The Facts and Norms Newsletter #17
- Henrique Napoleão Alves
- May 16
- 57 min read
For an optimal reading experience, this newsletter is best viewed in its original PDF format:
A periodical bulletin with world news, new developments in international law and human rights, recent rulings by international courts and tribunals and… selected academic and professional opportunities!
INSIDE THIS ISSUE:
Editorial
Universal News
Regional News
Academic & Professional Opportunities
News from the Facts and Norms Institute
EDITORIAL STAFF
Henrique Napoleão Alves, Bruno José Fonseca, João Fernando Martins Posso, Thiago Fernandes C. de Castro
ISSN 2965-8780
The Facts and Norms Newsletter is distributed to you without cost. The publication is currently unfunded! To support us, please subscribe, follow us on social media, and spread the word about our endeavors! Thank you.
Editorial
Dear Reader,
This edition reaches you amid recent UN News of 83 million people uprooted by conflict or disaster, famine stalking half a million Gazans, and African communities contending with the continent’s hottest year on record. Our opening UN News section tracks humanitarian crises in Gaza, Sudan, South Sudan, Myanmar and beyond.
We also note the hopeful India-Pakistan ceasefire, the UN Secretary-General's welcome of the new Pope Leo XIV, and ongoing concerns from midwifery funding to AI ethics and the fight against female genital mutilation.
International justice remains active: the ICJ anticipates judgment in the Gabon/Equatorial Guinea case, concluded hearings on the Israel/Occupied Palestine Advisory Opinion, modified measures in the Guyana v. Venezuela case, and decided on Sudan v. UAE. The ICC ruled in the Israel appeal and received vital support for its Trust Fund for Victims. ITLOS advances proceedings in the M/T Heroic Idun case and publishes the latest issue of its newsletter, featuring an interview with Judge Armas Pfirter.
Our Regional News covers the ACHPR’s praise for South Africa’s new land-reform and education laws, a peaceful election in Gabon, and urgent appeals over environmental contamination in Zambia.
The Inter-American Commission reports on disability rights, press freedom in Haiti, and the human cost of last year’s floods in Brazil’s Rio Grande do Sul. The Inter-American Court continues its educational efforts in disseminating the Court’s caselaw.
Our coverage also summarizes numerous European Court of Human Rights judgments, covering a broad spectrum of fundamental rights, from environmental justice in Italy to safeguards against discrimination in Russia.
For continued professional development, we also offer a curated selection of academic and career opportunities in international law and human rights.
Closer to home, we are humbled that the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education cited the Facts and Norms Institute’s research on human rights and artificial intelligence, including our concerns over student well-being and teacher livelihoods.
We trust you will find this edition informative and thought-provoking.
Thank you for reading.
Professor Henrique Napoleão Alves
Chief Editor (Henrique.alves@factsandnorms.com)
Universal News
UN News
DISASTERS AND CONFLICT LEAD TO MASSIVE DISPLACEMENTS WORLDWIDE (13 May 2025)
A record 83.4 million people have been forced from their homes around the world, fueled by an increase in disasters and conflict.
The recent rise in conflicts worldwide – particularly in Sudan, the Republic of the Congo, Lebanon, Ukraine and Palestine has pushed millions more into displacement, adding to the tens of millions who already live in protracted displacement in countries such as Afghanistan, Colombia, Syria and Yemen.
The number of displaced due to disasters has risen massively, climbing from last year’s 26.8 million to 45.8 million. “The number of disaster displacements in 2024 was nearly double the annual average of the past decade,” IOM said in a new report issued by the internal displacement monitoring centre (IDMC).
UN Photo / IOM / Lisa George. Flooding in Sudan has displaced 20,000 people since June.
For an optimal reading experience, this newsletter is best viewed in its original PDF format:
CLIMATE EVENTS TAKE EXTREME TOLL ON AFRICAN COUNTRIES (12 May 2025)
In 2024, Africa experienced one of its warmest years since records began over 120 years ago. Highlighting Africa’s particular vulnerability to our warming planet – caused mainly by rich nations burning fossil fuels – the UN said that floods, heatwaves and droughts forced 700,000 people out of their homes across the continent last year.
Erratic weather patterns across Africa are also hindering farming, driving food insecurity and displacing people who have had to flee war already, WMO explained.
Last October, for example, flooding affected 300,000 people in South Sudan – a hefty figure for a nation of 13 million, scarred by years of civil strife and where infrastructure is poor.
The disaster wiped out cattle, adding up to between 30 and 34 million farm animals – roughly two per inhabitant – and stagnant water fueled diseases. Families who had been self-sufficient had to seek help once again. “When someone slides back into being fed, it affects their dignity,” said Meshack Malo, South Sudan Country Representative for the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
STARVATION LOOMS IN GAZA (12 May 2025)
Gazans remain at “critical risk of famine,” UN-backed food security experts warned, a full 19 months since war began with Israel and 70 days since deliveries stopped of all aid and commercial supplies. In its latest update, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) platform estimated that one in five people in Gaza – 500,000 – faces starvation.
UN Photo/Mark Garten. UN Secretary-General António Guterres.
Prices have soared for basics such as a 25 kilogram sack of wheat flour, which now costs between $235 and $520, representing a 3,000 per cent price spike since February.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said he was alarmed by the findings, especially that most children are now facing extreme hunger.
The World Food Programme (WFP) and children’s agency, UNICEF, warned that hunger and malnutrition have intensified sharply since all aid was blocked from entering on 2 March.
WFP chief Cindy McCain said families are starving while the food they need is sitting at the border. “It’s imperative that the international community acts urgently to get aid flowing into Gaza again,” she said. “If we wait until after a famine is confirmed, it will already be too late for many people.”
Echoing the aid community’s rejection of the Israeli plan to manage deliveries of food and non-food items across Gaza, the IPC deemed it “highly insufficient to meet the population’s essential needs for food, water, shelter and medicine."
Meanwhile, reports of Israeli bombardment across Gaza continue to emerge.
UN CHIEF WELCOMES INDIA-PAKISTAN CEASEFIRE (10 May 2025)
Following pronouncements of an end to hostilities between India and Pakistan, neighboring nuclear powers, the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, said that the organization stands ready to support efforts aimed at promoting peace in the region.
Tensions had been steadily rising, after a group of gunmen fired on tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir on 22 April, killing at least 26 and injuring scores more. India and Pakistan both administer parts of the Himalayan region but claim the territory in its entirety, and it has been a scene of unrest for decades.
There were reports of jubilation in both India and Pakistan at news of the ceasefire, which is believed to be the result of talks mediated by the US.
‘WORLD NEWS IN BRIEF’: MASSIVE NEEDS IN SUDAN, DR CONGO AID SHORTFALL, CONGOLESE REFUGEES, ANGOLA CHOLERA RELIEF (9 May 2025)
Sudan: Since the beginning of the civil war in Sudan in April 2023, over 18,000 civilians have been killed and over 13 million have been forced from their homes. Moreover, over 30.4 million are in desperate need of humanitarian aid. The World Food Programme (WFP) has provided food assistance to over 300,000 people from the Zamzam camp. Yet, UN Humanitarian Affairs Coordinator noted that needs remain “massive” in the region.
UN Photo / UNICEF / Mohammed Jamal. Families that fled fighting in Zamzam and El Fasher in North Darfur, seek refuge in Tawila.
DR Congo: Funding shortfalls have forced the humanitarian community to re-prioritize its response plan to alleviate the crisis in the country.
Nearly seven million people have already been forcibly displaced by violence since advances by M23 rebels earlier this year.
Congolese health authorities are facing shortages of medical supplies as the DRC is now facing a cholera outbreak in six provinces.
UN OCHA is calling for greater protection of civilians in conflict-affected areas, and more support to prevent the collapse of essential services.
Angola: Two new allocations from the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) will support Congolese refugees in Uganda and efforts to combat a deadly cholera outbreak in Angola. The $1.8 million CERF contribution in Angola will support the urgent response to the country’s worst cholera outbreak in two decades. Since the beginning of 2025, the outbreak has spread to 17 provinces, with more than 18,000 cases and 586 deaths reported as of 7 May.
CRISIS DEEPENS BENEATH DEVASTATION FROM MYANMAR QUAKE (8 May 2025)
An estimated 3,800 people have died as a result of the devastating earthquakes that struck Myanmar on 28 March. Six weeks on, the situation in Myanmar remains dire.
UNICEF/Maung Nyan. A 10-year-old boy with his parrot on his shoulder at a temporary camp set up in the aftermath of devastating earthquake that struck Myanmar.
“Earthquakes took my mother and my aunt away,” five-year-old Khin Yadanar told the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), after both her family members were killed when a brick wall collapsed on them.
Around 6.5 million children were already in need of humanitarian assistance before the earthquake, which compounded existing vulnerabilities resulting from the brutal civil war between multiple armed opposition groups and the military junta which seized power in a February 2021 coup.
Families now face a further threat from flooding and landslides with the arrival of the monsoon season.
UN CHIEF WELCOMES NEW POPE “AT A TIME OF IMMENSE CHALLENGES” (8 May 2025)
UN Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the announcement of a new Pope.
Pope Leo XIV – born Robert Francis Prevost – is the first person from the United States to lead the Catholic Church, although he also holds Peruvian citizenship after working as a missionary in the Latin-American country for many years.
Leo XIV succeeds Pope Francis - the first Pope from Latin America - who died in April after serving for 12 years.
UN Photo/Mark Garten. UN Secretary-General António Guterres.
LIVES OF MOTHERS AND BABIES AT RISK AS FUNDING CUTS IMPACT MIDWIFERY SUPPORT (6 May 2025)
Each year, three-quarters of all maternal deaths occur in just 25 countries, the majority of them located in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, according to the UN reproductive health agency, UNFPA.
Midwives are often the first and only responders delivering life-saving care to pregnant women and their newborns in crisis settings, where the risk of dying during pregnancy or childbirth doubles.
Despite their critical role, UN support for midwifery is under serious threat due to severe funding cuts.
“We’re lacking everything, from blood bags to medicines. With the support of UNFPA and other partners, we can still provide services – but for how long?” said Fabrice Bishenge, Director of Kyeshero General Hospital in eastern DR Congo.
Deaths during childbirth in fragile and conflict-affected settings now account for 60 per cent of all maternal deaths globally. Worldwide, deep funding cuts only exacerbate this trend. In Yemen, for instance, over 590,000 women of childbearing age are expected to lose access to a midwife.
UNICEF/Mukhtar Neikrawa. The waiting room of a maternity hospital in Herat Province, Afghanistan.
HEALTH INEQUALITY: MORE THAN 30-YEAR DIFFERENCE IN LIFE EXPECTANCY (6 May 2025)
Where you are born could be the difference between living over three decades longer than someone else from a poorer country lacking safe housing, good educational opportunities and access to decent jobs, a new UN report revealed.
UN Photo / Silvia Ramos. Midwife Silvia Ramos checks the health of a newborn in Mexico.
The study by the World Health Organization (WHO) reveals that people living in the country with the highest life expectancy will on average live 33 years longer than those born in the country with the lowest life expectancy.
ALARMING SLOWDOWN IN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: COULD AI HELP CHANGE THAT? (6 May 2025)
For several decades, human development indicators showed a steady, upward curve and UN researchers predicted that by 2030, a high level of development would be enjoyed by the global population.
Those hopes have been dashed in recent years following a period of exceptional crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Human Development Report, an annual publication from the UN Development Programme (UNDP), shows that inequalities between rich and poor countries have widened for the fourth year in a row. Despite the gloomy indicators, the report is strikingly upbeat about the potential of artificial intelligence, noting the breakneck pace at which free or low-cost tools have been embraced by businesses and individuals alike.
UNDP researchers carried out a survey to gauge opinions on AI and discovered that around 60 per cent of respondents expect the technology to positively impact their work and create new opportunities. Those living in low and medium levels of development were particularly keen: 70 per cent expect AI to increase their productivity, and two-thirds anticipate using AI in education, health, or work within the next year.
UN LAUNCHES NETWORK TO SUPPORT VICTIMS OF TERRORISM (6 May 2025)
The UN Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT) recently launched the Victims of Terrorism Associations Network (VoTAN).
UN Photo/Monika Graff. A visitor lays a rose at the 9/11 Memorial in New York City.
The network is a key outcome from the first UN Global Congress of Victims of Terrorism, held in September 2022. It brings together victims and survivors of terrorism, victims’ associations and civil society organizations from across the globe. The goal is to provide a safe space for victims and survivors to support each other, build resilience and engage as advocates, educators, and peacebuilders.
‘WORLD NEWS IN BRIEF’: DEADLY ATTACKS IN SOUTH SUDAN AND UKRAINE, LIFESAVING AID IN YEMEN (5 May 2025)
South Sudan: The United Nations has condemned a deadly aerial bombardment on a hospital in South Sudan’s Jonglei state that killed multiple civilians and forced the suspension of vital medical services for over 100,000 people. The bombing follows a wave of similar attacks in Upper Nile State, where health facilities in Ulang and Nasir have been targeted in recent months. The latest strike has heightened fears of renewed conflict as political and ethnic tensions rise nationwide. The UN is now airlifting essential supplies to the area, but access remains limited. The violence has displaced over 130,000 people in the past two months, and aid agencies warn that South Sudan’s broader $1.7 billion humanitarian plan remains only 16 per cent funded.
Ukraine: The UN’s top humanitarian official in Ukraine condemned a series of Russian strikes on densely populated towns and cities. At least 12 people were killed and more than 100 others injured in attacks that targeted Kharkiv, Kyiv and Cherkasy, and other regions in Ukraine. These attacks also damaged homes, schools, a hospital and other civilian infrastructure, according to local authorities and partners.
Meanwhile, UN agencies alongside partners reached 600,000 people so far this year with first aid, medical transport, primary care and mental health support, including at transit centers for displaced people.
Yemen: The UN International Organization for Migration (IOM) on Monday delivered critical medical supplies to seven health facilities in Yemen, where a collapsing health system and chronic shortages continue to endanger millions.
With support from the Government of the United Kingdom, IOM shipments are reaching hospitals and clinics in Aden, Lahj, Shabwah, Al Bayda and Sana’a – facilities serving both migrants and local communities. The intervention comes amid an alarming health crisis. Nearly 20 million people in Yemen require medical assistance in 2025, but over half of the country’s health facilities are partially functioning or have shut down altogether. Funding gaps have left 382 facilities unsupported.
REDUCTION OF FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION AMID CONCERNS OVER THE PARTICIPATION OF HEALTH WORKERS (28 April 2025)
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is becoming less common worldwide, but when it does occur, it is increasingly performed by professional healthcare workers, warned the UN World Health Organization (WHO). As of 2020, an estimated 52 million girls and women were subjected to FGM at the hands of health workers – around one in four cases.
Putting an end to the practice is within the realm of the possible – and some countries are heading in that direction, the UN health agency said. Unrelenting efforts to stop FGM have led countries including Burkina Faso to reduce rates among 15 to 19-year-olds by 50 per cent in the past three decades. Likewise, prevalence fell by 35 per cent in Sierra Leone and 30 per cent in Ethiopia – thanks to action and political will to enforce bans and accelerate prevention.
UNICEF/Mulugeta Ayene. Girls in the Sidama region of Ethiopia participate in a session on harmful practices including female genital mutilation.
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
LAND AND MARITIME DELIMITATION AND SOVEREIGNTY OVER ISLANDS (GABON/EQUATORIAL GUINEA): COURT TO DELIVER JUDGMENT ON MERITS (13 May 2025)
The International Court of Justice will deliver its Judgment on the merits in the case concerning Land and Maritime Delimitation and Sovereignty over Islands (Gabon/Equatorial Guinea). A public sitting is scheduled for Monday, May 19, 2025, at 3 p.m. at the Peace Palace in The Hague.
The case was brought before the Court by a Special Agreement, in which the Parties asked the Court to determine the force of law of legal titles, treaties, and international conventions concerning their common maritime and land boundaries and sovereignty over the islands of Mbanié/Mbañe, Cocotiers/Cocoteros, and Conga.
Wikimedia Commons. The Peace Palace at the Hague, home of the International Court of Justice.
SUDAN V. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES GENOCIDE CASE: COURT REJECTS PROVISIONAL MEASURES AND REMOVES CASE FROM LIST (5 May 2025)
The Court today delivered its Order on the Request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Sudan. The Court rejected Sudan's Request for provisional measures (by fourteen votes to two) and ordered that the case be removed from the General List (by nine votes to seven). The Court found that it manifestly lacked jurisdiction to entertain Sudan's Application, noting that the United Arab Emirates had made a reservation to Article IX of the Genocide Convention, which excluded the Court's jurisdiction, and that there was no other basis for jurisdiction. The Court recalled, however, that States are required to comply with their obligations under the Convention, regardless of whether they have accepted the Court's jurisdiction. Several judges appended opinions or declarations to the Order.
ICJ ADVISORY OPINION ON ISRAEL'S OBLIGATIONS IN OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY: PUBLIC HEARINGS CONCLUDE (2 May 2025)
The public hearings on the request for an advisory opinion regarding the Obligations of Israel in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory concluded today, May 2, 2025. The hearings were held from April 28 to May 2, 2025, during which 39 States, the United Nations, and three other international organizations presented oral statements. The Court will now begin its deliberation, and the date for the delivery of its advisory opinion will be announced in due course.
ARBITRAL AWARD OF 3 OCTOBER 1899 (GUYANA V. VENEZUELA): COURT MODIFIES PROVISIONAL MEASURES (2 May 2025)
The Court delivered a new Order on Guyana’s request to modify the provisional measures indicated on December 1, 2023.
Finding that recent actions by Venezuela constituted a change in the situation, the Court reaffirmed its 2023 measures and, by twelve votes to three, indicated a new provisional measure directing Venezuela to refrain from conducting or preparing elections in the disputed territory currently administered by Guyana.
In a joint dissenting opinion, Judges Xue Hanqin, Dalveer Bandari, and Georg Note considered that the Court’s original Order of 1 December 2023 already clearly addressed the concerns raised by Guyana. In their view, the Court should exercise its power to specify the scope of its previous provisional measures only when a change in the situation gives rise to serious doubts as to whether its previous provisional measures are applicable or sufficient to address the new situation.
Agreeing with the Court’s Order, Judge Ad Hoc Rüdiger Wolfrum issued a declaration focusing on the requirement of “some change in the situation” needed to justify the revocation or modification of provisional measures.
Judge Leonardo Nemer Caldeira Brant also appended a declaration to the Order of the Court. In his view, while the initial December 2023 order already prohibited Venezuela from altering Guyana's administration of the disputed territory, new facts following that order convinced him of the necessity for the Court to clarify its expectations. Finding the existing procedural options of either modifying or merely reaffirming prior measures unsatisfactory for specifying obligations in light of these new developments, Judge Brant supported reaffirming the original measures while explicitly adding that Venezuela must refrain from holding elections, or preparing to hold elections, in the disputed territory.
Judge ad hoc Philippe Couvreur issued a separate opinion. In his view, although the “new” measure is entirely contained, in substance, in the previous measure and would therefore not have been indispensable in strict law, it has the advantage of clarifying the meaning and scope of the original measure in light of the current circumstances.
International Criminal Court (ICC)
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT’S APPEAL CHAMBER RULES ON THE APPEAL BY ISRAEL IN ISRAEL-PALESTINE CASE (24 Apr. 2025)
The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court ruled on the appeal filed by the State of Israel against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I on Israel’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court.
The Appeals Chamber concluded that the Pre-Trial Chamber committed an error of law by failing to sufficiently address Israel’s argument that it was entitled to make a jurisdictional challenge.
As a result, the Appeal Chamber remanded the matter to the Pre-Trial Chamber for a new ruling on the substance of Israel’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court. In addition, the Appeals Chamber, by majority, dismissed Israel’s appeal against Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision rejecting Israel’s request for an order to the Prosecutor to issue a new notice.
Wikimedia Commons. The International Criminal Court at the Hague.
FINLAND CONTRIBUTED TO THE FUND FOR VICTIMS OF THE LUBANGA CASE (24 Apr. 2025)
Finland, a State Party to the ICC since 2000, has contributed EUR 400,000 to the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in support of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in the Central African Republic and to advance reparations for former child soldiers in the Lubanga case.
Background: Between 2019 and 2024, the TFV has provided holistic, immediate and long-term support to 20,000 SGBV survivors across seven situations under the jurisdiction of the ICC. Finland’s contribution to the SGBV-focused program in the Central African Republic will ensure the continuation of activities across 27 locations in the country, which have to date directly benefitted around 10,000 SGBV survivors. Finland’s grant will contribute to rehabilitative and memoralization measures currently benefitting 2,471 eligible former child soldiers.
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)
ITLOS ANNOUNCES THE FIRST NEWSLETTER FOR 2025 (14 Apr. 2025)
The 2025/1 edition of the ITLOS Newsletter provides a comprehensive overview of the Tribunal's recent activities and future outlook, alongside an interview with Judge Armas Pfirter discussing the Tribunal's role in addressing emerging challenges like climate change and deep-sea mining, its relevance to the Latin American and Caribbean region, and advice for young professionals.
ITLOS SETS ORAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE M/T “HEROIC IDUN” CASE (24 Apr. 2025)
The M/T "Heroic Idun" (No. 2) Case is a legal dispute between the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the Republic of Equatorial Guinea concerning the detention of the vessel M/T "Heroic Idun" and its crew. This case is currently pending before a special chamber of the ITLOS.
Pursuant to previous Orders by the Tribunal, the time limits for the filing of the Reply of the Marshall Islands and for the Rejoinder of Equatorial Guinea were fixed at 25 November 2024 and 24 March 2025. These pleadings were filed within the prescribed time limits. By Order of 13 May 2025, the oral proceedings will now open on 6 October 2025.
Regional News
Africa
ACHPR COMMENDS GABON'S SUCCESSFUL PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, SIGNALLING END OF TRANSITION (8 May 2025) The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) noted with satisfaction the peaceful conduct of presidential elections in Gabon, which resulted in the election of President Brice Clotaire Oligui Nguema and the adoption of a new Constitution.
The Commission highlighted the high voter turnout (over 70%) as indicating a commitment to democracy, legality, and peace, crucial for human rights and marking good prospects for the end of the transition following the August 2023 crisis.
The ACHPR congratulated the new President and the Gabonese people and looks forward to resuming collaboration and its promotion mission.
Paul Kagame/Flickr/CreativeCommons. Swearing-in ceremony of President Brice Clotaire Oligui Nguema of Gabon | 3 May 2025.
ACHPR COMMENDS SOUTH AFRICA FOR ADVANCING LAND REFORM THROUGH EXPROPRIATION ACT (7 May 2025)The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights commended South Africa for enacting the 2025 Expropriation Act as a landmark legislative reform for land reform and social justice. The ACHPR noted key provisions including a unified legal framework, the repeal of the 1975 Act (originally drafted during the apartheid era), safeguards against arbitrary expropriation, and provisions for just and equitable compensation. The Commission urges effective implementation and constructive stakeholder engagement to address historical injustices.
Wikimedia Commons. South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa.
ACHPR COMMENDS SOUTH AFRICA FOR ADVANCING RIGHT TO EDUCATION THROUGH THE BELA ACT (6 May 2025)The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights welcomed the enactment of South Africa's Basic Education Laws Amendment Act, 2024 (BELA Act), commending it as a landmark development.
The ACHPR highlighted key reforms such as the recognition of South African Sign Language, the prohibition of corporal punishment, education rights for undocumented learners, and strengthened school governance.
The Commission noted these reforms promote inclusivity and align with the African Charter, urging South Africa to ensure effective implementation and continue addressing historical inequalities.
ACHPR MARKS WORLD PRESS FREEDOM DAY, FOCUSES ON AI IMPACT (3 May 2025)The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) commemorated World Press Freedom Day 2025, with a focus on the theme "Reporting in the Brave New World: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Press Freedom and the Media."
The Commission highlighted AI's transformative role and potential in journalism, while also noting risks such as bias, disinformation, and copyright violations. It urged the media to use AI ethically and to act as a watchdog on its societal impacts. The Commission also called on States Parties to develop media literacy policies and legal frameworks for digital platforms, emphasizing that AI should advance human rights and press freedom. The Commission also reiterated its condemnation of all attacks against journalists and media outlets.
ACHPR EXPRESSES CONCERN OVER ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION IN KABWE, ZAMBIA (29 April 2025)The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR), through its Working Group on Extractive Industries, Environment and Human Rights Violations (WGEI), transmitted a Letter of Urgent Appeal on 23 April 2025 to the President of Zambia regarding hazardous lead contamination in Kabwe.
The appeal highlighted the grave impact on the health and rights of local communities, especially children, from mining waste.
The Commission urged Zambia to suspend hazardous operations, conduct independent assessments, implement clean-up efforts, and support affected populations, reaffirming its commitment to environmental justice.
Americas
INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ISSUES NEW REPORT ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES IN THE AMERICAS (13 May 2025)
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights presented its first thematic report on the rights of persons with disabilities, "The Situation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the Americas" (available in Spanish):
Cover of the IACHR’s new report on the rights of persons with disabilities (available in Spanish).
INTER-AMERICAN COURT DELEGATION VISITS CHILE TO SUPERVISE COMPLIANCE WITH HUMAN RIGHTS SENTENCES (12 May 2025)
A delegation from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I/A Court) conducted a three-day visit to Santiago, Chile, from May 5-7, 2025, to oversee the nation's progress in complying with past court judgments. Led by Judge Ricardo C. Pérez Manrique, the mission included private hearings for four specific cases involving violations of health rights, discrimination, and due process. The delegation also met with Chilean state authorities, including representatives from the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Justice, and members of the National Congress, to discuss the implementation of sentences and mechanisms for ensuring non-repetition of human rights violations.
The supervised cases included the Poblete Vilches case, concerning the right to health for an elderly person; the Vera Rojas case, involving a child's right to life and health care; the Pavez Pavez case, addressing discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment; and the Norín Catrimán et al. case, concerning due process violations against Mapuche indigenous leaders.
Discussions in the hearings focused on specific reparations, such as public apologies, healthcare provisions, educational programs, and legislative reforms. The visit also featured a roundtable with representatives from several regional states to share best practices on implementing I/A Court rulings.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Court’s headquarters in San Jose, Costa Rica.
INTER-AMERICAN COURT UPDATES BOOKLETS ON CONTROL OF CONVENTIONALITY, CORRUPTION, AND PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS (9 May 2025, 30 April 2025 & 25 April 2025)
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights announced the updated version of the following booklets | caselaw journals:
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 7: Control of Conventionality.
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 10: Personal Integrity.
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 21: Right to Life.
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 23: Corruption and Human Rights.
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 33: Preliminary Objections.
The Jurisprudence Journal of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights No. 42: The Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Jurisprudence Journals Series is the systematic organization of the international standards on human rights matters of the I/A Court. Its goal is to disseminate the Court’s main lines of caselaw on various topics of interest in the region.
INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ISSUES NEW REPORT ON THE SITUATION OF PRESS FREEDOM IN HAITI (9 May 2025)
The Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights announced the publication of its thematic report on the situation of press freedom in Haiti (available in English).
SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR FOR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ISSUES HIS ANNUAL REPORT (9 May 2025)
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights' Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression has published its 2024 Annual Report (available in both English and Spanish), detailing significant trends, challenges, and advances concerning freedom of expression and the press in the Americas.
The Rapporteur expressed grave concern over the continuing trend of lethal violence, with at least 22 journalists killed in 2024 across six OAS member states.
The report also documents violence against journalists and protesters during various social protests in the region, committed by both security forces and private individuals.
A progressive deterioration of public debate was also noted, evidenced by rising hate speech, discrimination, and intolerance towards vulnerable or historically marginalized groups in some regional states, alongside attacks on women journalists featuring elements of gender-based violence.
Regarding the internet, the Rapporteur followed debates and initiatives to regulate social media platforms in response to the spread of violent discourse, hate speech, and disinformation. These challenges are compounded by the rapid advancement of generative Artificial Intelligence and the use of technologies to profile, monitor, and intimidate journalists and other civil society actors. This is the twenty-sixth annual report from the Special Rapporteur since its 1997 creation.
FREE EXPRESSION MANDATE HOLDERS URGE HUMAN RIGHTS-CENTERED AI DEVELOPMENT (7 May 2025)
Marking World Press Freedom Day in Brussels, Special Rapporteurs on freedom of expression from the UN, OSCE, OAS, and ACHPR issued a joint statement underscoring the profound impact of Artificial Intelligence on free expression and the media. Acknowledging AI's potential benefits alongside serious human rights concerns, they emphasized the critical need to ensure its design, development, and deployment are firmly anchored in international human rights principles, with human dignity and equality as guiding tenets for information integrity.
The Rapporteurs highlighted specific regional and thematic concerns: Pedro Vaca (OAS) stressed shifting from mere risk-mitigation to embedding freedom of expression and information integrity from AI's inception. Jan Braathu (OSCE) pointed to media dependency on platforms, threats to journalist safety, and the uncompensated use of journalistic content for AI training, advocating for public interest information spaces. Geereesha Topsy Sonoo (ACHPR) warned of AI exacerbating Africa's digital divide and creating biased systems due to a lack of local development resources and data. Irene Khan (UN) urged that AI's success be measured by information quality and public trust, not speed or profit, envisioning it as a tool for sustainable development.
HUMAN RIGHTS EXPERTS URGE STATES TO RECOGNIZE RIGHT TO CARE AND UPHOLD ASSOCIATIONAL FREEDOMS FOR WOMEN WORKERS (1 May 2025)
On International Workers' Day, UN and IACHR Rapporteurs jointly called upon States to formally recognize and guarantee the human rights to care and support, and to protect the freedom of association and peaceful assembly for all women workers.
The experts emphasized that structural discrimination and the disproportionate, often unremunerated, burden of care responsibilities shouldered by women create significant barriers to their exercise of fundamental rights, including unionization and collective participation. Despite these obstacles, women have consistently been at the forefront of defending human rights and advancing workplace improvements against violence, harassment, and discrimination, and lead in exercising rights to strike and associate globally.
According to the ILO, 708 million women worldwide are excluded from the labor force due to unpaid care work. This exclusion, particularly affecting women in the informal economy or rural areas, is compounded by a lack of social security for over half of working women in Latin America and the Caribbean.
The Rapporteurs advocated for the "5Rs Framework" (Recognize, Reduce, Redistribute, Reward, Represent) to guide public policies, urging formalization, fair wages, social protection in the care sector, and corporate due diligence in line with international standards like ILO Conventions 189 (domestic workers), 183 (maternity protection), and 190 (violence and harassment), to ensure women's substantive equality and active participation.
REDESCA REPORT ON RIO GRANDE DO SUL FLOODS URGES BRAZIL TO BOLSTER CLIMATE JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN DISASTER RESPONSE AND PREVENTION (30 April 2025)
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights' Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural, and Environmental Rights (REDESCA) has released a comprehensive report on the devastating floods in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, following a December 2024 working visit (available in English, Spanish, and Brazilian Portuguese).
Led by Special Rapporteur Javier Palummo Lantes, the mission assessed the impacts of the April-May 2024 socio-environmental tragedy—which affected over 2.3 million people, caused 183 deaths, and displaced thousands—on economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights (ESCER), focusing on emergency response, mitigation, reconstruction, and climate adaptation.
The report acknowledges Brazil's significant efforts in mobilizing resources, managing the crisis, and providing humanitarian aid, but also identifies structural failings that exacerbated the disaster. These include environmental degradation, agribusiness expansion, weakened environmental legislation, and inadequate flood containment.
REDESCA highlights the disproportionate impact on vulnerable groups like women, Afro-descendants, Indigenous peoples, and informal workers.
Key recommendations urge Brazil to embed climate justice in public policies, strengthen human rights-based disaster prevention and response, reverse environmental setbacks, ensure community participation, and address severe impacts on the right to water due to contamination, informal workers, food security for rural/Indigenous communities (recommending land titling and rejecting restrictive interpretations such as the "marco temporal" thesis, a legal cut-off date for Indigenous land claims). REDESCA stresses the urgency of implementing structural preventative measures, such as modernizing hydrological monitoring and early warning systems, reinforcing flood defenses, and adopting Nature-Based Solutions.
Europe
CROATIA VIOLATED DIRECTOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS IN CONFISCATION OF COMPANY'S CRIME PROCEEDS (13 May 2025)
In the case of Radelić v. Croatia (application no. 12432/22), Mr. Dražen Radelić, the sole shareholder and director of a company, Radelić d.o.o., was convicted of business fraud for obtaining illegal pecuniary gain for his company by presenting forged cheques. After the company went bankrupt and ceased to exist, the domestic courts ordered that these proceeds of crime be confiscated from Mr. Radelić personally.The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) held, by four votes to three, that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that the interference with Mr. Radelić's property rights was not "provided for by law." It noted that the applicant was convicted of business fraud with the intent of acquiring unlawful gain for his company, not for himself personally. The Penal Code at the time did not contain specific provisions allowing proceeds of crime to be confiscated from the perpetrator if they had been acquired for the benefit of another person or entity; indeed, Supreme Court case-law indicated the contrary. The domestic courts had justified the confiscation by relying on Article 77 of the Penal Code read in conjunction with section 252(5) of the Commercial Companies Act (concerning tort liability of management board members to company creditors), applying the latter by analogy. The Court concluded that this application by analogy was unforeseeable. Applying a provision on tort liability in civil law to justify a confiscation measure in criminal proceedings was inconsistent with the nature of confiscation (which the Court considered more akin to unjust enrichment) and with the specific offence for which Mr. Radelić was convicted. There was no relevant domestic case-law supporting such an application for confiscation.The Court ordered Croatia to ensure the applicant’s property is not subject to further enforcement of the confiscation order and to compensate him for any sums that might have already been taken.
Council of Europe. The European Court of Human Rights.
Judge Davor Derenčinović, in a concurring opinion, agreed with the violation but argued the case should also have been examined under Article 7 (no punishment without law) of the Convention.
Judges Anja Seibert-Fohr, Jovan Ilievski, and Stéphane Pisani dissented, arguing that the confiscation was foreseeable under Croatian law, and that the Court was overstepping its role by re-interpreting domestic law.
Judge Stéphane Pisani, in a separate dissent, further emphasized the practical realities of corporate fraud and the necessity for States to confiscate illicit gains, suggesting the applicant could have foreseen the consequences.
NO VIOLATIONS FOUND IN CASE OF MALTESE NATIONAL'S DETENTION AND TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS POST-EXTRADITION (13 May 2025)
The case of Spiteri v. Malta (application no. 37055/22) concerned a Maltese national, Mr. Patrick Spiteri, who was extradited from the United Kingdom to Malta under a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) to face charges including fraud and misappropriation. He complained about the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention in Malta, subsequent restrictions on his freedom of movement, and the Maltese Constitutional Court’s failure to give reasons for not requesting a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section) held, by five votes to two, that there had been no violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security of person) of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding his pre-trial detention.
The Court found that the applicant's pre-trial detention was based on a “Part III Arrest Warrant” issued by the Maltese Court of Magistrates under domestic law (Subsidiary Legislation 276.05) prior to the EAW. The Maltese Constitutional Court had found this Part III warrant to be a valid national arrest warrant, distinct from the EAW itself, providing a proper legal basis for his arrest and detention for prosecution. The European Court of Human Rights considered the Constitutional Court's interpretation not to be arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable. It also noted that the EAW Form itself was issued by a competent judicial authority.
The Court also held, by six votes to one, that there had been no violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom to leave any country) concerning the travel restriction.
The Court found the restriction to be lawful and pursuing the legitimate aim of securing his availability for trial on serious criminal charges, which necessitated international cooperation. The restriction was deemed proportionate given the applicant's history of being uncooperative, absconding from Malta, and attempting to evade justice during his extradition from the United Kingdom.
Finally, the Court held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) regarding the refusal to request a preliminary ruling.
The Court determined that while the Constitutional Court did not explicitly address the applicant’s request for a preliminary reference to the CJEU, its reasons for not doing so were sufficiently implicit from its judgment. The Constitutional Court had accepted the established CJEU case-law principle (that an EAW must be preceded by a national arrest warrant) and had applied it to the facts, concluding that the Part III warrant fulfilled this requirement. Thus, a reference was deemed unnecessary as the relevant legal point was not in doubt.
Judge Faris Vehabović, in a partly dissenting opinion, disagreed with the majority on Article 5 § 1, arguing that the EAW’s purpose was exhausted upon extradition and that no separate, valid national warrant existed for the applicant’s continued detention.Judge Abigail Lofaro, also in a partly dissenting opinion, found violations of both Article 5 § 1 and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4. She considered the Part III Arrest Warrant and the EAW Form to be one and the same instrument, meaning no distinct national arrest warrant preceded the EAW, rendering the detention and the subsequent travel restrictions unlawful due to a lack of scrupulous observance of procedural requirements.
Wikimedia Commons/Darwinek. The Supreme Court building. Warsaw, Poland.
POLAND VIOLATED JUDGE'S RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING IN SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT PROCESS (9 May 2025)
In the case of Sadomski v. Poland (application no. 56297/21), a Polish judge, Mr. Jacek Roman Sadomski, applied for a position in the Supreme Court's Civil Chamber but was rejected by the National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ), the body responsible for recommending judicial candidates. Mr. Sadomski challenged this rejection in the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC).
Initially, the SAC issued an interim order to pause the NCJ's decision. Later, the SAC ruled in Mr. Sadomski's favor, annulling parts of the NCJ's resolution. However, despite the SAC's interim order, the President of Poland went ahead and appointed the candidates recommended by the NCJ. Furthermore, during Mr. Sadomski's legal challenge, new laws were passed that aimed to prevent or limit such appeals concerning Supreme Court appointments. Mr. Sadomski argued these actions denied him a genuinely effective review by a court, violating his right to a fair hearing under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing and access to an effective court) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section) unanimously found that Poland had violated Article 6 § 1. The President of Poland appointed the other candidates despite the SAC’s binding interim order telling him not to proceed until the review was complete. Laws were changed while Mr. Sadomski's case was ongoing to limit or eliminate the possibility of judicial review for such appointments. The NCJ delayed sending Mr. Sadomski's appeal to the SAC, and the Polish Constitutional Court also made rulings aimed at blocking such reviews. Although the SAC eventually ruled in Mr. Sadomski's favor, the combined actions of the President and the legislature meant that the SAC's decisions (both the interim order and the final judgment) had no real, practical impact for Mr. Sadomski. His access to a court that could provide an effective remedy was rendered "illusory."
Wikimedia Commons. The European Court of Human Rights.
Judge Anna Adamska-Gallant, in a concurring opinion, agreed with the violation, emphasizing that the legislative amendments and the de facto actions of State authorities were aimed at preventing the applicant from having his case determined by the court, thereby rendering the SAC's final judgment ineffective and depriving the applicant of meaningful protection of his rights.
AZERBAIJAN VIOLATED LAWYER'S PRIVACY DUE TO INADEQUATE COURT REVIEW OF POLICE FILMING AND FOOTAGE PUBLICATION (6 May 2025)
The case of Bayramov v. Azerbaijan (application no. 45735/21) concerned a lawyer, Mr. Bahruz Bayramov, who was filmed when stopped by the State Traffic Police (STP) for alleged drink-driving and during a subsequent medical examination. This video footage was later published on television channels and websites. Mr. Bayramov initiated a civil action against the police.The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that the respondent State had failed to fulfil its positive obligations under Article 8. The domestic courts dismissed the applicant's claim that STP officers had unlawfully filmed him and distributed the footage, despite media reports citing police sources. The Court concluded that the domestic courts failed to provide sufficient reasoning for this dismissal, inadequately addressing the applicant’s arguments and evidence. For instance, they accepted the STP's denial of distributing the footage and did not properly explain how third parties could have filmed the applicant during a closed medical examination.The Court determined that Article 8 was applicable as the publication of the video footage, suggesting the applicant (an advocate) had been drink-driving, seriously affected his private life and reputation.
The Government’s preliminary objection concerning non-exhaustion of domestic remedies (arguing the applicant should have sued the media outlets directly) was joined to the merits and dismissed, as the Court found it reasonable for the applicant to sue the STP. The applicant's initial complaints under Article 6 (fair trial) regarding his civil action were examined by the Court under Article 8.
HUNGARY VIOLATED EXPULSION SAFEGUARDS BY WITHHOLDING NATIONAL SECURITY REASONS (6 May 2025)
The case of Demirci v. Hungary (application no. 48302/21) concerned Mr. Orhan Demirci, a Turkish national with long-term residence in Hungary, who was expelled in 2021 on national security grounds. The specific reasons for his expulsion and the information underlying the decision by the Constitution Protection Office (CPO) were classified and not disclosed to him. The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 (procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens) to the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that Mr. Demirci, a lawfully resident alien, was not informed of the factual elements or the content of documents underlying the CPO's recommendation for his expulsion. This constituted a significant limitation of his procedural rights. The domestic courts were bound by the CPO’s assessment and could not review the necessity of the classification or meaningfully scrutinize the national security claims. The Court concluded that the restrictions on Mr. Demirci's procedural rights were not sufficiently counterbalanced by other safeguards, such as effective representation (as his lawyer also lacked access to the classified information) or a thorough independent judicial review of the merits of the national security assessment. Consequently, his expulsion was not "in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with law."
GREECE VIOLATED JEWISH COMMUNITY’S PROPERTY RIGHTS OVER PLOT DEEMED “ENEMY PROPERTY” DESPITE 1934 OWNERSHIP (6 May 2025)
The case of Jewish Community of Thessaloniki v. Greece (application no. 13959/20) concerned the 2019 dismissal of the community’s demand to be judicially recognized as the sole owner of a plot of land on the grounds that it was categorized as “enemy property” after the end of World War II (and despite the ownership of the plot having been transferred to the community in 1934).
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (peaceful enjoyment of possessions) to the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court first determined that the complaint fell within its competence ratione temporis, finding that although some events predated Greece's acceptance of the right of individual application, the applicant community irrevocably lost ownership of the contested plot only by virtue of the final Court of Cassation judgment delivered in 2019.
On the merits, the Court found that the interference with the applicant community's property rights – the 2019 judgment – was not "in accordance with the law." It reasoned that the national court's interpretation and application of the relevant domestic legislation (which required the applicant community to assert its rights within a three-month deadline in 1955 under laws concerning "enemy property") was not foreseeable. This was primarily because the applicant community, a Greek entity, had acquired ownership of the plot in 1934, meaning the conditions for the "enemy property" laws (which targeted property belonging to Italian nationals at a critical date in 1947) were not met. Furthermore, the Court noted a lack of consistency in the State’s actions over the years, which contradicted the "good governance" principle, as the State initially appeared to acknowledge the applicant community's ownership by seeking compensation for the expropriation before later claiming ownership itself. The applicant community could not reasonably have anticipated this change in the State's stance or the domestic courts' ultimate interpretation of the legislation.
Wikimedia Commons. Exterior view of the Monastir Synagogue in Thessaloniki, Greece.
A complaint under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) was declared admissible, but the Court found it unnecessary to examine it separately given the finding of a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The Court awarded the applicant community EUR 5,000 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 40,000 for costs and expenses, noting that domestic law provides for the possibility of reopening the proceedings.
Wikimedia Commons. Courtroom of the European Court of Human Rights.
ITALIAN AUTHORITIES FAILED TO PROTECT RESIDENTS FROM FOUNDRY POLLUTION (6 May 2025)
The case of L.F. and Others v. Italy (application no. 52854/18) concerned 151 Italian nationals (the complaints of two other applicants having been declared inadmissible) living near a foundry (Fonderie Pisano) in the Salerno municipality. They alleged that the authorities failed to take adequate measures to protect their right to private life from environmental pollution caused by the plant's continuing operation, which had been active since 1960 in an area later opened for residential development.The European Court of Human Rights (First Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that the Italian authorities failed to take all necessary measures to ensure the effective protection of the applicants’ rights. Despite some tangible effects of post-2016 measures aimed at minimizing the foundry's harmful effects, the authorities, in authorizing its continued operation, failed to properly consider the significant harmful effects on the local population from prolonged exposure to pollution prior to 2016. Official studies indicated serious contamination (e.g., elevated mercury levels and higher morbidity/mortality rates from certain diseases) for those living within six kilometers of the plant. The Court concluded that a fair balance between the applicants' interest in not suffering serious environmental harm and the interest of society as a whole had not been struck.
The applicants also complained under Article 2 (right to life), but the Court found it appropriate to examine the complaints solely from the standpoint of Article 8. A complaint under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) was declared inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded. The complaints of two applicants living significantly further from the plant were declared inadmissible.Regarding the execution of the judgment (Article 46), the Court stated that the respondent State was free to choose the means to discharge its obligations, but noted that the applicants' Article 8 complaints could be remedied by duly addressing the environmental hazards so that the foundry’s impact became fully compatible with its residential location, or by relocating the plant.Judge Georgios A. Serghides, in a partly dissenting opinion, argued that the complaint under Article 2 should have been examined separately and a violation found. He also disagreed that the finding of a violation was sufficient just satisfaction, believing a monetary award for non-pecuniary damage was warranted.
Wikimedia Commons. The Italian Institute of Health in Rome, Italy (the Institute is one of the institutions responsible for the official studies associated with L.F. and Others v. Italy).
RUSSIA VIOLATED WOMAN'S FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION OVER COVID SKEPTICISM POSTS (29 Apr. 2025)
The case of Avagyan v. Russia (application no. 36911/20) concerned Ms. Mariya Avagyan’s conviction in 2020 for willful dissemination of untrue information. She had posted on a social-media platform questioning the presence of the Covid-19 virus in Krasnodar and the Government’s reasons for reporting deaths as being a result of the disease. She was fined 30,000 Russian roubles (approximately 390 euros at the time).
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that her conviction for willfully disseminating “untrue information” and the subsequent fine were not “necessary in a democratic society.” The Court noted that Ms. Avagyan's comments, posted on an Instagram account primarily used for her small business, expressed criticism of a perceived lack of transparency and did not purport to provide verified factual information. The domestic courts had failed to establish the deliberate falsity of her statements—a key element of the offence—and had improperly shifted the burden of proof onto her. They also overlooked the limited dissemination of her comments and the lack of evidence that they posed a genuine risk.
The Court concluded that while combating disinformation during a public health emergency might be a valid objective, sanctioning individuals for expressing skepticism about official information or calling for greater transparency was not. The fine imposed was also considered a significant financial burden capable of having a chilling effect.The Court also found, unanimously, a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial – impartial tribunal) of the Convention, due to the absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings against the applicant. This structural deficiency was found to have compounded the perfunctory approach to establishing her culpability under Article 10.The Court first confirmed its jurisdiction to examine the application, as the facts occurred before Russia ceased to be a Party to the Convention on 16 September 2022.
Judges Ioannis Ktistakis, Diana Kovatcheva and Mateja Đurović, in a joint concurring opinion, questioned whether sanctioning allegedly “untrue” statements, even for the protection of public health, pursues a legitimate aim under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.
RUSSIA VIOLATED LGBT ACTIVISTS' RIGHTS IN WORKSHOP RAID, FAILED TO INVESTIGATE DISCRIMINATION (29 Apr. 2025)
The case of Derrek and Others v. Russia (application no. 31712/21) concerned six Russian LGBT activists whose workshop in Yaroslavl was raided by police and special forces on 5 December 2020. The applicants were subjected to personal searches and questioning, had their identity documents filmed, and were forcibly taken for obligatory drug testing, which proved negative. Some were then detained at a police station for several hours before release.The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section) held, by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) taken in conjunction with Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights, under both its substantive and procedural limbs.The Court found that the treatment by police, including personal searches and obligatory drug testing which lacked any investigative value, was willfully intended to humiliate and debase the applicants due to their association with the LGBT community. This was aggravated by the chief of police's use of homophobic hate speech ("faggots") during the raid and the subsequent public disclosure of video footage. The Court concluded that this conduct was motivated by homophobic hatred, aroused feelings of fear, anguish, and insecurity in the applicants, and amounted to degrading treatment.Regarding the procedural aspect, the Court determined that the Russian authorities failed to conduct an effective investigation into the applicants' credible allegations that the police misconduct was motivated by homophobic discrimination. Domestic complaints detailing these concerns were summarily dismissed or rejected by courts without a merits-based examination of the potential discriminatory motive.The Court also unanimously found a violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security of person). It held that the applicants were deprived of their liberty when confined at the workshop venue, and during their forced transfer to a hospital for drug testing and, for three of them, to a police station for several hours. This deprivation was unlawful as no record of their arrest or detention was drawn up—a serious failing—and the transfer for drug testing lacked any procedural guarantees or proper authorization.Furthermore, the Court unanimously found a violation of Article 11 (freedom of peaceful assembly). The disruption of the LGBT workshop by the authorities was deemed a disproportionate interference, not justified by any "pressing social need." The Court noted that the authorities failed to show that the alleged non-compliance with COVID-19 measures by participants was a genuine factor for the raid, particularly as related administrative proceedings were discontinued. The authorities' actions had a chilling effect on participation in similar gatherings, and the applicants were denied domestic redress.Judge Andreas Zünd, in a partly concurring, partly dissenting opinion, agreed with the violations of Articles 5 § 1 and 11. However, he argued that the treatment did not meet the severity threshold for Article 3, suggesting instead that the facts constituted a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life) in conjunction with Article 14, due to the homophobic nature of the acts and the failure to investigate them effectively under that provision.
WikiImages. Piece of Berlin Wall in front of the European Court of Human Rights.
PARTIAL VIOLATION OF FAIR TRIAL RIGHTS IN ALBANIAN MAN'S ABSENTIA CONVICTION (29 Apr. 2025)
The case of Jaupi v. Albania (application no. 23369/16) concerns Mr. Kastriot Jaupi’s trial in absentia, for which he received a life sentence. He was convicted of the attempted murder of the chief of the criminal police of Berat, I.N., and his driver, and the murder of I.N. in a bar in Vlora in 2000. As Mr. Jaupi was in detention in Spain at the time, the trial was held without him present.
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section)
held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) (right to defend himself in person) of the European Convention. The Court noted that, while the applicant was initially tried in absentia while detained in Spain, he was subsequently granted leave to appeal out of time after his extradition to Albania. The applicant was notified of the ensuing appeal hearing and offered the opportunity to attend but chose not to.
Regarding the right to examine witnesses under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, the Court found unanimously, no violation in respect of the applicant's conviction for murder. Although statements from two absent prosecution witnesses (R.B. and B.H.) were admitted, the Court found there were good reasons for their non-attendance. Crucially, for the murder charge, their evidence was not the sole or decisive basis for conviction, as it was supported by other significant corroborating evidence (including eyewitness testimony, evidence of motive from the applicant's mother, and forensic reports).
Council of Europe. The European Court of Human Rights.
On the other hand, the Court found, unanimously, a violation of Article 6 with regard to the applicant's conviction for attempted murder. While there were also good reasons for the non-attendance of witnesses R.B. and B.H. at the trial, their pre-trial statements (which included alleged confessions by the applicant) were found to be decisive for the attempted murder conviction. The Court determined that there were insufficient counterbalancing factors to compensate for the disadvantages to the defense stemming from their non-attendance.
SLOVAKIA VIOLATED NOTARY'S RIGHTS IN OFFICE SEARCHES DUE TO LACK OF JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT (29 Apr. 2025)
The case of Kavečanský v. Slovakia (application no. 49617/22) concerned a notary, Mr Vojtech Kavečanský, whose notary’s office and other unoccupied non-residential premises were searched, and his electronic devices seized, in 2021. These actions were based on search warrants issued by an investigator and approved by a prosecutor in the context of criminal proceedings for embezzlement against him.The European Court of Human Rights (First Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life and home) of the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found that the interference with the applicant's private life and home – through the searches of his notary’s office and other unoccupied non-residential premises, and the seizure of his electronic devices – was not in accordance with the law.
Slovak law at the relevant time did not provide sufficient judicial safeguards against arbitrary interference. This was particularly concerning for searches of premises like a notary's office, which could involve professionally privileged information. The search warrants were issued by an investigator and approved by a prosecutor, without a prior judicial warrant, and there was no possibility for the applicant to obtain effective a posteriori judicial review of either the decision to order the searches or the manner of their execution. The Court concluded that the applicant was thereby deprived of the minimum protection required under the rule of law.
Council of Europe. The European Court of Human Rights.
NO VIOLATION FOUND IN CASE OF TURKISH PRISONER'S ACCESS TO INTERNET PRINTOUTS (29 Apr. 2025)
The case of Tergek v. Türkiye (application no. 39631/20) concerned Mr. Abdül Samed Tergek, a convicted prisoner for membership of an armed terrorist organization, who complained about the prison authorities' refusal to deliver documents printed from the internet, sent to him by his relatives. One set of documents from his sister was eventually delivered after a domestic court ruling, while a second set from his wife was withheld.The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) held, by four votes to three, that there had been no violation of Article 10 (freedom to receive information and ideas) of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding the withheld documents. The Court recharacterized the complaint, initially lodged under Article 8 (right to respect for correspondence).
CtEHR. The European Court of Human Rights.
The Court concluded that the interference (withholding the internet printouts) was justified. It noted that the interference was prescribed by law and pursued legitimate aims (protection of national security, prevention of disorder and crime). The Court found the measure proportionate, emphasizing the Turkish Constitutional Court’s reasoning in a leading case (Diyadin Akdemir). This reasoning highlighted that reviewing a large volume of printed or photocopied documents, in addition to regular publications, could overwhelm prison staff, impede their duties, and place an excessive burden on the judiciary. Furthermore, inherent differences exist between officially published materials (which undergo pre-publication scrutiny) and printouts/photocopies, the latter posing specific risks to prison security and order (e.g., facilitating illicit communication). The Court acknowledged that various other means were available for prisoners to obtain publications under domestic law. It concluded that it was reasonable for national authorities to regulate how prisoners obtain such documents to ensure efficient prison functioning, and that the Constitutional Court had conducted a detailed and carefully balanced assessment, not exceeding its margin of appreciation.A joint dissenting opinion by Judges Arnfinn Bårdsen, Anja Seibert-Fohr and Juha Lavapuro argued that the blanket ban on internet printouts, based solely on format without considering content, was a human rights violation. They questioned whether the interference was "prescribed by law" and argued that the necessity of such a broad ban had not been convincingly demonstrated by the State, criticizing the Constitutional Court's reasoning as insufficient to justify the restriction on prisoners' rights.
Council of Europe. The European Court of Human Rights.
UKRAINE HINDERED ECHR APPLICATION AND UNLAWFULLY DETAINED APPLICANT (24 Apr. 2025)
The case of Bogdan Shevchuk v. Ukraine (application no. 55737/16) concerned Mr. Bogdan Grygorovych Shevchuk’s alleged unlawful detention and the authorities' alleged interference with his right of individual application to the European Court of Human Rights.The European Court (Fifth Section) held, unanimously, that Ukraine had failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 34 (right of individual application) not to hinder the effective exercise of this right, and that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security of person) of the European Convention on Human Rights.The Court found a violation of Article 34 because it concluded there was sufficient indirect proof that the applicant's request to withdraw his ECHR application was made under undue pressure. This pressure stemmed from a Kyivskyi District Court judge (Judge F.) who was involved in new criminal proceedings against him while also being the judge whose actions in the initial criminal proceedings formed the subject-matter of his ECHR application. Judge F. continued to hear the new case against Mr. Shevchuk, making decisions affecting his liberty, even after becoming aware of his ECHR application. The Court noted the applicant's expressed fears of repercussions from Judge F. and found that the circumstances, including an alleged "offer" to resolve his domestic case in return for withdrawing his ECHR application, created a "chilling effect" and amounted to undue pressure. The Court therefore dismissed the withdrawal request and continued its examination of the case.
CtEHR. The European Court of Human Rights.
Regarding the violation of Article 5 § 1, the Court found that the Kyivskyi District Court (specifically Judge F.) had extended the applicant's detention from 28 August to 18 October 2016 after the Odesa Regional Court of Appeal had already transferred his case to a different competent court on 17 August 2016. Consequently, the Kyivskyi District Court no longer had jurisdiction. Its decision to extend the applicant's detention was made in excess of jurisdiction and constituted a "gross and obvious irregularity" that could not be remedied by domestic judicial review.The Court found it unnecessary to examine the complaint under Article 5 § 4 (right to a speedy decision on lawfulness of detention), given its finding of a violation under Article 5 § 1. A new complaint regarding the amount of bail, lodged after the case was communicated to the Government, was not taken up by the Court.
Wikimedia Commons. Courtroom of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber).
UKRAINE VIOLATED PRISONER'S RIGHTS BY DENYING VIDEOLINK PARTICIPATION AND MONITORING CORRESPONDENCE (24 Apr. 2025)
The case of Ivan Karpenko v. Ukraine (no. 2) (application no. 41036/16) concerned a prisoner, Mr. Ivan Ivanovych Karpenko, who complained that prison authorities had unlawfully monitored his correspondence with a domestic court. He further alleged that, when he challenged this in court, he was unfairly denied the right to participate in the hearings via videolink as an unrepresented litigant, and that the domestic courts’ decisions were inadequately reasoned.The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for correspondence) of the Convention.
Regarding Article 6 § 1, the Court found that the domestic courts failed to properly assess whether the nature of the applicant's case—a factual dispute concerning his personal experience with the prison administration regarding his correspondence—necessitated his presence, potentially via videolink. Instead, the courts focused on supposed deficiencies in domestic law at the time, which they claimed did not provide for videolink participation from prison in administrative cases. The Court noted that even if such a legislative lacuna existed, it could not justify a failure to uphold Convention standards. The applicant, who was unrepresented, was thereby deprived of the opportunity to present his case effectively and to respond to the oral submissions made by the prison administration. This also constituted a breach of the principle of equality of arms.
Concerning Article 8, the Court concluded that the prison administration had breached the legal ban on monitoring prisoners’ correspondence with domestic courts. While there was a factual dispute as to whether the applicant submitted the letter sealed or unsealed, the Court emphasized that it was the prison administration’s responsibility to ensure compliance with regulations requiring such correspondence to be handled as a "sealed envelope." The prison administration's cover letter to the Higher Administrative Court, which included details like the appeal number and page count, indicated that the contents had been reviewed.
Wikimedia Commons. Courtroom of the European Court of Human Rights.
FRANCE VIOLATED MINORS' RIGHTS IN SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES DUE TO FAILURES IN LAW, PRACTICE, AND INVESTIGATIONS (24 Apr. 2025)
The cases of L. v. France (no. 46949/21), H.B. v. France (no. 24989/22), and M.L. v. France (no. 39759/22) concerned three applicants who, as minors (aged 14, 14, and 16 respectively at the time of the events), reported non-consensual sexual acts. They alleged that France failed in its positive obligations to protect them through an effective criminal law system and to effectively investigate and prosecute these acts.
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section) held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of all three applicants. For Ms L. (no. 46949/21), the Court also found, unanimously, a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8.
The Court found that France failed to effectively apply a criminal law system capable of repressing non-consensual sexual acts committed against minors. Key deficiencies identified by the Court included:
¾ The inadequacy of the relevant domestic law at the time, which did not sufficiently or explicitly incorporate the notion of "consent," particularly in the context of minors and their capacity to consent.
¾ Domestic courts failed to duly analyze the effect of all surrounding circumstances when assessing the alleged acts.
¾ The courts did not give sufficient weight to the applicants' particular vulnerability (due to their minority, psychological state, and, in some cases, consumption of alcohol/drugs) when evaluating their capacity for discernment and whether their consent was freely and knowingly given.
¾ Specifically for applicants L. and M.L., the criminal proceedings lacked the required celerity and diligence.
In Ms L.'s case, the Court found she suffered "secondary victimization" in violation of Article 14. She was exposed by national authorities to blaming, moralizing, and sexist stereotypes during the investigation. Furthermore, the reasoning of the investigating chamber's decision was found to be tainted by sex-based discrimination and employed gender stereotypes that were inoperative and undermined her dignity.
UKRAINE: ANTI-CORRUPTION CHIEF'S CONVICTION AND PUBLIC REGISTER LISTING VIOLATED RIGHTS (24 Apr. 2025)
The case of Sytnyk v. Ukraine (application no. 16497/20) concerned proceedings brought against a high-level public official in the field of anticorruption for accepting gifts – specifically holidays – in breach of the Code of Administrative Offences. He was found guilty in 2019 and his name was included, indefinitely, in a public register of corrupt officials.
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section) held, unanimously, that there had been violations of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), and Article 18 (limitation on use of restriction of rights) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court found that the administrative-offence proceedings against Mr Sytnyk were seriously flawed.
Firstly, there were justified fears concerning the impartiality of the trial judge, who was a witness in a parallel criminal investigation, creating potential leverage for the prosecution.
Secondly, the domestic courts failed to address the applicant’s substantive arguments regarding the reliability of the decisive prosecution witness’s inconsistent statements, which were potentially made under pressure.
Furthermore, defense witness evidence was disregarded, and the burden of proof was arbitrarily distributed, depriving the applicant of any practical opportunity to effectively challenge the charges against him. The calculation of the alleged "gift value" was also found to be arbitrary.
Regarding Article 8, the Court held that the indefinite publication of the applicant’s details on the "Corrupt Officials Register" constituted an interference with his private life, seriously prejudicing his professional and social reputation. This interference was not justified because the underlying proceedings leading to his conviction were flawed (violating Article 6. Moreover, the indefinite retention of his name on the register, without adequate provision for re-evaluation or removal, was disproportionate and deprived him of any means to defend his moral and professional integrity.
Finally, the Court found a violation of Article 18 in conjunction with Articles 6 and 8. It concluded that cumulative circumstances – including investigations into high-ranking officials (the Minister of the Interior and the Prosecutor General), their manifest hostility towards the applicant, the vulnerability of the key witness to pressure from the Prosecutor General's Office, media leaks of inflated holiday costs attributed to the applicant, and the seriously flawed judicial process – indicated that the predominant purpose behind the applicant's prosecution and the subsequent listing on the register was not genuinely to prevent corruption. Instead, it was primarily a personal attack aimed at discrediting his moral and professional integrity.
Academic & Professional Opportunities
Call for Submissions: Digitalization of Birth Registration in Africa, African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child | Submission Deadline: June 10, 2025
Writing Competition, Global Health Law Student Writing Competition, ASIL Global Health Law Interest Group & Journal of Global Health Law | Apply by August 31, 2025
Call for Abstracts: Inaugural Australia-New Zealand Business and Human Rights Research Workshop | Melbourne, Australia | Submission Deadline: May 18, 2025
Call for Paper Proposals, Hague Yearbook of International Law, Volume 39: Symposium on Territory in International Law. Deadline: June 30, 2025
Call For Papers: European Yearbook of Constitutional Law, Volume 8 (2026) - Social Rights and Constitutional Justice | Proposal Deadline: June 1, 2025 | Complete Paper Deadline: December 1, 2025
Call for Papers, ICC IAG Research Forum 2025 | Deadline: July 31, 2025
Call for Papers, Kabarak Law Review, Volume 4 | Apply by July 31, 2025 (for other submissions)
Call for Papers, Yale Journal of International Law (YJIL) Online | Deadlines: June 1, August 1, October 1, 2025 (for Forum Pieces by current law students; rolling submissions for other categories)
Call for Abstracts: “Evolving Rights: Social Rights in the Era of Climate Change and Digital Revolution” Conference | Leiden, The Netherlands | Dates: September 4-5, 2025 | Submit your abstract by June 30, 2025
Call for Applications: Summer Course in Human Rights in Arabic, Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, Saint Joseph University, United Nations | Beirut, Lebanon | Dates: July 21-25, 2025 | Application Deadline: May 22, 2025
Advanced Human Rights Course: Women's Rights in Africa, Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria | Hybrid (Online & Pretoria, South Africa) | Apply by July 10, 2025 (for scholarships); general registration open until later dates
Call for Applications: PhD Course: "Selected trends and developments in international human rights practice", Norwegian Centre for Human Rights | Oslo, Norway | October 6-8, 2025 | Apply by May 18, 2025
PhD Program, PhD in International and European Law, Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic | Apply by May 31, 2025
Doctoral Position, Doctoral Research Positions (12 Positions), IDP BHR | Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany | Apply by June 1, 2025
PhD Studentship: UCC - Matheson Innovation Partnership, University College Cork - School of Law | Cork, Ireland | Funding: €25,000 per annum (fees fully funded) | Apply by June 20, 2025
PhD Research Fellowship in “Inequalities in Education”, Centre for Research on Equality in Education (CREATE), University of Oslo | Oslo, Norway | Duration: 3 years (fulltime) | Apply by May 21, 2025
Associate Professor in International Politics with focus on Security Studies, University of Southern Denmark | Odense, Denmark | Apply by June 7, 2025
Senior Lecturer in Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Uppsala University | Uppsala, Sweden | Apply by June 17, 2025
Call for Applications: UN Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples - Participation in 2025 Treaty Body Sessions | July - September 2025 | Apply by May 26, 2025
Humanitarian Affairs Intern, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs | Doha, Qatar | Apply by June 14, 2025
Human Rights Intern, Inter-American Human Rights Commission | Washington DC and Country Offices | Apply by May 30, 2025
Legal Affairs Intern, UN Department of Management | New York, USA | Apply by June 14, 2025
Internship, Political Affairs Intern, UN Office for Disarmament Affairs | Vienna, Austria | Apply by May 18, 2025
Human Rights - Office of the Director, Civil Society Team, UN Human Rights Council and Treaty Mechanisms Division | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by May 19, 2025
Legal Intern, UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate | New York, USA | Apply by May 19, 2025
Implementation Support and International Development, International Civil Aviation Organization | Montreal, Canada | Apply by August 25, 2025
Political Affairs Intern, UN Verification Mission in Colombia | Bogota, Colombia | Apply by September 15, 2025
Political Affairs Intern: UNOCC Management Support | New York, USA | Apply by April 7, 2026
Political Affairs Intern: Information analysis and data visualization, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs-Department of Peace Operations-Shared Structure | New York, USA | Apply by April 8, 2026
Internship, UN Special Procedures Branch | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by December 30, 2025
Intern - Human Rights, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Bangkok, Thailand | Apply by October 7, 2025
Intern - Humanitarian Affairs, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs | New York, USA | Apply by December 18, 2025
Internship - Database and ERP Administration (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Internship - Immediate Office of the Registrar (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Internship - Chambers (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Internship, Legal Intern, UNEP | Nairobi, Kenya | Duration: 6 months | Apply by May 22, 2025
Intern, Humanitarian Affairs Officer, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs | Riyadh, Saudi Arabia | Apply by May 30, 2025
Intern, Human Rights (Social Media), UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by May 26, 2025
Intern, Political Affairs, UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate | New York, USA | Apply by May 26, 2025
Political Affairs Intern, UN Office for Disarmament Affairs | New York, USA | Apply by June 8, 2025
Visiting Professional - Chambers (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Visiting Professional - Chambers/Case Law Database (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Visiting Professional - Secretariat of the Assembly of States Parties (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Visiting Professional - Victims Participation and Reparation Section - Field Unit (Funded), International Criminal Court | The Hague, NL | Apply by May 18, 2025
Legal National Consultant, UN Human Settlements Programme | Damascus, Syria | Duration: 12 months | Apply by May 20, 2025
Human Rights Consultant, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Colombo, Sri Lanka | Duration: 6 months | Apply by May 20, 2025
Consultant, External Evaluation of SALW Project, OAS Department of Procurement Services and Management Oversight | Remotely | Apply by May 22, 2025
Project and Grant Management Consultant, OAS Department of Procurement Services and Management Oversight | Washington D.C. | Apply by May 22, 2025
Consultant, External Evaluation of PIDA Project, OAS Department of Procurement Services and Management Oversight | Remotely | Apply by May 27, 2025
Consultant, Communication Strategy & Resource Mobilization, Inter-American Commission of Women | Washington D.C. | Apply by May 22, 2025
Consultant, OAS Department for the Promotion of Peace and Coordination with Subnational Governments | Washington D.C. | Apply by May 16, 2025
General Coordinator Consultant, OAS Department of Sustainable Development | Lima, Peru | Apply by May 27, 2025
Claims Assistant, UN Office at Geneva | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by May 27, 2025
Legal Assistant, International Court of Justice | The Hague, Netherlands | Apply by June 8, 2025
Human Rights Specialist, IACHR | Washington DC | Apply by May 26, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by June 19, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Phnom-Penh, Cambodia | Apply by June 21, 2025
Legal Officer, UN DPPA-SPM cluster II | New York, USA | Apply by June 27, 2025
Human Rights Officer / Fact Finding Team Leader, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Panama City, Panama | Apply by May 18, 2025
Political Affairs Officer, UN Office of the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Sudan | Addis Ababa, Ethiopia | Apply by May 23, 2025
Political Affairs Officer, UN DPPA-SPM cluster II | New York, USA | Apply by May 28, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Maputo, Mozambique | Apply by May 28, 2025
Political Affairs Officer, UN Office for Disarmament Affairs | New York, USA | Apply by June 6, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Ramallah, OPT | Apply by June 8, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Gaza, OPT | Apply by June 8, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Pemba, Mozambique | Apply by June 12, 2025
Representative, Human Rights, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Nouakchott, Mauritania | Apply by June 15, 2025
Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Beirut, Lebanon | Apply by May 22, 2025
Senior Gender Affairs Officer, UN Office of the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Sudan | Addis Ababa, Ethiopia | Apply by May 23, 2025
Senior Legal Officer, UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the DR Congo | Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo | Apply by May 19, 2025
Senior Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by May 21, 2025
Deputy Director, Global Operations Division, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Geneva, Switzerland | Apply by June 5, 2025
Regional Director, Americas, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Panama City, Panama | Apply by June 7, 2025
Regional Director, Americas, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | Panama City, Panama | Apply by June 7, 2025
News from the Facts and Norms Institute
UN REPORT ON AI AND EDUCATION CITES THE FACTS AND NORMS INSTITUTE'S CONTRIBUTION (15 May 2025)
Dr. Farida Shaheed, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education.
GENEVA, 15 May 2025 – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Dr Farida Shaheed, has cited the Facts and Norms Institute (FNI) in her report to the UN General Assembly on Human Rights, Artificial Intelligence, and Education.
FNI’s ideas echoed in the UN Report
The Special Rapporteur’s analysis reflects several themes articulated in the study authored by Professor Henrique Napoleão Alves and submitted by the Facts and Norms Institute to the UN in 2024:
Subjects covered by the FNI study | How Reflected in the UN Report |
Expansion and Types of AI in Education (v.g. intelligent tutoring, writing support, learning analytics, references the Council of Europe's thematic categories) | The UN Report details AI applications such as generative AI, intelligent tutoring systems, writing support, immersive learning, and references the Council of Europe's thematic categories |
Impact on Learners & Teachers: Tracking, Feedback, Customization (Citing UNESCO) | Personalized learning through AI tools tracking student progress, providing feedback, and tailoring learning paths is discussed as an opportunity |
Challenges: Simplistic Learning Models, Memorization over Critical Thinking | The UN Report warns that AI can inhibit critical thinking and that education needs to shift towards higher-order skills, originality, and critical reasoning |
Challenges: Intrusive & Discriminatory E-Proctoring | The UN Report discusses e-proctoring as a facial recognition technology variant used in higher education, noting concerns about its intrusive nature and lack of observance of data protection rules |
Challenges: Limited True Personalization, Undermining Collaboration | The UN report notes AI cannot replicate emotional support or interpersonal connection and that AI may decrease face-to-face interactions, impeding social skill development |
Challenges: Harming/Unfair Predictive Analytics & Privacy Compromise | The UN report details issues with predictive analytics leading to biased outcomes (UK exam algorithm, Wisconsin, Nevada examples) and privacy compromises |
Challenges: Undermined Student & Parental Agency | The UN Report discusses how commercial AI providers can reduce autonomy of traditional actors and recommends empowering parents and students with information |
Challenges: Limited AI Applications for Children with Disabilities | The UN Report notes concerns that AI systems can discriminate against individuals with disabilities and stresses the need for AI tools to address inclusion for students with disabilities |
Challenges: High-Risk AI, Data Misuse, Biases, Discrimination | The UN Report extensively discusses algorithmic biases, discrimination based on race, gender, disability, and the risks of data misuse in high-risk applications |
Challenges: Potentially Harmful/Unethical Identification of Learner's Emotional State | The UN Report mentions "emotion recognition software" used to monitor facial expressions and determine moods, highlighting this as a concern. |
Challenges: AI Monitoring & Digital Safeguarding – Privacy, Consent, Freedom of Expression | The UN Report discusses issues with consent in educational settings, data ownership, surveillance, and how social media surveillance software can undermine student freedoms |
Shortage of Impartial Evidence on Tech Impact | The UN Report states "actual impact...is unclear," "overwhelming majority of claimed evidence is produced by developers," and calls for "independent, interdisciplinary research" |
Accessibility & Digital Divide | The UN Report dedicates significant space to the digital divide and strategies to close it |
Focus on Learning Outcomes over Digital Inputs | The UN Report states AI use should be "pedagogically justified" and "enhance learning outcomes," and bring "added value to quality education" |
Need for Regulation & Quality Control | The Report emphasizes ethical frameworks, robust legal/policy frameworks, monitoring/evaluation, and the State's regulatory role |
Business Practices of Tech Companies & Ethical Concerns | The UN Report discusses the aggressive push of commercial AI, profit motives, and calls for regulating tech companies. |
Importance of a Balanced Curriculum (Arts & Humanities) (Citing UNESCO) | The UN Report implicitly supports this by emphasizing originality, critical thinking, creativity, and ethical reasoning – skills often cultivated in humanities. |
Concern about Job Loss due to AI in Education | The UN Report explicitly states "concern that widespread AI adoption and automation in education could lead to large-scale job losses." |
Evolving Role of Teachers (Not Replacement by AI) | The UN Report stresses teachers' central role, AI as support not replacement, and human oversight. |
Social media/Smartphone usage & Negative Impacts (Physical, Mental, Academic) | The UN Report links increased social media/smartphone use to mental health crises, notes information overload impacts, and recommends addressing adverse effects of screen time |
Proposed Solutions (Reducing screen time, limiting phone usage in schools, etc.) | The UN Report's recommendation to "[a]ddress the adverse effects of screen time and AI on children’s physical, mental and emotional well-being" aligns with the need for interventions. |
Debate around Causal Claims & Need for Action Regardless (FNI's discussion of Jonathan Haidt's work and his critics) | The UN Report notes that "[w]hile there is not yet a consensus on the exact causation..., [a] precautionary approach is necessary." This captures FNI's summary of the debate and call for precaution. |
Precautionary Approach to AI in Education (FNI's overarching conclusion) | The UN Report concludes the section on student well-being by stating that "[a] precautionary approach is necessary, particularly within educational settings." |
Special acknowledgments
The UN Report particularly acknowledges the analysis of the Facts and Norms Institute on two key topics: Concerns over AI-driven Job Losses in Education and the Need for a Precautionary Approach to Student Well-being and Mental Health.
Paragraph 59 of the UN document notes:
"There is also concern that widespread AI adoption and automation in education could lead to large-scale job losses, especially in low-income countries and areas already facing difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers."
The Report expressly attributes this concern to the contributions by the Facts and Norms Institute, the Russian Federation, and the National Confederation of Education Workers. FNI's study had indeed flagged "job loss due to AI in education and other areas" as a significant issue requiring careful scrutiny.
Moreover, the Special Rapporteur’s report, in its discussion on "Student well-being and mental health" (paragraph 76), states:
"Young people’s mental health crisis – a rise in anxiety, depression and self-harm – is often linked to the increased use of social media130 and the widespread adoption of smartphones and social media starting in the early 2010s. While there is not yet a consensus on the exact causation and extent of harm, the primary question should be whether there is sufficient evidence to deem AI, smartphones and social media technologies safe for children and adolescents. A precautionary approach is necessary, particularly within educational settings."
The Report explicitly attributes this perspective to the "Submission by Facts and Norms Institute." This directly reflects FNI's argument for prioritizing student safety amidst technological uncertainties.
Expert reaction
“Seeing our research woven into an official UN document confirms that a Global-South voice on AI and human rights is part of the international debate,” said Professor Henrique Napoleão Alves, who spearheaded the Institute’s contribution.
"Our submission highlighted the human rights implications of AI, calling for a careful, evidence-based, and precautionary approach to its impact on student well-being. We also raised socio-economic concerns, such as the risk of job displacement for educators. Seeing these points echoed at this level reinforces the value of independent, critical academic input in shaping global policy on emerging technologies."
About the Facts and Norms Institute
The Facts and Norms Institute is an independent academic institution based in the Global South. The Institute’s mission is to promote education based on reason, justice, human rights and the pursuit of peace. The Institute has extensive collaboration with international organizations. For more information about the Institute’s activities and projects, please visit www.factsandnorms.com
Comments