Author: Human Rights Watch

The Australian government’s proposed amendments to its sanctions regulations are an important step toward accountability for Taliban officials and others responsible for serious abuses in Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch said in a recent submission to the Australian government.

The amended Autonomous Sanctions Regulations introduce new listing criteria that are specific to Afghanistan and will enable the Australian government to impose targeted sanctions and travel bans on individuals and entities in Afghanistan who are engaging in, responsible for, or complicit in the oppression of women, girls, and minority groups, or oppression in general. It will also permit sanctions against anyone undermining good governance and the rule of law in Afghanistan.

“It’s crucial for the Australian government to take action against Taliban leaders responsible for the assault on women and girls’ rights and other egregious abuses in Afghanistan,” said Daniela Gavshon, Australia director at Human Rights Watch. “The amended sanctions regulations will allow Australia to join with other countries already taking steps to oppose the Taliban’s widespread and systematic oppression.”

The Taliban, since taking over the country in August 2021, have deepened their attack on the rights of women and girls, which amounts to the crime against humanity of gender persecution. UN human rights experts and Afghan women’s rights activists have described the Taliban’s systematic and structural violations on women and girls as “gender apartheid.”

Taliban authorities have also increasingly restricted civic space, carried out broad censorship, and detained and tortured journalists and activists. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Afghans, and people who do not conform to rigid gender norms in Afghanistan have faced an increasingly desperate situation and grave threats to their safety and lives under the Taliban. In addition, groups affiliated with the Islamic State (ISIS) have carried out bombings targeting ethnic Hazara Shia and others, killing and injuring hundreds of people.

“The Australian government should use targeted sanctions as an important foreign policy tool against the Taliban to press for accountability for serious abuses,” Gavshon said. “Imposing sanctions on abusive leaders is one of several measures that can raise the cost of committing human rights violations in Afghanistan and elsewhere.”

(Beirut) – Lebanese authorities released Hannibal Gaddafi, the son of Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi, on November 10, 2025, ending nearly 10 years of arbitrary detention without trial, Human Rights Watch said today. While judicial authorities’ decision to end Gaddafi’s unlawful treatment is a long overdue step in the right direction, they should also formally drop all baseless charges against him and provide adequate compensation for his unlawful detention, Human Rights Watch said. 

The judicial investigator in the case, Zaher Hamadeh, first ordered Gaddafi’s release on October 17, but it was initially conditioned on the payment of a US$11 million bail and a two-month travel ban. Following an appeal by Gaddafi’s lawyers, judicial authorities lowered his bail to $900,000 and lifted the travel ban on November 6. Authorities released Gaddafi on November 10 but have not formally withdrawn charges relating to “concealing information” about the 1978 disappearance of Lebanese cleric Imam Moussa al-Sadr in Libya, when Gaddafi was two years old, according to two of his lawyers. 

“Hannibal Gaddafi’s release from prison was a necessary step, but it comes a decade too late,” said Adam Coogle, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “An important next step will be to formally end the sham legal case against Gaddafi and compensate him for this miscarriage of justice.”  

As of August 2025, nearly 80 percent of Lebanon’s prisoners and detainees were being held without a prison sentence, according to numbers provided to Human Rights Watch by the Lebanon’s General Directorate of Internal Security Forces.

A Human Rights Watch researcher visited Gaddafi in August 2025 at the General Directorate of Internal Security Forces’ Information Branch Headquarters in Beirut, where he was held. It was the first time an international human rights organization visited Gaddafi while he was in Lebanese detention.

Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces arrested Gaddafi in December 2015 on apparently unsubstantiated allegations that he was withholding information about the disappearance of al-Sadr in Libya in 1978 along with two companions. The cleric’s fate remains a sensitive political issue in Lebanon. 

Prior to his detention, Gaddafi had been primarily living in Syria with his family after fleeing Libya in 2011, during the uprising against his father’s government. But in 2015, armed men kidnapped Gaddafi in Syria near the Lebanese border after reportedly luring him to what he believed was a newspaper interview. In December 2015, Hamadeh issued an arrest warrant for Gaddafi, formally charging him with concealing information on al-Sadr’s disappearance in 2016, according to two of his lawyers. 

No one should be held for 10 years in prison without trial, Human Rights Watch said. Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Lebanon is a party, maintains that “anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.” Even if released, everyone has a right to be tried without an “undue delay.” Individuals who have been subject to unlawful arrest or detention “shall have an enforceable right to compensation,” according to the ICCPR. 

“Lebanese authorities should investigate and hold those responsible for Gaddafi’s ordeal accountable,” Coogle said. “They should also ensure that the rule of law is respected and that the judiciary is independent so that others do not suffer the same fate.”

 

• Turkish authorities are increasingly restricting the legal residency of Uyghurs seeking safety from the Chinese government.
• Until recently, Uyghurs who escaped repression at home felt safe in Türkiye, but as China-Türkiye relations warm, and the Erdoğan government cracks down on refugees and migrants, many are growing fearful.
• The Turkish government should stop deporting Uyghurs to third countries and recognize them as refugees. Other governments should halt transferring Uyghurs to Türkiye and consider resettling Uyghur refugees from Türkiye.

(Istanbul) – Turkish authorities are increasingly restricting the legal residency of Uyghurs seeking safety from the Chinese government, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 51-page report, “Protected No More: Uyghurs in Türkiye,” finds that Uyghurs’ previous access to international protection status, and indeed preferential treatment under the Turkish immigration system, is being nullified as authorities arbitrarily mark their police and immigration records with “restriction codes,” denoting them a “public security threat.” The government detains some Uyghurs in inhumane and degrading conditions, and coerces them to sign voluntary return forms, putting them at risk of removal to third countries that have extradition agreements with China.

“Until recently, Uyghurs who escaped repression at home felt safe in Türkiye, but as China-Türkiye relations warm, and the Erdoğan government cracks down on refugees and migrants, many are growing fearful,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Some Uyghurs say they don’t dare leave their homes for fear of arrests and being sent to deportation centers, while others are undertaking perilous journeys elsewhere in search of safety.”

Human Rights Watch interviewed 13 Uyghurs, 6 lawyers, and a Turkish government official knowledgeable about the situation, and reviewed Turkish government policies and documents, such as deportation decisions, case records, and circular orders. Human Rights Watch also reviewed publicly available cases of 33 Uyghurs who were held in deportation centers between December 2018 and October 2025.

“Now, because I don’t have any legal documents, I cannot even go outside because of fear, even for groceries because I don’t want to end up in the deportation center again.” said a Uyghur whose residence permit was arbitrarily canceled by Turkish authorities.

Under the immigration crackdown, Uyghurs, like other refugees and migrants in Türkiye, are often assigned “restriction codes” (typically code “G87”) that can lead to a cascade of negative and often devastating consequences. These include rejection of international protection applications or another status entitling an individual to residency, as well as denial of citizenship. Uyghurs have effectively become “irregular migrants” and some eventually are ordered deported. When they interact with a police or immigration officers for any reason, they can be sent to a deportation center.

The Uyghurs and their lawyers that were interviewed said that Uyghurs are subjected to ill-treatment in detention centers and often pressured to sign voluntary return forms, allowing them to be repatriated or sent to another country. At least three of the Uyghurs interviewed had signed the form, and one of them was deported to the United Arab Emirates, which has an extradition treaty with China.

Human Rights Watch wrote to the Migration Management President seeking comments on the report findings and information about Uyghurs in Türkiye on September 23, and again on October 27, 2025, and received no answer.

The assignment of restriction codes is linked to the implementation of Türkiye’s Law 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection. How and why restriction codes are assigned is unclear and in practice their use seems to reach far beyond what was intended under the law. They are often imposed without reasonable justification, concrete evidence, or a clear causal link to wrongdoing.

Under Turkish law, individuals can appeal deportation decisions.Human Rights Watch reviewed five court decisions from 2024 and 2025 concerning deportation order appeals by Uyghurs. In each case, the court upheld the deportation order without saying what the individuals had done that constituted the alleged threat to public security and order. Worryingly, in each case the court ruled that the prohibition of refoulement did not apply, contending that the applicant Uyghur had not established they would be at risk of ill-treatment and torture if sent to China. A lawyer who has lodged many such appeals said that judges can often issue “a negative decision [dismissing an appeal] when they see restriction codes, just to be safe.”

The Turkish government is obligated to respect the international law principle of nonrefoulement, which prohibits countries from returning anyone to a place where they would face a real risk of persecution, torture or other serious ill-treatment, a threat to life, or other comparable serious human rights violations.

A simple complaint from a neighbor or being ensnared in a criminal case—even though later acquitted—can result in decisions to apply the restriction codes. Turkish authorities also base these codes on intelligence provided by other governments. In some cases, the Chinese government submitted lists of people it brands as “terrorists,” a term it conflates with peaceful activism or expression of Uyghur identity in Xinjiang.

Since 2017, the Chinese government has subjected Uyghurs to severe human rights abuses that Human Rights Watch and independent legal experts have concluded amount to crimes against humanity. If returned to China, especially from a country such as Türkiye that the Chinese government deems “sensitive,” Uyghurs may face detention, interrogation, torture, and other cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment.

“The Turkish government should respect the principle of nonrefoulement, immediately stop all deportations of Uyghurs to third countries, and recognize Uyghurs as refugees on a prima facie basis,” Pearson said. “Other governments should halt transferring Uyghurs to Türkiye, as it can no longer be considered a safe third country for Uyghurs, and should consider resettling Uyghur refugees from Türkiye.”

Selected Quotes:

“I was treated as if I was guilty. I spent one year in detention…. I tried several times to renew my residence permit but failed. The immigration office told me I had 10 days to leave the country, after telling me that my latest residence permit application was rejected. Then, I decided to leave the country. I had my Chinese passport, so I booked a flight to a third country that would be a path for me to go to safety in Europe. Turkish authorities detained me at the airport and put me on a two-year entry ban.” 
– A Uyghur who was arbitrarily detained by Turkish authorities because of a restriction code and left Türkiye afterwards, June 2025.

“The conditions were very poor. In one instance, the facility did not provide proper food for nine days straight. In one deportation center, I slept on the cement floor for a week where I shared a single blanket with two other people. There were 20 people in a small cell where there was no sense of hygiene. I witnessed people who got infested with lice.” 
– A Uyghur who spent several months at various deportation centers, May 2025.

“In some instances, people who had a call with someone suspicious can get assigned a code. For example, there was a Uyghur who was detained on suspicion of “terrorism” but then released unconditionally, as there was a lack of evidence. However, during the investigation, everyone who had a phone call with this person got a G87 code.” 
– A lawyer who works on cases of Uyghurs, July 2025.

“There are many cases where the government cancelled the long-term residence permits of Uyghurs and gave them a humanitarian residence permit [instead]. The decision is arbitrary. And some of my clients’ humanitarian residence permits are also cancelled or denied renewal. In such situations, people can be held in those centers for up to one year. Then they will be released without legal status. Then, after a couple of days, another police checkpoint can lead them to detention once again. It is … a horrible vicious cycle for those who don’t have proper documents. Türkiye has increasingly become an unlivable place for Uyghurs.” 
– A lawyer who works on cases of Uyghurs, June 2025.

The trial of Roger Lumbala Tshitenga, a former rebel leader and former minister in the Democratic Republic of Congo, begins on Wednesday, November 12, 2025, before the Paris Criminal Court. Lumbala is charged with crimes against humanity allegedly committed in North Kivu and Ituri provinces between 2002 and 2003, including summary executions, torture and other inhuman treatment, rape, pillages, and enslavement, including sexual slavery.

French authorities arrested Lumbala in Paris in December 2020 and indicted him in November 2023 as a matter of universal jurisdiction. Under this legal principle, states can investigate and prosecute those responsible for grave crimes regardless of where they were committed or the nationality of the suspects or their victims.

This is the first universal jurisdiction trial for atrocities committed in Congo by a Congolese national, an important step for justice and a testament to the perseverance of victims and survivors.

Congo today remains embroiled in a conflict that has spanned over 30 years. Fighting between August 1998 and July 2003 involved the Congolese government against the Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD) armed group and several national armed forces, including Rwanda, Uganda, and Burundi. Lumbala founded and led the Congolese Rally for Democracy-National (RCD-National), an armed group that Uganda supported to fight against the Congolese government, which had its own allies in a war that left over one million dead.

Lumbala, 67, is accused of complicity in crimes against humanity during “Effacer le tableau” (“Erase the board”), a military operation carried out by the RCD-National between October 2002 and January 2003 to capture the resource-rich territory of Beni in North Kivu province.

Lumbala’s trial is a stark reminder of the persistent impunity for atrocities in Congo; for more than three decades, the near absence of accountability has contributed to recurrent cycles of abuse. Governments should support and strengthen justice efforts for Congo, both domestic and international, and they should continue to pursue cases under universal jurisdiction to bolster victims’ access to justice.

• The Venezuelan nationals the US government sent to El Salvador in March and April were tortured and subjected to other abuses, including sexual violence.
• The cases of torture and ill-treatment of Venezuelans in El Salvador were not isolated incidents by rogue guards or riot police, but rather systematic violations.
• The Trump administration is complicit in torture, enforced disappearance, and other grave violations, and should stop sending people to El Salvador or any other country where they face a risk of torture.

(Washington, DC) – The Venezuelan nationals the United States government sent to El Salvador in March and April 2025 were tortured and subjected to other abuses, including sexual violence, Human Rights Watch and Cristosal said in a report released today. 

The 81-page report, “‘You Have Arrived in Hell’: Torture and Other Abuses Against Venezuelans in El Salvador’s Mega Prison,” provides a comprehensive account of the treatment of these people in El Salvador. In March and April 2025, the US government sent 252 Venezuelans, including dozens of asylum seekers, to the Center for Terrorism Confinement (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, CECOT) mega prison in El Salvador, despite credible reports of serious human rights abuses in El Salvador’s prisons. The Venezuelans were subject to refoulement—being sent to where they would face torture or persecution—arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, torture, inhumane detention conditions and, in some cases, sexual violence.

“The Trump administration paid El Salvador millions of dollars to arbitrarily detain Venezuelans who were then abused by Salvadoran security forces on a near-daily basis,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “The Trump administration is complicit in torture, enforced disappearance, and other grave violations, and should stop sending people to El Salvador or any other country where they face a risk of torture.”

Between March and September 2025, researchers interviewed 40 of the Venezuelans who had been held in CECOT, and 150 of their relatives, lawyers, and acquaintances. Researchers reviewed photographs of injuries, criminal record databases, documents related to these individuals’ immigration status in the United States, and data released by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on its deportations. Researchers also corroborated detainees’ allegations through forensic analyses provided by the Independent Forensic Expert Group and open-source research by the University of California, Berkeley Human Rights Center’s Investigation Lab.

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal requested information from the US and Salvadoran governments about these detentions, but received no response.

The US government reportedly provided at least US$4.7 million to El Salvador including to cover costs of detaining the men. Some Venezuelans sent to El Salvador had been seeking asylum in the United States after fleeing persecution in Venezuela.

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal found that roughly half the Venezuelans sent to CECOT had no criminal history, and only 3 percent had been convicted in the United States of a violent or potentially violent offense. Additional background checks showed that many had not been convicted of crimes in Venezuela or other Latin American countries where they had lived. 

Relatives and lawyers said that at least 62 of the Venezuelans were removed amid their asylum process in the United States and despite having passed their initial “credible fear” screening, which gave them the right to a full hearing on their asylum claims before an immigration judge. Three said they had arrived in the United States after being fully vetted and processed through the Safe Mobility Offices program established by the US government.

The US and Salvadoran governments repeatedly refused to disclose information about the Venezuelans’ fate or whereabouts in what amounted to enforced disappearances under international law. Cristosal helped relatives to file 76 habeas corpus petitions before El Salvador’s Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court, which failed to rule on their cases. 

The people held in CECOT were subjected to regular and severe physical, verbal, and psychological abuse by Salvadoran prison guards and riot police. Under international human rights law, the abuses constituted cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and in many cases, torture. Prison guards and riot police regularly beat Venezuelans including during daily cell searches, for minor rule violations—such as speaking loudly or showering at the wrong time—or for requesting medical assistance. 

“Guards came to search the cells every day,” one of them said. “They took us all out of our cells, made us kneel, handcuffed our hands behind our backs and put our arms on our heads, and beat us with batons, kicks and fists … and then left us kneeling for 30 or 40 minutes.”

Several former detainees said that officers beat them after they spoke with International Committee of the Red Cross staff members during their May visit to CECOT. One of them said guards “kept hitting me, in the stomach, and when I tried to breathe, I started to choke on the blood.” 

Three people held in CECOT said they were subjected to sexual violence. One said four guards sexually abused him and forced him to perform oral sex on one of them. “They played with their batons on my body,” he said. 

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal concluded that the cases of torture and ill-treatment of Venezuelans in CECOT were not isolated incidents by rogue guards or riot police, but rather systematic violations. The abuses appear to have been part of a practice designed to subjugate, humiliate, and discipline detainees, Human Rights Watch and Cristosal said. The brutality and repeated nature of the abuses also appear to indicate that guards and riot police acted on the belief that their superiors either supported or, at the very least, tolerated their abusive acts.

The Venezuelans were held in inhumane conditions, with scarce and inadequate food, poor hygiene and sanitation, limited access to health care and medicine, and no access to recreation or education.

In mid-July, the Salvadoran government sent the 252 people to Venezuela in exchange for 10 US citizens or permanent residents who had been detained in many cases arbitrarily. Venezuela has experienced a humanitarian crisis and systematic human rights violations under the Nicolás Maduro administration, which have compelled nearly 8 million people to flee. 

“The US government has not been linked to acts of systematic torture on this scale since Abu Ghraib and the network of clandestine prisons during the war on terror,” said Noah Bullock, executive director of Cristosal. “Disappearing people into the hands of a government that tortures them runs against the very principles that historically made the United States a nation of laws.”

Following an appeal by 49 rights groups, a cross-regional group of states requested an urgent United Nations Human Rights Council session on atrocities in North Darfur’s capital, El Fasher, in Sudan.

The session, planned for November 14, follows reports and images of mass atrocities by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which is battling the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)following the takeover of El Fasher on October 26.

Human Rights Watch analyzed dozens of videos filmed by the RSF showing fighters celebrating over dead people, executing apparent civilians, including injured people, and taunting people. One video shows an RSF soldier executing an older man in civilian clothes inside the Faculty of Medicine in a room already littered with bodies. The UN reported that the RSF massacred patients and staff in Al-Saudi Maternity Hospital.

The horror of these appalling abuses is tragically familiar. The RSF has committed crimes against humanity throughout the current conflict, including an ethnic cleansing campaign in West Darfur in 2023, and widespread sexual violence in Khartoum and South Kordofan.

The risk of ongoing violations in North Darfur and the Kordofan region persists. The UN has recently warned of “emerging of serious violations in the context of the RSF capture of Bara in North Kordofan.”

The UN and the African Union have failed to act to protect civilians and to close the accountability gap. Too many governments have been reluctant to sanction those most responsible or confront those providing military support to the RSF, notably the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This latest wave of atrocities needs to mark a turning point.

The special session in Geneva offers an opportunity to spotlight abuses, step up accountability efforts, and apply pressure on the RSF and their backers. It should center the voices of those affected by the crisis. The Human Rights Council should request—and adequately resource—a special investigation by the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan into atrocities around El Fasher and the role of external actors in fueling them. It should also ask them to transmit relevant evidence to the International Criminal Court to support its investigations.

Global and regional leaders and bodies should call on UAE to suspend its support to the RSF, sanction the RSF leadership, and deploy a physical protection mission. Anything short of this will risk more lives and further empower a force that has for years deliberately terrorized and targeted civilians.

The United States Supreme Court last week allowed the implementation of a discriminatory Trump administration policy requiring new passports to reflect an individual’s sex assigned at birth.

The policy follows President Trump’s executive order instructing federal agencies to recognize only two sexes, male and female, and declaring these fixed at birth. The US State Department subsequently stopped processing passport applications for updated or nonbinary gender markers that do not match a person’s sex assigned at birth.

This approach reverses decades of progress allowing passports to more accurately reflect an individual’s gender identity. US passports only began including gender markers in 1977. Since 1992, the State Department had permitted individuals to update their gender marker with proof of gender reassignment surgery, and in 2010 it relaxed that onerous surgical requirement to allow updates with proof of “appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition.” In 2022, the State Department created an “X” gender marker for nonbinary individuals and others who did not want their documentation to classify them as male or female.

Requiring passports to reflect sex assigned at birth rather than gender identity does not serve any compelling purpose, and it forces transgender and intersex individuals to carry passports that may be inconsistent with their other documentation and the way they identify and present themselves in the world.

It also potentially puts them at risk of harassment or violence when they travel abroad. Advocates for Trans Equality’s recent survey of 84,000 transgender adults in the United States, for example, found that 22 percent reported harassment, assault, or denial of services when their identification did not match their gender expression.

The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and other experts said that a person should be able to assert their own gender identity, including a nonbinary identity, for use on identification. For this reason, many countries have recently reflected gender identity or allowed nonbinary gender markers on legal documentation, including passports.

The Trump administration’s policy strips away another basic protection for transgender and intersex people. It also conveys the dangerous idea that requiring transgender and intersex people to share their sex assigned at birth is harmless. Lawmakers should swiftly act to remedy this violation of the rights to privacy and nondiscrimination and restore the ability to travel freely and safely regardless of gender identity.

Many of her videos showed laughter, music, and the color of daily life in Tonka, her hometown on the edge of Mali’s desert near Timbuktu. On TikTok, 20-year-old Mariam Cissé, besides sharing moments of joy, often voiced support for the Malian armed forces in a region ravaged by armed conflict since 2012. Last week, those videos, viewed by nearly 100,000 followers, had deadly consequences.

On November 6, Islamist fighters, allegedly from the Al Qaeda-linked Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wa al-Muslimeen, or known as JNIM), abducted Cissé while she was filming at a local fair in Tonka. The next day, they brought her back to Tonka’s central square and executed her in front of terrified residents, accusing her of collaborating with the Malian army. 

A 30-year-old phone seller said that on November 7, he saw a group of heavily armed Islamist fighters heading toward the town center on motorbikes. He recognized Cissé on the back of one. “We followed them,” he said. “And when we reached the square, we heard gunshots.” The man said the fighters declared the execution a warning to anyone supporting the Malian army.

Residents said there are no Malian security forces stationed in Tonka, a town of 53,000, and that the nearest military base is in Goundam, 31 kilometers away. “Soldiers came on November 8, after Mariam had already been buried,” another local resident said.

The JNIM has recently tightened its grip over Mali. Since early September, the armed group has besieged the nation’s capital, Bamako, and cut off fuel supplies, disrupting transportation and access to electricity, and forcing the military junta to temporarily shut down schools and universities. 

All parties to the armed conflict in Mali are bound by international humanitarian law, notably Common Article 3 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and customary laws of war. The laws of war prohibit summary executions as war crimes.

Islamist armed groups and Malian security forces and allied militias have long been responsible for massacres and other atrocities against civilians. Few on either side have been held to account, which only serves to foster further abuses. Perhaps the brutal killing of Mariam Cissé, whose work impacted the lives of thousands, will send the message of the war’s true cost to people beyond Mali’s borders.

Instead of supporting those who fill the gaps left by Hungary’s crumbling public services and social security system, the government is prosecuting them. On November 3, prosecutors charged Pastor Gábor Iványi, who has long defended the rights of people living in poverty, with “group-committed violence against an official person” in connection with a February 2022 raid by the tax authority on the Budapest homeless shelter his church operates.

The Hungarian Evangelical Fellowship, part of the Methodist Church, which Iványi heads, provides shelter, food, and education in a manner that respects human dignity to those left behind by the state. It runs shelters, schools, and social programs that serve thousands of people across the country, offering vital support to families, children—including children with disabilities—and individuals experiencing poverty and social exclusion.

The fellowship’s social and humanitarian work has made it a frequent government target.

Human Rights Watch has previously reported on the government’s harassment of Iványi and his church, documenting how authorities sought to obstruct their humanitarian work and close down their activities, including, in 2024, three schools for children from low-income households.

In 2011, Viktor Orbán’s government stripped the church of its official status in a move the European Court of Human Rights later ruled unlawful. Since then, the government has withheld substantial funds that the court had ordered be paid, and under subsequent judgments, to the Hungarian Evangelical Fellowship and other faith groups, while repeatedly subjecting the church to financial and administrative harassment.

The prosecution of Iványi and interference with his church’s work is part of a wider pattern of the Hungarian government targeting human rights defenders working with migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, people experiencing poverty or homelessness, children with disabilities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Instead of supporting those who provide services where the state has failed to meet its rights obligations, the government has sought to discredit, defund, and in some cases prosecute them.

The Hungarian authorities should immediately drop the charges against Iványi, end all forms of harassment against his church, and pay what is owed under the European Court’s ruling. The government should also restore the church’s legal status and ensure that its humanitarian and social work can continue free from political interference.

(Washington, DC) – The United States government, including Congress, should address Saudi human rights abuses during Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s expected visit to Washington, DC, on November 18, 2025, said 11 organizations, including Human Rights Watch, in a joint statement today.

The Trump administration is expected to welcome the crown prince on his first visit to the United States since he approved the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi in March 2018 and oversaw an unprecedented rights crackdown in Saudi Arabia.

The following are statements from a number of human rights organizations about the visit:

Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch:

“Saudi Arabia’s crown prince is trying to rebrand himself as a global statesman, but the reality at home is mass repression, record numbers of executions, and zero tolerance for dissent. US officials should be pressing for change, not posing for photos.”

“In the fallout from Jamal Khashoggi’s assassination, Mohammed bin Salman’s regime felt international pressure to improve its human rights record, and that pressure made a difference. Some child defendants on death row were resentenced and released, and from July 2021-July 2025, there were no executions for childhood crimes.”

“The recent executions of Jalal al-Labbad and Abdullah al-Derazi show a brutal Saudi regime acting with impunity and daring partners to object. The US must urgently reconsider its massive security assistance to a country that executes people for attending demonstrations when they were 15 years old. It’s too late for Jalal and Abdullah, but a strong signal from the US that this is unacceptable could save Youssef al-Manasif’s life.”

Abdullah Alaoudh, senior director for countering authoritarianism at the Middle East Democracy Center (MEDC):

“It is a tragic irony that while Saudi Arabia carries out a record number of executions, including prominent journalist Turki al-Jasser who was executed just a few months ago, MBS comes to Washington for his first visit since his regime’s ruthless murder of Jamal Khashoggi.”

“The change in Saudi Arabia seems to be from killing journalists behind closed doors to executing them in plain sight.”

Liesl Gerntholtz, managing director of the PEN/Barbey Freedom to Write Center:

“Saudi Arabia remains one of the world’s most relentless jailers of writers, consistently ranking among the top three in PEN America’s Freedom to Write Index.”

“Again and again, we’ve seen Saudi authorities weaponize their justice system to silence writers, handing down draconian sentences and, in some cases, executing those whose only crime was speaking freely. As the White House welcomes the crown prince, US representatives must condemn the Saudi government’s ongoing repression of dissidents and writers at risk. We urge the Trump administration to prioritize human rights and freedom of expression.”

Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN):

“The Trump administration is rolling out the red carpet for the man who approved the murder and dismemberment of our founder Jamal Khashoggi.”

“We know President Trump won’t ask MBS to reveal where Jamal’s remains are so his family can finally bury him. But the least he can do—the absolute minimum—is publicly press MBS to release the dozens of activists, writers, and reformers languishing in Saudi prisons for the ‘crime’ of speaking freely.”

Abdullah Aljuraywi, monitoring and campaigns officer at ALQST for Human Rights:

“Beneath Saudi Arabia’s glittering facade, the repression of Saudi citizens and residents continues unabated. To avoid emboldening this, the US should use its leverage to secure concrete commitments, including the release of detained activists, lifting of arbitrary travel bans, and an end to politically motivated executions.”

Signatories:

1. ALQST for Human Rights
2. Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
3. DAWN
4. Freedom House
5. Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR)
6. Human Rights Watch
7. MENA Rights Group
8. Middle East Democracy Center
9. Peace Action
10. PEN America
11. Reprieve