with terrorism and incitement of hatred. Other irregularities include a lack of legal assistance and transfer to maximum security prisons.

Adding to the political persecution, a court issued an arrest warrant against Edmundo Gonzalez for conspiracy and usurping power. This prompted him to flee to Spain. Similarly, other figures, like diplomats, have been targeted, too, as Maduro ordered diplomats who opposed his victory to leave the country.

Protests in Venezuela on May 1st, 2019. Source: Wikimedia Commons archive; originally published by Voice of America.
Image 3: Protests in Venezuela on May 1st, 2019. Source: Wikimedia Commons archive; originally published by Voice of America.

Future Implications

After the return of the Carter Center’s technical election observation mission, the center stated that the elections did not meet the integrity standards. The Organization of American States and several countries, including Argentina and Costa Rica, recognized Edmundo Gonzalez as the president-elect and called for transparency. Nevertheless, as Gonzalez has now fled to Spain, it is unclear what the next steps the international community will take to address the democratic crisis.

Since the elections, Venezuelans have felt both hope and fear. Despite a great number of protests and social media posts, fear of government retaliation has reached a higher level than ever. Some believe it is impossible for Maduro to resign, but only time will tell if democracy can still be restored.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who is Jimmy Lai? What is he charged with?

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Lai Trial and November 20th Resumption Update

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

China: Violations of Freedom of Expression, Speech, and Peaceful Assembly

China's flag in front of the Great Wall of China.
Image 1: China’s flag in front of the Great Wall of China. Source: Yahoo Image.

Thousands of miles away, activists for basic human rights sit in prison cells. Most await punishments that far exceed the crime. In China, heavy prison sentences weigh on the shoulders of its brightest human rights activists, scholars, and lawyers. 

According to Amnesty International, freedom of expression and speech is having the right to say what you believe and to call for a better world. To express your freedom of speech is to be able to openly, and without consequences, critique those in power. The United Nations (UN) states that the right to peaceful assembly is the right to hold peaceful gatherings, sit-ins, rallies, and protests without fearing repercussions. 

Who are They? And What Does the Law Say?

Protesters in Qidong, China.
Image 2: Protesters in Qidong, China. Source: Yahoo Image.

Human rights lawyer, Ding Jiaxi, has been imprisoned since December 2019 for subversion of state power. Also arrested for subversion of state power was Xu Zhiyong, a legal scholar.

Ding Jiaxi and Xu Zhiyong are members of the New Citizens’ Movement, a group of activists dedicated to creating a better China. Xu and Ding co-created the movement back in 2012 in order to shed light on government corruption. After a meeting with the activist movement in December 2019 in a Chinese city called Xiamen, multiple members were arrested. As a result of their critique of the Chinese government’s handling of the coronavirus, Xue Zhiyong and Ding Jiaxi were charged with “subversion of state power.” Both have been imprisoned, with sources saying that they have been subjected to various forms of torture. 

By examining China’s laws regarding freedom of press and expression, a clearer understanding of the regulations that restrict the people of China is achieved. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China Article 5 states that the government must protect their citizens’ right to freedom of press so long as they do not criticize the basic principles of the constitution. Citizens must abide by certain regulations put into place of what they can and cannot publish. In support, Article 26 outlines specific regulations such as, no publication shall oppose basic principles and shall not endanger the unification, sovereignty and integrity of the State. 

How then, can a people that are restricted from criticizing their own government be considered free?  In 1989, Tiananmen Square became a testament to just how far the Chinese government was willing to go to suppress its citizens dissent. 

Tiananmen Square History and Influence of Chinese Activist

Man standing in front of military tanks.
Image 3: A  man standing in front of military tanks at Tiananmen Square. Source: Yahoo Image.

During the month of April, in 1989, a peaceful gathering to mourn Hu Yaobang, a liberal Communist Party member, took place in Beijing at Tiananmen Square. The gathering calmly turned into demonstrations that called for the abrupt end of corruption in the Chinese government. An estimated one million people joined in to peacefully protest their grievances. 

In response, Martial Law was enforced and thousands of troops were released upon the protesters. They opened fire on those gathered and plowed through the crowds with military tanks. To this day, the Chinese government refuses to release any new information regarding the massacre. This event is prohibited from being spoken about or commemorated in China and Hong Kong.  

The total number of deaths is unknown in China’s attempt to purge the memory of Tiananmen Square from history. The event is censored; families have been unable to mourn or acknowledge their loved ones. People are forced to forget, and the truth is neglected from the knowledge of a new generation.  

Zhou Fengsuo is the Executive Director of Human Rights in China and was also a student leader at the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre. What was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration turned into a horrific bloodbath. Zhou was there when his peers were shot down in front of him. His eyes are a witness to military tanks and tear gas being used as a means to end the uproar. In his testimony Zhou wrote, “The scene was that of a war zone; a war conducted by the CCP’s army against the Chinese people.” Zhou calls out on foreign governments to take a firmer stance on China’s violation of human rights. 

Activists Imprisonment of Chinese and Hong Kong Human Rights Activist

Large group of protesters at Hong Kong protest.
Image 4: Large group of protesters at Hong Kong protest. Source: Yahoo Image.

Xu Zhiyong writes in his book, A Beautiful China -Thirteen-The Citizens Movement, about his vision for China. In his writings, he talks of a better China; one that is accomplished through peaceful protest and nonviolence. He says, “We are all Chinese, and we will build a beautiful China together in the future.” Throughout his collection of twenty-four essays he repeatedly reiterates the importance of unity.  

To be a true citizen is to have basic rights. Xu writes that when they have the right to vote and to speak freely they will be true citizens. People that are free are ones that can openly and without fear criticize their governments. In A Beautiful China Xu says, “Amid the absurd, we stick to the truth; amidst evil, we hold fast to our conscience; in the darkness, we create light.” Many Chinese and Hong Kong activists are dedicated to changing their governments. 

After being handed over to China in 1997, Hong Kong was promised fifty years with their independent government. Halfway through their allotted time, Beijing implemented a law that gave them further influence in Hong Kong. As of 2020, the new law in Hong Kong, known as the National Security Law (NSL), was passed. This law has since then increased prison sentences and allowed for extreme censorship. 

Chow Hang-tung and Jimmy Lai are both Hong Kong activists. Jimmy Lai was arrested for “colluding with foreign forces” and sedition. His newspaper, Apple Daily, which advocated for human rights such as freedom of expression and speech, was later closed down in June 2021. He has been held in solitary confinement awaiting his trial to resume in November 2024. Lai is 76 years old and only gets around 50 minutes of time outside a day. Chow Hang-tung was arrested after attending a vigil for the Tiananmen Square Massacre. She was imprisoned for 22 months and faces possible imprisonment again for 10 years or more. The new National Security Law states that she was “inciting subversion.” She has also been subjected to solitary confinement. 

Chow Hang-tung, Ding Jiaxi, and Jimmy Lai have been considered by Amnesty International to be prisoners of conscience. A prisoner of conscience is someone imprisoned because of political, social, religious, or other personal beliefs. 

Conclusion: What is China’s Response? What is the Global Reaction?

The United Nation Human Rights Council accepted China’s report on their Human Rights achievement for the 56th Universal Periodic Review (UPR). While multiple activists remain imprisoned in solitary confinement, Chinese Daily flaunts the approval given to them for their advanced improvements in Human Rights by countries like Russia, Algeria, and Venezuela. Chinese Daily said,  “China welcomes and remains open to all constructive suggestions that are proposed in good faith to help it improve its human rights conditions.” This seems to be the case so long as the criticism and call for improvements, recognition, and change do not come from Chinese or Hong Kong citizens. 

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, continue to call for the release of activists Jimmy Lai, Chow Hang-tung, Ding Jiaxi, and Xu Zhiyong. Activists like Zhou Fengsuo, who has been advocating for change in China for many years, will continue the fight for human rights. It is through them that freedom will be achieved. 

 

The Awaiting Arrest Warrant of Bangladesh

Abu Sayed, a student studying English at the Begum Rokeya University, stood on the streets of Rangpur with his arms wide open on July 16, 2024. Although posing no threat, within seconds, the young man was shot in the chest by officers standing 15 meters in front of him. This was in addition to the tear gas and batons others around him were suffering. Despite being only in his mid-20s, Sayed became a martyr that afternoon. 

Events setting the stage for such open violence in Bangladesh began on July 1st, 2024, with peaceful protests by students against the Prime Minister, Sheikha Hasina, and in response to the government’s decades-old quota system. 

Why a Protest? 

Following the war granting Bangladesh independence from Pakistan in 1971, a quota system for highly valued jobs was created. This system not only claimed more than half of the civil service posts for particular social groups but also reserved the top 30% of the most sought-after positions for relatives of the 1971 veterans. Initially, this was a choice of goodwill with the intention to acknowledge and appreciate the freedom fighters who secured their nation. However, despise and anger of the system in the Bangladeshi students arose due to two factors. First, the country is going through incrementally increasing unemployment rates. With a population of over 170 million and a median age of 25.7, over 30 million Bangladeshi are unemployed, with the youth being the most impacted. Second, many of the political leaders of the nation are the relatives of the 1971 veterans. This includes the 76-year-old Prime Minister, Sheikha Hasina, daughter of the assassinated Sheikha Mujibur Rahman. Although she is considered the longest-serving female head of government, there have been multiple remarks that her rule has become increasingly authoritarian over time. In other words, this trade of unemployment so that wealthy elites can sustain their security and high income is why the quota system is actively being called out as discriminatory and favoring the political supporters of Hasina’s Awami League party. In combination with the youth’s frustration with inequality and injustice, peaceful protesting began on July 1st at the prestigious Dhaka University. 

Protestors standing and sitting in a group advocating against the quota system with flags, posters, and paint.
Image 1: Protestors standing and sitting in a group advocating against the quota system with flags, posters, and paint. | Source: Yahoo Images

The Escalation  

Initiating in Dhaka, protests with students holding posters and flags quickly spread like fire through cities across the nation. However, as the youth of the nation began to unite, they soon faced a dramatic escalation of violence within days. On July 15th, students inside Dhaka University were directly attacked by rods, clubs, and sighted revolvers by members of the Bangladeshi Chatra League (BCL), a wing of the Awami League party. The following day, Abu Sayed was shot to death in the streets of Rangpur.  

A row of Bangladeshi police officers holding batons, their helmets, and shields.
Image 2: A row of Bangladeshi police officers holding batons, their helmets, and shields. | Source: Yahoo Images

A protestor in Dhaka, Hassan Abdullah, stated in a CNN interview, “The police are constantly bursting sound grenades right now.” Such grenades being thrown, shots being fired, and tear gas attacks quickly became a daily norm on the streets for weeks. There are even accounts of hospitalizations due to heads being smashed by officers.  

On July 18th, NetBlocks, an internet monitoring site, posted a confirmation of an almost complete internet shutdown throughout the country, in addition to efforts tampering with social media access and mobile data services. After July 18th, Bangladesh went entirely offline, blinding the world to the courses of action and violence occurring within. It is known, however, that the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), an anti-crime division of the Bangladeshi police, the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB), a border security force, and the National Army were spread across the country alongside the alleged establishment of a shoot on sight curfew. A few days afterward, online restrictions were somewhat lifted, revealing over 200 deaths and thousands injured within a short span of 10 days.  

Since the escalation of events, in addition to the violence, many have also been arrested arbitrarily, with about 61,000 being accused in legal cases for protesting. Such open, brutal, and life-threatening violence with no remorse or apology continued into August. In fact, on August 4th alone, 91 people were killed, the highest death count within a single day in Bangladesh’s recent history, with hundreds more injured and/or hospitalized.  

As the only response to the frank harm and threat to her citizens, Sheikha Hasina initiated a judicial investigation of the matter as she encouraged the public to wait for the higher court to deliver a just decision.  

Resignation of Power 

After weeks of the determined protestors advocating for justice and the commotion that followed, on August 5th, Hasina resigned from her position and ended her dominance in the country’s politics. She is believed to have fled to a neighboring country in India, near Delhi.  

Within hours of the resignation, Mohammad Shahabuddin, Bangladesh’s President, released former Prime Minister and Hasina’s opposition rival, Khaleda Zia, who had been jailed for graft charges. Shahabuddin also proceeded to release all detained students captured for protesting the quota system. In addition, the curfew was lifted, a temporary government led by Muhammad Yunus was established, and new elections were intended to be held. 

Following Hasina’s departure, protestors continued committing aggressive acts. Furniture from the residency of Hasina was seen being carried out, police and government buildings were alit, and attempts to tear down the statue of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, father of Sheikha Hasina, were made. Such acts were done in celebration and to demand a new government that was not led by its military.

As of October 17th, the Bangladeshi International Crimes Tribunal has issued arrest warrants for 45 people, which includes Sheikha Hasina and other members of her cabinet. This is being done on the basis of Hasina presiding over the mass killings and inhumane crimes that occurred during the protests. As a result, Sheikha Hasina must appear before the court by the date of November 18th. 

Members of the protestors standing on top of a building to celebrate the end of the Hasina rule.
Image 3: Members of the protestors stood on top of a building to celebrate the end of the Hasina rule. | Source: Yahoo Images

Human Rights Matter

It is blatant that such treatment of individuals, as seen by the young Bangladeshi students, is inhumane and vicious. And so, there are certain factors in the situation worth bringing our attention to. Firstly, the unlawful use of force is being placed on protestors. The violent and lethal tactics accompanied by a range of weapons have led to hundreds dead and thousands injured. It is important to acknowledge that not only are these numbers but also living people being put through excruciating pains and grief physically and psychologically. Furthermore, Human Rights Watch has remarked that the excessive use of force by security personnel violates several international human rights standards, drawing widespread criticism from global human rights organizations. Another point is the arbitrary arrest of civilians in order to disrupt their ability to express and assemble. This was further pressed on by the internet restriction, which removed a major layer of protection for civilians. 

Sheikha Hasina giving a speech to the General Assembly of the UN dressed in a light blue sari.
Image 4: Sheikha Hasina gave a speech to the General Assembly of the UN dressed in a light blue sari. | Source: Yahoo Images

It is incredibly important to understand that the discussed situation is not solely relevant to Bangladesh; but rather to international affairs, as with all human rights matters. In fact, alongside the protesters in Bangladesh, smaller protests have already been held by international Bangladeshi students in New York, Melbourne, Sydney, and even Copenhagen. And so, not only is the world awaiting to see how Bangladesh’s unknown future forms, but also how the matter of human rights violation is dealt with by the Bangladeshi International Crimes Tribunal.  

As we wait for Hasina to determine if she will present herself before the court from a public perspective, we are able to consider a few choices of support. Join the movement by supporting organizations like Amnesty International, spreading awareness on social media, or writing to your local representatives to condemn the human rights abuses in Bangladesh. The ability of people to come together, even internationally, and make great differences is something that has always remained astounding.  

The Battle of NGOs in Nicaragua: A Human Rights Crisis

Arbitrarily detained, beaten in prison, exiled, and stripped of their nationality has become a common experience for activists in Nicaragua. This is the case of Kevin Solís, who was arbitrarily detained twice; in 2018 for allegedly obstructing public services and carrying a firearm, and later in 2020 for alleged robbery and assault. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention determined there had been irregularities in the legal procedures of Kevin’s case, a violation of his legal rights, and a concerning threat to his rights to life and integrity. Along with Solís, another two hundred political prisoners were released in 2023, some of whose citizenship was later revoked. Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega’s war against NGOs is rooted in his plan to crush opposition to his leadership and avoid responsibility for human rights violations.

But how did Nicaragua get to this point?

2018 was the start of a large and violent retaliation of the government against protestors. However, 5 years prior, discontent was already blooming in the Nicaraguan people’s hearts. The Nicaraguan Congress passed, on June 13, 2013, a law that affects the future livelihood of many communities, Law 840. The law deals with the development of infrastructure and free trade zones. As a result of this legal advancement, communities would be pushed out of their homes to accommodate ‘new and improved’ facilities. According to an Amnesty International report, Law 840 allows the government to authorize the construction of projects without consulting the communities that would be affected. Among those is Francisca Ramirez, whose community learned about a new project approved through Law 840 in a televised announcement by President Ortega. To their surprise, the president had sold the land they lived on to foreign investors for canal construction and subsequent amenities. Francisca and her community, along with other human rights activists, took their concerns to the streets to advocate for their rights and oppose the Canal. Yet, they were met with threats, harassment, and arrest.

Protests of 2018

Localized demonstrations in response to President Ortega’s actions continued until 2018 when large-scale protests exploded in the streets of Nicaragua. The Nicaraguan people responded negatively to the new changes the Ortega administration implemented to the social security and pension system. However, it wasn’t all about social security. Previously, widely censored media was combined with excessive use of force by police officers who were firing tear gas and rubber bullets at protestors. Hence, years of corruption and repression of peaceful protest made the population join the rally against the new social security measures. Human Rights Watch reported on the injured and death toll after initial protests, in which the Nicaraguan Red Cross claimed to have helped 435 injured people between April 18th and 25th, while the CIDH listed 212 people dead between April 19th and June 19th, 2018. In this same report, it is stated that Nicaraguan newspapers that spoke about the protests and the death toll were later impacted by the government’s agenda against media outlets that didn’t back up President Ortega. Independent and critical newspapers like El Nuevo Diario had been unable to access paper and supplies due to a blockade on imports imposed by the Ortega administration, said Carlos Fernando Chamorro, an exiled journalist and director of El Nuevo Diario. Chamorros’ exile follows the trend of journalists and communicators who have been imprisoned and forced to leave the country to speak against Ortega.

Daniel Ortega is sworn into Nicaragua’s leadership for his 4th presidential term.
Image 1: Daniel Ortega is sworn into Nicaragua’s leadership for his 4th presidential term. Source: Yahoo images

 

What does the Government have to say? 

The Ortega administration made several claims invoking laws that have increased monitoring, making NGOs’ work more difficult and giving the government grounds for forced dissolution. A legal framework was created to regulate organizations and individuals that receive foreign funding and utilize those funds to attempt to undermine the nation’s sovereignty and independence. Among some of the requirements, organizations need to present monthly reports of who their donors are or their source of income. For NGOs, this law means that whoever receives foreign funding or fails to report accurately would be stripped of their political personality. And this is exactly what happened. Invoking this framework, it was stated in an official release that the organizations had not complied with the law by reporting their finances, which also led to accusations based on money laundering laws.  

The pro-Ortega news outlet La Nueva Radio Ya called the 2018 protest a “coup” orchestrated by NGOs associated with organized crime and international organizations like the OEA (Organization of American States) and IACHR (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights) who want to push an imperialistic agenda into the Nicaraguan people. The article dismissed the reasons for the protests as well as the number of injured and dead protestors. Instead, it focuses on the number of police who were injured and killed, claiming there was never such an assault against the national police force, which in turn shows that the protests were not peaceful. Equally, it holds that the “failed coup” led to kidnappings, assaults, torture, murder, and a great impact on the jobs and the incomes of many families.

Nicaraguans protesting in 2018 after changes to the pension system.
Image 2: Nicaraguans protested in 2018 after changes to the pension system. Source: Yahoo images

 

NGOs have faced villainization and limitations of their funding and activities because they were thought to be too politically involved. Staying on trend with other democracies and post-soviet governments, after the events of 2018, Daniel Ortega’s administration escalated violations of free speech and freedom of assembly, starting a public crackdown on individuals and groups who spoke against his leadership. In addition to the medical associations, climate change, education, and more, one type of largely targeted NGO was religious. So far, clergy members have been imprisoned and exiled, catholic churches and universities have shut down, and the legal standing of charities has been revoked. On the last round of suspensions on August 19th, 2024, hundreds of the 1,500 NGOs were small faith groups whose property may be seized.  

Ronaldo Alvarez, a Nicaraguan bishop, put a target on his back after speaking on human rights issues and the retaliation of the government against religious organizations. He was under house arrest in his home and later at his parent’s house while he was investigated for inciting violence. The priest was later accused of “conspiracy against the government, carrying out hate acts, and damaging society.” Others, such as priest Oscar Benavídez, were indicted at the prosecutor’s office on unknown charges.

Daniel Ortega is sworn into Nicaragua’s leadership for his 4th presidential term.
Image 3: Bishop Ronaldo Alvarez. Source: Ramírez 22 nic, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

 

Reactions of the International System and Future Implications 

The United Nations General Assembly released the resolution 49/3 calling for the protection of human rights in Nicaragua. The resolution includes requests for the Government to fully cooperate with the monitoring and reporting of human rights, including the free passage of human rights groups to assess the country’s conditions. The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) has also pronounced itself on the crimes against humanity perpetrated in the state and encouraged accountability for human rights violations. The press release cited the impactful reports it had filled on the closure of universities, crackdown of media outlets, and repression against Indigenous and Afro-descent who opposed the government. At the same time, the IACHR followed suit; the U.S. imposed sanctions and additional actions, such as visa restrictions on Nicaraguan officials who were involved in the imprisonment and violence against religious institutions and religious leaders. The international system is concerned with the violent developments in Nicaragua and the lack of accountability. However, the ability of international instruments to punish is limited, and without the cooperation of the rest of the international community, Nicaraguans won’t receive much outside help. 

 

No NGOs to advocate for the rights of the people they protect means there are no organizations with enough structure and funding that can help people in a situation where the oppressor is the state. These groups were able to provide individuals with resources and programs that the government didn’t or was unable to. Now, their access to the safe spaces NGOs create is rapidly crumbling down. The persecution of NGOs should be addressed by a large number of actors in the international system to apply pressure on the Ortega Administration and support Nicaraguans. Although the fate of Nicaraguan-based NGOs is uncertain, check out other organizations that survived the last wave of suspensions, like El Porvenir (The Future).