https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/ Tue, 05 May 2026 08:46:59 +0000 es-ES hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-OB-eye-orange-32x32.png https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/ 32 32 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/tunisie-detention-arbitraire-de-chawki-tabib-ancien-president-de-linstance-nationale-de-lutte-contre-la-corruption/ Mon, 04 May 2026 08:19:02 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24689 Chawki Tabib, avocat tunisien, ancien bâtonnier de l’Ordre national des avocats de Tunisie et ancien président de l’Instance nationale de lutte contre la corruption (INLUCC) de 2016 à 2020. Le 14 avril 2026, Chawki Tabib s’est présenté volontairement devant le juge d’instruction près le pôle judiciaire économique et financier, rattaché au tribunal de première instance de Tunis, suite à une information transmise au barreau de Tunis fixant son audition à cette date. Sans procéder à son audition, le juge d’instruction a émis un mandat de dépôt à l’encontre de M. Tabib, qui a été incarcéré depuis à la prison de Mornaguia, au sud-ouest de Tunis. Cette décision s’est accompagnée du gel de ses biens et avoirs financiers. M. Tabib est poursuivi pour plusieurs infractions financières dans le cadre de ses fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC, notamment pour « concussion », sur le fondement des articles 82, 96, 98 et 99 du Code pénal tunisien, ainsi que pour « blanchiment d’argent », en vertu des articles 92 à 97 de la loi n°2015-26 du 7 août 2015 relative à la lutte contre le terrorisme et à la répression du blanchiment d’argent. Il lui est notamment reproché de s’être vu octroyer des avantages en nature indus, d’avoir attribué des primes et indemnités à certain·es agent·es de l’institution sans fondement réglementaire, d’avoir autorisé le versement de salaires supérieurs aux montants contractuels, d’avoir accordé des avantages injustifiés à certain·es prestataires et financé des missions à l’étranger au profit de personnes extérieures à l’instance. Cepedant, les employé·es et prestataires de l’INLUCC ont continué à percevoir les mêmes droits et avantages après le départ de M. Tabib de l’institution. Le 21 avril 2026, M. Tabib a été entendu par le juge d’instruction près le pôle judiciaire économique et financier, saisi de l’affaire. 47 avocats se sont déplacés pour assurer sa défense, mais seuls six ont été autorisés par le juge à assister à l’audition sans fondement légal. Selon sa famille, lors de l’audience fixée au 27 avril 2026, M. Tabib a été emmené au tribunal mais n’a pas pu être présent à l’audience pour des raisons inconnues. L’audience a été reportée au 18 mai 2026. L’Observatoire rappelle que le 20 août 2020, M. Tabib avait été démis de ses fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC par Elyes Fakhfakh, ancien chef du gouvernement tunisien, dans le contexte des investigations menées par l’Instance sur des soupçons de conflit d’intérêt et d’irrégularités dans la déclaration de patrimoine concernant ce dernier. Entre août et octobre 2021, M. Tabib avait été placé en résidence surveillée avant de faire l’objet de mesures d’interdiction de voyager sans fondement juridique apparent. Par ailleurs, le 6 avril 2026, M. Tabib avait déjà comparu devant la première chambre criminelle du tribunal de première instance de Tunis dans le cadre d’une autre affaire, pour des faits de « faux commis par un agent public », « détention de faux » et « usage de faux » également en lien avec ses précédentes fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC. Toutefois, les faits reprochés dans cette procédure sont formellement distincts de ceux ayant conduit à l’émission du mandat de dépôt du 14 avril 2026. M. Tabib a évoqué devant le juge d’instruction les « dizaines de plaintes » déposées contre lui depuis son départ de l’INLUCC et la multiplication d’accusations diffamatoires. L’Observatoire souligne que les poursuites engagées contre M. Chawki Tabib s’inscrivent dans un contexte plus large de restriction croissante de l’espace civique et de répression des voix critiques en Tunisie, marqué par la multiplication des poursuites judiciaires contre des journalistes, avocat·es, défenseur·es des droits humains et opposant·es politiques. L’Observatoire rappelle ainsi que cette affaire est une illustration supplémentaire de la remise en cause de l’indépendance de la justice depuis les mesures d’exception annoncées par le président Kaïs Saïed en juillet 2021, notamment à la suite de la dissolution du Conseil supérieur de la magistrature et de la révocation arbitraire de nombreux·ses magistrat·es fragilisant gravement les garanties d’indépendance du pouvoir judiciaire en Tunisie. L’Observatoire exprime sa plus vive inquiétude face à la détention arbitraire et à l’acharnement judiciaire et procédural à l’encontre de Chawki Tabib, qui ne semblent viser qu’à sanctionner l’exercice légitime de ses précédentes fonctions de président de l’INLUCC et son engagement dans le combat contre la corruption et pour l’indépendance de la justice et des avocat·es. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités tunisiennes à libérer immédiatement et sans conditions Chawki Tabib, et à mettre un terme à tout acte de harcèlement, y compris au niveau judiciaire, à son encontre ainsi qu’à celle de tou·tes les défenseur·es des droits humains dans le pays. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités tunisiennes à garantir pleinement le droit à un procès équitable de Chawki Tabib, y compris le respect de la présomption d’innocence, ainsi qu’à veiller à ce que toute procédure judiciaire engagée à son encontre soit conduite de manière indépendante, impartiale et transparente.]]> Chawki Tabib, avocat tunisien, ancien bâtonnier de l’Ordre national des avocats de Tunisie et ancien président de l’Instance nationale de lutte contre la corruption (INLUCC) de 2016 à 2020. Le 14 avril 2026, Chawki Tabib s’est présenté volontairement devant le juge d’instruction près le pôle judiciaire économique et financier, rattaché au tribunal de première instance de Tunis, suite à une information transmise au barreau de Tunis fixant son audition à cette date. Sans procéder à son audition, le juge d’instruction a émis un mandat de dépôt à l’encontre de M. Tabib, qui a été incarcéré depuis à la prison de Mornaguia, au sud-ouest de Tunis. Cette décision s’est accompagnée du gel de ses biens et avoirs financiers. M. Tabib est poursuivi pour plusieurs infractions financières dans le cadre de ses fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC, notamment pour « concussion », sur le fondement des articles 82, 96, 98 et 99 du Code pénal tunisien, ainsi que pour « blanchiment d’argent », en vertu des articles 92 à 97 de la loi n°2015-26 du 7 août 2015 relative à la lutte contre le terrorisme et à la répression du blanchiment d’argent. Il lui est notamment reproché de s’être vu octroyer des avantages en nature indus, d’avoir attribué des primes et indemnités à certain·es agent·es de l’institution sans fondement réglementaire, d’avoir autorisé le versement de salaires supérieurs aux montants contractuels, d’avoir accordé des avantages injustifiés à certain·es prestataires et financé des missions à l’étranger au profit de personnes extérieures à l’instance. Cepedant, les employé·es et prestataires de l’INLUCC ont continué à percevoir les mêmes droits et avantages après le départ de M. Tabib de l’institution. Le 21 avril 2026, M. Tabib a été entendu par le juge d’instruction près le pôle judiciaire économique et financier, saisi de l’affaire. 47 avocats se sont déplacés pour assurer sa défense, mais seuls six ont été autorisés par le juge à assister à l’audition sans fondement légal. Selon sa famille, lors de l’audience fixée au 27 avril 2026, M. Tabib a été emmené au tribunal mais n’a pas pu être présent à l’audience pour des raisons inconnues. L’audience a été reportée au 18 mai 2026. L’Observatoire rappelle que le 20 août 2020, M. Tabib avait été démis de ses fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC par Elyes Fakhfakh, ancien chef du gouvernement tunisien, dans le contexte des investigations menées par l’Instance sur des soupçons de conflit d’intérêt et d’irrégularités dans la déclaration de patrimoine concernant ce dernier. Entre août et octobre 2021, M. Tabib avait été placé en résidence surveillée avant de faire l’objet de mesures d’interdiction de voyager sans fondement juridique apparent. Par ailleurs, le 6 avril 2026, M. Tabib avait déjà comparu devant la première chambre criminelle du tribunal de première instance de Tunis dans le cadre d’une autre affaire, pour des faits de « faux commis par un agent public », « détention de faux » et « usage de faux » également en lien avec ses précédentes fonctions à la tête de l’INLUCC. Toutefois, les faits reprochés dans cette procédure sont formellement distincts de ceux ayant conduit à l’émission du mandat de dépôt du 14 avril 2026. M. Tabib a évoqué devant le juge d’instruction les « dizaines de plaintes » déposées contre lui depuis son départ de l’INLUCC et la multiplication d’accusations diffamatoires. L’Observatoire souligne que les poursuites engagées contre M. Chawki Tabib s’inscrivent dans un contexte plus large de restriction croissante de l’espace civique et de répression des voix critiques en Tunisie, marqué par la multiplication des poursuites judiciaires contre des journalistes, avocat·es, défenseur·es des droits humains et opposant·es politiques. L’Observatoire rappelle ainsi que cette affaire est une illustration supplémentaire de la remise en cause de l’indépendance de la justice depuis les mesures d’exception annoncées par le président Kaïs Saïed en juillet 2021, notamment à la suite de la dissolution du Conseil supérieur de la magistrature et de la révocation arbitraire de nombreux·ses magistrat·es fragilisant gravement les garanties d’indépendance du pouvoir judiciaire en Tunisie. L’Observatoire exprime sa plus vive inquiétude face à la détention arbitraire et à l’acharnement judiciaire et procédural à l’encontre de Chawki Tabib, qui ne semblent viser qu’à sanctionner l’exercice légitime de ses précédentes fonctions de président de l’INLUCC et son engagement dans le combat contre la corruption et pour l’indépendance de la justice et des avocat·es. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités tunisiennes à libérer immédiatement et sans conditions Chawki Tabib, et à mettre un terme à tout acte de harcèlement, y compris au niveau judiciaire, à son encontre ainsi qu’à celle de tou·tes les défenseur·es des droits humains dans le pays. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités tunisiennes à garantir pleinement le droit à un procès équitable de Chawki Tabib, y compris le respect de la présomption d’innocence, ainsi qu’à veiller à ce que toute procédure judiciaire engagée à son encontre soit conduite de manière indépendante, impartiale et transparente.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/indonesia-government-must-quash-charges-against-delpedro-marhaen-and-human-rights-defenders-uphold-freedom-of-expression/ Wed, 11 Mar 2026 09:22:01 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24517 Paris-Geneva, 6 March 2026. On 27 February 2026, prosecutors demanded a two-year prison sentence for the four human rights defenders. The Court is set to issue its decision on 6 March. “The right to freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental rights in a democratic society. Indonesia could not maintain its position as a democratic nation when it weaponises its rule of law system to criminalise human rights defenders and activists for expressing dissent against government policies,” said Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso, Executive Director of FORUM-ASIA. What happened Delpedro Marhaen serves as the Executive Director of Lokataru Foundation, an organisation specialising in human rights protection on civic liberties while Muzaffar Salim works as a staff member at Lokataru Foundation. Syahdan Husein and Khariq Anhar are university group activists. In August 2025, Indonesia witnessed a series of mass protests following the state’s announcement of increased allowances for parliament members amidst mass layoffs and budget cuts across education and human rights sectors. The protests were met with excessive force by both police and military, leading to more than ten deaths, 34 short-term enforced disappearances, hundreds of injuries, and at least 6,700 arbitrary arrests against civilians. Following the protests, Delpedro Marhaen, Muzaffar Salim, Syahdan Husein, and Khariq Anhar were arrested and charged with incitement under Article 28 (3) and (45A) of the notorious Electronic Information and Transactions Law, incitement to defy public authorities under Article 246 of the Criminal Code, and sedition charges under Article 160 of the Criminal Code. The charges stemmed from the accusation that they posted inflammatory content on social media, which then allegedly caused civil unrest and violence as well as damage to public facilities and injuries to police officers. The police pointed out the Lokataru Foundation’s social media post, which details complaint centres and a hotline number students can use in case they experience violations, arbitrary arrests, or threats for joining the August protests. The post was meant to inform student protesters on their right to peaceful assembly and for the organisation to document any instances of unjust repression and provide assistance to protestors. The allegations also included their use of hashtags #IndonesiaGelap (Dark Indonesia) and #ReformasiPolri (reform the police) which was alleged to have allowed confrontational narrative to reach a massive audience. Criminalising human rights defenders The cases against Mr Delpedro, Mr Muzaffar, Mr Syahdan, and Mr Khariq are not isolated. Over 6,719 people were arrested, with 703 individuals currently facing judicial proceedings for their involvement in the August 2025 protests, according to the data provided by Gerakan Muda Lawan Kriminalisasi under a civil society-led fact-finding commission initiated by FORUM-ASIA member organisations Indonesia Legal Aid Foundation and the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS). This marked the highest number of arrests and political prosecution against activists since the 1998 reform. At least 70 individuals reportedly received payments to provoke the August 2025 protests by bringing firecrackers, molotov cocktails, and fireworks, the commission found. These individuals were affiliated with an organisation that helped campaign for Prabowo Subianto’s 2024 presidential bid. The commission also noted a great imbalance of law enforcement given the criminalisation of students, youth activists, and human rights defenders rather than those who actually incited civil unrest. This practice effectively creates a chilling effect for citizens and human rights defenders who are merely exercising their fundamental freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. Call to action The online posts made by Mr Delpedro, Mr Muzaffar, Mr Syahdan and Mr Khariq highlighted problematic government policies and human rights violations committed by State security actors. Hence the Court must consider how these expressions are protected under the Indonesian Constitution as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Indonesia is a party to. The Court must interpret the law against incitement under the context of the limitation for freedom of expression. This would require the Court to follow the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality. Likewise, this should be proven beyond reasonable doubt. As Indonesia currently holds the presidency of the United Nations Human Rights Council, it must set the highest standard of protection for human rights defenders.]]> Paris-Geneva, 6 March 2026. On 27 February 2026, prosecutors demanded a two-year prison sentence for the four human rights defenders. The Court is set to issue its decision on 6 March. “The right to freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental rights in a democratic society. Indonesia could not maintain its position as a democratic nation when it weaponises its rule of law system to criminalise human rights defenders and activists for expressing dissent against government policies,” said Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso, Executive Director of FORUM-ASIA. What happened Delpedro Marhaen serves as the Executive Director of Lokataru Foundation, an organisation specialising in human rights protection on civic liberties while Muzaffar Salim works as a staff member at Lokataru Foundation. Syahdan Husein and Khariq Anhar are university group activists. In August 2025, Indonesia witnessed a series of mass protests following the state’s announcement of increased allowances for parliament members amidst mass layoffs and budget cuts across education and human rights sectors. The protests were met with excessive force by both police and military, leading to more than ten deaths, 34 short-term enforced disappearances, hundreds of injuries, and at least 6,700 arbitrary arrests against civilians. Following the protests, Delpedro Marhaen, Muzaffar Salim, Syahdan Husein, and Khariq Anhar were arrested and charged with incitement under Article 28 (3) and (45A) of the notorious Electronic Information and Transactions Law, incitement to defy public authorities under Article 246 of the Criminal Code, and sedition charges under Article 160 of the Criminal Code. The charges stemmed from the accusation that they posted inflammatory content on social media, which then allegedly caused civil unrest and violence as well as damage to public facilities and injuries to police officers. The police pointed out the Lokataru Foundation’s social media post, which details complaint centres and a hotline number students can use in case they experience violations, arbitrary arrests, or threats for joining the August protests. The post was meant to inform student protesters on their right to peaceful assembly and for the organisation to document any instances of unjust repression and provide assistance to protestors. The allegations also included their use of hashtags #IndonesiaGelap (Dark Indonesia) and #ReformasiPolri (reform the police) which was alleged to have allowed confrontational narrative to reach a massive audience. Criminalising human rights defenders The cases against Mr Delpedro, Mr Muzaffar, Mr Syahdan, and Mr Khariq are not isolated. Over 6,719 people were arrested, with 703 individuals currently facing judicial proceedings for their involvement in the August 2025 protests, according to the data provided by Gerakan Muda Lawan Kriminalisasi under a civil society-led fact-finding commission initiated by FORUM-ASIA member organisations Indonesia Legal Aid Foundation and the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS). This marked the highest number of arrests and political prosecution against activists since the 1998 reform. At least 70 individuals reportedly received payments to provoke the August 2025 protests by bringing firecrackers, molotov cocktails, and fireworks, the commission found. These individuals were affiliated with an organisation that helped campaign for Prabowo Subianto’s 2024 presidential bid. The commission also noted a great imbalance of law enforcement given the criminalisation of students, youth activists, and human rights defenders rather than those who actually incited civil unrest. This practice effectively creates a chilling effect for citizens and human rights defenders who are merely exercising their fundamental freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. Call to action The online posts made by Mr Delpedro, Mr Muzaffar, Mr Syahdan and Mr Khariq highlighted problematic government policies and human rights violations committed by State security actors. Hence the Court must consider how these expressions are protected under the Indonesian Constitution as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Indonesia is a party to. The Court must interpret the law against incitement under the context of the limitation for freedom of expression. This would require the Court to follow the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality. Likewise, this should be proven beyond reasonable doubt. As Indonesia currently holds the presidency of the United Nations Human Rights Council, it must set the highest standard of protection for human rights defenders.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/peru-hostigamiento-ataques-basados-en-genero-y-amenazas-contra-la-fiscal-anticorrupcion-marita-barreto/ Tue, 09 Dec 2025 10:29:53 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24222 Marita Sonia Barreto Rivera, Fiscal Superior del Ministerio Público del Perú y ex Coordinadora del ahora disuelto Equipo Especial de Fiscales Contra la Corrupción en el Poder (EFICCOP), en el cual lideraba investigaciones sobre crimen organizado y alta corrupción, que involucraban a miembros de la élite política y económica desde julio 2022, que incluirían a expresidentes y sus familiares, altos funcionarios del Ministerio Publico, entre otros. El 2 de octubre de 2025, la Sra. Marita Barreto fue objeto de una resolución de la Dirección General de Procedimiento Administrativo Disciplinario que declaró fundadas dos quejas interpuestas en su contra. Estas quejas la acusan de haber influido en otra fiscal para denunciar penalmente a un periodista y de haber filtrado información confidencial. Con esta resolución, la Sra. Barreto corre el riesgo inminente de suspensión o destitución de su cargo. El hostigamiento contra la Sra. Marita Barreto, ha generado graves impactos en su vida profesional e integridad física y psicológica. Los actos de persecución contra la Sra. Barreto se intensificaron desde noviembre de 2023 cuando, como coordinadora de EFICCOP, inició una investigación sobre una presunta organización criminal involucrada en actos de alta corrupción dentro del Ministerio Público y que comprometía a la entonces Fiscal de la Nación, la Sra. Patricia Benavides. El 26 de noviembre de 2023, la EFICCOP llevó a cabo un operativo en el que se detuvo a Jaime Villanueva, asesor de la entonces Fiscal de la Nación, la Sra. Benavides, por integrar una presunta organización criminal en el interior del Ministerio Público. En represalia, el 27 de noviembre de 2023, la Sra. Barreto fue destituida como fiscal superior provisional del distrito fiscal de Lima Centro y como Fiscal Coordinadora del EFICCOP. El 7 de diciembre de 2023, la Junta Nacional de Justicia suspendió a la Fiscal Benavides, quien fue destituida. El 11 de diciembre de 2023, la Sra. Barreto fue restituida en su cargo de la EFICCOP por parte del Fiscal de la Nación interino, el Sr. Pablo Sánchez. Desde entonces, la Sra. Barreto ha sido objeto de persecución judicial y administrativa, acumulando hasta la fecha, 18 investigaciones ante la Autoridad Nacional de Control del Ministerio Público, 17 procesos penales y un procedimiento ante la Controlaría General de la República. Las causas penales se han adelantado bajo los delitos supuestos de enriquecimiento ilícito (Art. 401 del Código Penal de Perú), prevaricato (Art. 418 del Código Penal de Perú) y/o cohecho pasivo propio (Art. 393 del Código Penal de Perú). Ante el inicio de los distintos procesos, la Sra. Barreto ha solicitado defensa y asesoría jurídica públicas en diferentes ocasiones; sin embargo, estas le han sido negadas. El 28 de febrero de 2024, la Fiscal Barreto recibió en su correo electrónico un mensaje amenazante: “TERMINARAS DESTITUIDA Y PRESA”. Esta amenaza fue el inicio de ataques basados en género, tales como una campaña dirigida desde el canal de televisión Willax TV, donde a través de reportajes se ponían en duda sus logros académicos y, haciendo uso de lenguaje misógino y discriminatorio, se buscaba desacreditarla públicamente. Algunos reportajes sobre Marita Barreto fueron:“Las vergonzosas calificaciones de Marita Barreto: terminó de estudiar Derecho en 11 años y jaló 24 cursos” y “La Todopoderosa”. Estos hechos no sólo afectaron su integridad emocional y reputación profesional, sino que fueron desproporcionados con respecto a otras campañas de desprestigio dirigidas a otros fiscales hombres involucrados en procesos anticorrupción, por lo que se generó un entorno hostil en su contra que incrementó los riesgos para su seguridad personal. Pese a estas difamaciones públicas, la Sra. Barreto está impedida por una directiva de vocería institucional del Ministerio Público (GOTINCPP/DIR-02) de defenderse públicamente en el espacio público. La Sra. Barreto solicitó dar declaraciones en medios sobre los casos en su contra, sin tener una respuesta institucional positiva por parte del Ministerio Público. El 9 de mayo de 2024, el Ministerio del Interior disolvió el equipo especial de la Policía Nacional del Perú que apoyaba el trabajo de la EFICCOP, dejando al equipo especial sin capacidad operativa para investigar. El 13 de diciembre de 2024, el Ministerio Público disolvió a la EFICCOP, dejando sin efecto el nombramiento de la Sra. Barreto como Fiscal Superior al frente de ese equipo. El 3 de octubre de 2024, la Sra. Barreto fue acusada por el periodista Carlos Paredes del medio de comunicación Willax de haber filtrado información reservada sobre una investigación contra el congresista Guillermo Bermejo. Como consecuencia, el 9 de octubre de 2024, la Autoridad Nacional de Control del Ministerio Público la suspendió de su cargo como Fiscal Superior del Ministerio Público del Perú por seis meses. Cabe señalar que la Sra. Barreto no tuvo la oportunidad de presentar una defensa o responder a estas acusaciones. A ello se sumó la suspensión temporal de su esquema de seguridad atribuido por el Ministerio Público, el cual fue posteriormente restituido de manera reducida como consecuencia de una apelación sobre este tema de la Sra. Barreto. La suspensión del esquema de seguridad fue prorrogada el 4 de abril de 2025, y en julio de este año fue finalmente designada fiscal provincial titular penal supraprovincial de Lima, en la Primera Fiscalía Penal Supraprovincial Especializada en Derechos Humanos e Interculturalidad. Paralelamente, durante este tiempo, los actos de hostigamiento, campañas de desprestigio y amenazas en contra de la Sra. Barreto continuaron intensificándose. Entre estos, la Sra. Barreto denunció actos de vigilancia, intimidación y múltiples intentos de ingresar a su domicilio. Tras una comunicación enviada al Estado peruano el 10 de marzo de 2025 por parte de la Relatora Especial de Naciones Unidas sobre la independencia de los magistrados y abogados, que mostraba preocupación sobre la situación de la Sra. Barreto, se inició una investigación penal a cargo de la Fiscalía Provincial Transitoria Corporativa Especializada en Violencia contra la mujer, contra periodistas de Willax TV, por acoso y violación de domicilio. La investigación continúa abierta, pero ahora bajo la competencia de la segunda Fiscalía Corporativa Penal de Miraflores-San Borja. El 25 de julio de 2025, 20 personas pertenecientes a los grupos anti-derechos “La Resistencia” llegaron a la oficina de la Fiscal Barreto Rivera con pancartas y megáfonos gritando “burrita Barreto”, quien “tiene enriquecimiento ilícito de las mafias” y otras frases que incitan las campañas de odio y desinformación que vienen ejecutando. Recientemente, se suman a estos hechos persecutorios la exposición de información personal de la Sra. Barreto, tras un ataque informático a la base de datos de la Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia de la Policía Nacional de Perú y la apertura de un proceso de fiscalización en su contra en septiembre de 2025. En esta clase de procesos la Contraloría investiga el buen uso de los bienes públicos por parte de los servidores públicos. El Observatorio señala que estos hechos se insertan en un contexto y patrones de hostigamiento prolongado en contra de funcionarios judiciales que se han destacado por su labor de lucha contra la impunidad y de defensa del Estado de Derecho en el Perú, razón por la cual son perseguidos por una mayoría ultraconservadora del Congreso. Así, lo ha venido denunciando la FIDH desde 2023 en su Informe ”Perú: avance del autoritarismo y regresión de derechos”. El Observatorio condena enérgicamente el hostigamiento, los ataques mediáticos y las amenazas dirigidos contra la Sra. Barreto, que buscarían desacreditar su trabajo de lucha contra la impunidad, aislarla profesionalmente, obstaculizar su legítima labor en la lucha contra la corrupción y el crimen organizado y en general desestabilizar a la institucionalidad judicial y así al Estado de derecho en el Perú. Igualmente, los ataques contra la Sra. Barreto incluye claros componentes de violencia de género, que instrumentalizan estereotipos y prejuicios machistas para minar su credibilidad y autoridad como defensora y fiscal anticorrupción y constituyen una grave forma de violencia contra las mujeres en el espacio profesional y público. Asimismo, el Observatorio advierte que estos actos han generado serios perjuicios emocionales, laborales y económicos para la Sra. Barreto e insta a las autoridades peruanas a cumplir con sus obligaciones nacionales e internacionales en cuanto a la protección del personal operador de justicia, y la independencia judicial. El Observatorio pide a las autoridades peruanas, cesar el hostigamiento, las amenazas y los ataques basados en género contra la Sr.Marita Sonia Barreto Rivera y garantizar la autonomía e independencia de todos los poderes del Estado Peruano, en particular de la administración de justicia.]]> Marita Sonia Barreto Rivera, Fiscal Superior del Ministerio Público del Perú y ex Coordinadora del ahora disuelto Equipo Especial de Fiscales Contra la Corrupción en el Poder (EFICCOP), en el cual lideraba investigaciones sobre crimen organizado y alta corrupción, que involucraban a miembros de la élite política y económica desde julio 2022, que incluirían a expresidentes y sus familiares, altos funcionarios del Ministerio Publico, entre otros. El 2 de octubre de 2025, la Sra. Marita Barreto fue objeto de una resolución de la Dirección General de Procedimiento Administrativo Disciplinario que declaró fundadas dos quejas interpuestas en su contra. Estas quejas la acusan de haber influido en otra fiscal para denunciar penalmente a un periodista y de haber filtrado información confidencial. Con esta resolución, la Sra. Barreto corre el riesgo inminente de suspensión o destitución de su cargo. El hostigamiento contra la Sra. Marita Barreto, ha generado graves impactos en su vida profesional e integridad física y psicológica. Los actos de persecución contra la Sra. Barreto se intensificaron desde noviembre de 2023 cuando, como coordinadora de EFICCOP, inició una investigación sobre una presunta organización criminal involucrada en actos de alta corrupción dentro del Ministerio Público y que comprometía a la entonces Fiscal de la Nación, la Sra. Patricia Benavides. El 26 de noviembre de 2023, la EFICCOP llevó a cabo un operativo en el que se detuvo a Jaime Villanueva, asesor de la entonces Fiscal de la Nación, la Sra. Benavides, por integrar una presunta organización criminal en el interior del Ministerio Público. En represalia, el 27 de noviembre de 2023, la Sra. Barreto fue destituida como fiscal superior provisional del distrito fiscal de Lima Centro y como Fiscal Coordinadora del EFICCOP. El 7 de diciembre de 2023, la Junta Nacional de Justicia suspendió a la Fiscal Benavides, quien fue destituida. El 11 de diciembre de 2023, la Sra. Barreto fue restituida en su cargo de la EFICCOP por parte del Fiscal de la Nación interino, el Sr. Pablo Sánchez. Desde entonces, la Sra. Barreto ha sido objeto de persecución judicial y administrativa, acumulando hasta la fecha, 18 investigaciones ante la Autoridad Nacional de Control del Ministerio Público, 17 procesos penales y un procedimiento ante la Controlaría General de la República. Las causas penales se han adelantado bajo los delitos supuestos de enriquecimiento ilícito (Art. 401 del Código Penal de Perú), prevaricato (Art. 418 del Código Penal de Perú) y/o cohecho pasivo propio (Art. 393 del Código Penal de Perú). Ante el inicio de los distintos procesos, la Sra. Barreto ha solicitado defensa y asesoría jurídica públicas en diferentes ocasiones; sin embargo, estas le han sido negadas. El 28 de febrero de 2024, la Fiscal Barreto recibió en su correo electrónico un mensaje amenazante: “TERMINARAS DESTITUIDA Y PRESA”. Esta amenaza fue el inicio de ataques basados en género, tales como una campaña dirigida desde el canal de televisión Willax TV, donde a través de reportajes se ponían en duda sus logros académicos y, haciendo uso de lenguaje misógino y discriminatorio, se buscaba desacreditarla públicamente. Algunos reportajes sobre Marita Barreto fueron:“Las vergonzosas calificaciones de Marita Barreto: terminó de estudiar Derecho en 11 años y jaló 24 cursos” y “La Todopoderosa”. Estos hechos no sólo afectaron su integridad emocional y reputación profesional, sino que fueron desproporcionados con respecto a otras campañas de desprestigio dirigidas a otros fiscales hombres involucrados en procesos anticorrupción, por lo que se generó un entorno hostil en su contra que incrementó los riesgos para su seguridad personal. Pese a estas difamaciones públicas, la Sra. Barreto está impedida por una directiva de vocería institucional del Ministerio Público (GOTINCPP/DIR-02) de defenderse públicamente en el espacio público. La Sra. Barreto solicitó dar declaraciones en medios sobre los casos en su contra, sin tener una respuesta institucional positiva por parte del Ministerio Público. El 9 de mayo de 2024, el Ministerio del Interior disolvió el equipo especial de la Policía Nacional del Perú que apoyaba el trabajo de la EFICCOP, dejando al equipo especial sin capacidad operativa para investigar. El 13 de diciembre de 2024, el Ministerio Público disolvió a la EFICCOP, dejando sin efecto el nombramiento de la Sra. Barreto como Fiscal Superior al frente de ese equipo. El 3 de octubre de 2024, la Sra. Barreto fue acusada por el periodista Carlos Paredes del medio de comunicación Willax de haber filtrado información reservada sobre una investigación contra el congresista Guillermo Bermejo. Como consecuencia, el 9 de octubre de 2024, la Autoridad Nacional de Control del Ministerio Público la suspendió de su cargo como Fiscal Superior del Ministerio Público del Perú por seis meses. Cabe señalar que la Sra. Barreto no tuvo la oportunidad de presentar una defensa o responder a estas acusaciones. A ello se sumó la suspensión temporal de su esquema de seguridad atribuido por el Ministerio Público, el cual fue posteriormente restituido de manera reducida como consecuencia de una apelación sobre este tema de la Sra. Barreto. La suspensión del esquema de seguridad fue prorrogada el 4 de abril de 2025, y en julio de este año fue finalmente designada fiscal provincial titular penal supraprovincial de Lima, en la Primera Fiscalía Penal Supraprovincial Especializada en Derechos Humanos e Interculturalidad. Paralelamente, durante este tiempo, los actos de hostigamiento, campañas de desprestigio y amenazas en contra de la Sra. Barreto continuaron intensificándose. Entre estos, la Sra. Barreto denunció actos de vigilancia, intimidación y múltiples intentos de ingresar a su domicilio. Tras una comunicación enviada al Estado peruano el 10 de marzo de 2025 por parte de la Relatora Especial de Naciones Unidas sobre la independencia de los magistrados y abogados, que mostraba preocupación sobre la situación de la Sra. Barreto, se inició una investigación penal a cargo de la Fiscalía Provincial Transitoria Corporativa Especializada en Violencia contra la mujer, contra periodistas de Willax TV, por acoso y violación de domicilio. La investigación continúa abierta, pero ahora bajo la competencia de la segunda Fiscalía Corporativa Penal de Miraflores-San Borja. El 25 de julio de 2025, 20 personas pertenecientes a los grupos anti-derechos “La Resistencia” llegaron a la oficina de la Fiscal Barreto Rivera con pancartas y megáfonos gritando “burrita Barreto”, quien “tiene enriquecimiento ilícito de las mafias” y otras frases que incitan las campañas de odio y desinformación que vienen ejecutando. Recientemente, se suman a estos hechos persecutorios la exposición de información personal de la Sra. Barreto, tras un ataque informático a la base de datos de la Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia de la Policía Nacional de Perú y la apertura de un proceso de fiscalización en su contra en septiembre de 2025. En esta clase de procesos la Contraloría investiga el buen uso de los bienes públicos por parte de los servidores públicos. El Observatorio señala que estos hechos se insertan en un contexto y patrones de hostigamiento prolongado en contra de funcionarios judiciales que se han destacado por su labor de lucha contra la impunidad y de defensa del Estado de Derecho en el Perú, razón por la cual son perseguidos por una mayoría ultraconservadora del Congreso. Así, lo ha venido denunciando la FIDH desde 2023 en su Informe ”Perú: avance del autoritarismo y regresión de derechos”. El Observatorio condena enérgicamente el hostigamiento, los ataques mediáticos y las amenazas dirigidos contra la Sra. Barreto, que buscarían desacreditar su trabajo de lucha contra la impunidad, aislarla profesionalmente, obstaculizar su legítima labor en la lucha contra la corrupción y el crimen organizado y en general desestabilizar a la institucionalidad judicial y así al Estado de derecho en el Perú. Igualmente, los ataques contra la Sra. Barreto incluye claros componentes de violencia de género, que instrumentalizan estereotipos y prejuicios machistas para minar su credibilidad y autoridad como defensora y fiscal anticorrupción y constituyen una grave forma de violencia contra las mujeres en el espacio profesional y público. Asimismo, el Observatorio advierte que estos actos han generado serios perjuicios emocionales, laborales y económicos para la Sra. Barreto e insta a las autoridades peruanas a cumplir con sus obligaciones nacionales e internacionales en cuanto a la protección del personal operador de justicia, y la independencia judicial. El Observatorio pide a las autoridades peruanas, cesar el hostigamiento, las amenazas y los ataques basados en género contra la Sr.Marita Sonia Barreto Rivera y garantizar la autonomía e independencia de todos los poderes del Estado Peruano, en particular de la administración de justicia.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/ukraine-judicial-harassment-of-anti-corruption-activist-mr-vitaliy-shabunin/ Mon, 03 Nov 2025 15:27:13 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24129 Vitaliy Shabunin, founder and chair of the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC), a prominent civil society organisation based in Kyiv that works to strengthen Ukraine’s measures against corruption and enhance transparency. In the context of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, Mr Shabunin currently holds the rank of sergeant in the 43rd Separate Mechanised Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and voluntarily mobilised during the first days of the full-scale invasion, in 2022.   On 15 July 2025, Mr Shabunin was brought before the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv in a criminal case linked to his work in defending human rights, promoting anti-corruption, and advancing transparency in Ukraine. The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) accused him of “evading military service” and “fraud” (under Part 4 of Article 409 and Part 2 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code). The SBI's accusations of his alleged evasion of service are based on the period when Shabunin was seconded to the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NACP), done in accordance to his official order of the command.   During the hearing, Judge Svitlana Grechana ruled in favour of the prosecution’s request and prohibited Mr Shabunin from leaving the place of deployment of his military unit, except for duties directly related to military service. Moreover, the name of the village where he is deployed, 50 km away from the line of contact, was publicly announced at the court hearing, creating further risks for Mr Shabunin’s security.   Mr Shabunin was also barred from communicating with all officials of the NACP, his former commander Mr Viktor Yushko, and all servicemen of the unit where he served in 2022. These duties are impossible to implement since there are hundreds of people who fall into this criteria that Mr Shabunin does not even know or haven’t ever met. Mr Shabunin is forbidden from entering the NACP building, as well as required to surrender his passport for foreign travel.   If sentenced, Mr Shabunin could face up to 10 years of detention. The criminal case opened against him falls within a pattern of smear campaigns of which Mr Shabunin had been a victim over the last decade, with the latest one wrongly accusing him of evading military services. In a joint statement published on 15 July 2025, more than 100 Ukrainian civil society organisations denounced that this criminal prosecution is carried out in violation of Ukraine's obligations under Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights) in conjunction with Article 6 (right to a fair trial) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) of this Convention and called for an end to the use of the justice system as a tool for political reprisals. On 11 July 2025, Mr Shabunin had denounced on his Telegram channel that the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) was carrying out searches at several addresses linked to him. The searches happened while Mr Shabunin was on active duty in the Chuhuiv district of the Kharkiv region, and his family, including his wife and two minor children, were at home in Kyiv. In his place of military service, a lieutenant colonel of the security services deceitfully asked Mr Shabunin to show his phone for a counterintelligence check. The officer took the unlocked device and rushed to leave with it. A few hours later, an SBI operative brought the phone back in the room claiming he had “found” it, but refused to give it back to Mr Shabunin. Simultaneous searches happened in his registered residence in Kyiv, where his family, including young children, live. The SBI seized his relatives’ devices, including his children’s tablets. Later, the SBI informed they had returned all the confiscated gadgets, which Mr Shabunin denied. The searches were conducted in the absence of court warrants and of Mr Shabunin’s lawyers, which only arrived to their Kyiv home at the end of the searches, making them illegal and in violation of the right to a due process. Furthermore, later, Telegram channels linked to authorities unlawfully disclosed and manipulatedpersonal data from the confiscated mobile phone of Mr Shabunin’s wifeInformation about temporary refuge of Shabunin’s family in the United States in 2022–2023 was leaked and falsely presented as his own property allegedly worth 1 million USD (approximately 861 000 Euros). On 14 August 2025, the SBI announced it had completed the investigation into criminal proceedings against Vitaliy Shabunin. After Mr Shabunin’s defence reviews the case materials, an indictment is expected to be submitted to the court. On 19 August, the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv extended the preventive measure in the form of Vitaliy Shabunin’s personal commitment to remain in the premises of his military unit except for performing military duties for another two months, until 19 October 2025. On August 15, Mr Shabunin’s lawyer, Ms Olena Shcherban, has reported being subjected to pressure and an attempt to strip her of her legal license on the grounds of allegedly failing to complete mandatory annual professional training in time. In addition, smear messages targeting Ms Shcherban appeared in various Telegram channels. Complaints against her emerged only after she began working on Mr Shabunin’s case. Ms Shcherban has prepared and submitted the responses which allowed her to keep her legal license. This persecution and stigmatisation is another episode in the long-standing history of attacks against Vitaliy Shabunin and the Anti-Corruption Center, headed by him. On 23 July 2020, Mr Shabunin’s house in the village of Hnidyn, near Kyiv, had suffered arson. The Ukrainian Prosecutor’s Office opened an investigation based on the clear “intention of destruction and damage to property”, but to the date of publication of this urgent alert, the investigation did not reach conclusions. On 31 December 2020, it was reported that explosive devices had been discovered on the first floor of the apartment building of Shabunin's wife's parents in Borshchahivka, near Kyiv. Residents were evacuated and no one was injured. The day before, on 30 December, an explosive device consisting of two grenades was found outside the door of Vitaliy Shabunin's mother's apartment in Rivne. - The Observatory strongly condemns the persecution and judicial harassment of Mr Shabunin, which appears aimed at punishing him for his legitimate fight against corruption and for transparency in Ukraine, as well as the exercise of his right to freedom of expression. The Observatory calls on the Ukrainian authorities to immediately and unconditionally drop the charges against Mr Shabunin and to put an end to all forms of harassment against all human rights defenders in Ukraine.]]> Vitaliy Shabunin, founder and chair of the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC), a prominent civil society organisation based in Kyiv that works to strengthen Ukraine’s measures against corruption and enhance transparency. In the context of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, Mr Shabunin currently holds the rank of sergeant in the 43rd Separate Mechanised Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and voluntarily mobilised during the first days of the full-scale invasion, in 2022.   On 15 July 2025, Mr Shabunin was brought before the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv in a criminal case linked to his work in defending human rights, promoting anti-corruption, and advancing transparency in Ukraine. The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) accused him of “evading military service” and “fraud” (under Part 4 of Article 409 and Part 2 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code). The SBI's accusations of his alleged evasion of service are based on the period when Shabunin was seconded to the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NACP), done in accordance to his official order of the command.   During the hearing, Judge Svitlana Grechana ruled in favour of the prosecution’s request and prohibited Mr Shabunin from leaving the place of deployment of his military unit, except for duties directly related to military service. Moreover, the name of the village where he is deployed, 50 km away from the line of contact, was publicly announced at the court hearing, creating further risks for Mr Shabunin’s security.   Mr Shabunin was also barred from communicating with all officials of the NACP, his former commander Mr Viktor Yushko, and all servicemen of the unit where he served in 2022. These duties are impossible to implement since there are hundreds of people who fall into this criteria that Mr Shabunin does not even know or haven’t ever met. Mr Shabunin is forbidden from entering the NACP building, as well as required to surrender his passport for foreign travel.   If sentenced, Mr Shabunin could face up to 10 years of detention. The criminal case opened against him falls within a pattern of smear campaigns of which Mr Shabunin had been a victim over the last decade, with the latest one wrongly accusing him of evading military services. In a joint statement published on 15 July 2025, more than 100 Ukrainian civil society organisations denounced that this criminal prosecution is carried out in violation of Ukraine's obligations under Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights) in conjunction with Article 6 (right to a fair trial) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) of this Convention and called for an end to the use of the justice system as a tool for political reprisals. On 11 July 2025, Mr Shabunin had denounced on his Telegram channel that the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) was carrying out searches at several addresses linked to him. The searches happened while Mr Shabunin was on active duty in the Chuhuiv district of the Kharkiv region, and his family, including his wife and two minor children, were at home in Kyiv. In his place of military service, a lieutenant colonel of the security services deceitfully asked Mr Shabunin to show his phone for a counterintelligence check. The officer took the unlocked device and rushed to leave with it. A few hours later, an SBI operative brought the phone back in the room claiming he had “found” it, but refused to give it back to Mr Shabunin. Simultaneous searches happened in his registered residence in Kyiv, where his family, including young children, live. The SBI seized his relatives’ devices, including his children’s tablets. Later, the SBI informed they had returned all the confiscated gadgets, which Mr Shabunin denied. The searches were conducted in the absence of court warrants and of Mr Shabunin’s lawyers, which only arrived to their Kyiv home at the end of the searches, making them illegal and in violation of the right to a due process. Furthermore, later, Telegram channels linked to authorities unlawfully disclosed and manipulatedpersonal data from the confiscated mobile phone of Mr Shabunin’s wifeInformation about temporary refuge of Shabunin’s family in the United States in 2022–2023 was leaked and falsely presented as his own property allegedly worth 1 million USD (approximately 861 000 Euros). On 14 August 2025, the SBI announced it had completed the investigation into criminal proceedings against Vitaliy Shabunin. After Mr Shabunin’s defence reviews the case materials, an indictment is expected to be submitted to the court. On 19 August, the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv extended the preventive measure in the form of Vitaliy Shabunin’s personal commitment to remain in the premises of his military unit except for performing military duties for another two months, until 19 October 2025. On August 15, Mr Shabunin’s lawyer, Ms Olena Shcherban, has reported being subjected to pressure and an attempt to strip her of her legal license on the grounds of allegedly failing to complete mandatory annual professional training in time. In addition, smear messages targeting Ms Shcherban appeared in various Telegram channels. Complaints against her emerged only after she began working on Mr Shabunin’s case. Ms Shcherban has prepared and submitted the responses which allowed her to keep her legal license. This persecution and stigmatisation is another episode in the long-standing history of attacks against Vitaliy Shabunin and the Anti-Corruption Center, headed by him. On 23 July 2020, Mr Shabunin’s house in the village of Hnidyn, near Kyiv, had suffered arson. The Ukrainian Prosecutor’s Office opened an investigation based on the clear “intention of destruction and damage to property”, but to the date of publication of this urgent alert, the investigation did not reach conclusions. On 31 December 2020, it was reported that explosive devices had been discovered on the first floor of the apartment building of Shabunin's wife's parents in Borshchahivka, near Kyiv. Residents were evacuated and no one was injured. The day before, on 30 December, an explosive device consisting of two grenades was found outside the door of Vitaliy Shabunin's mother's apartment in Rivne. - The Observatory strongly condemns the persecution and judicial harassment of Mr Shabunin, which appears aimed at punishing him for his legitimate fight against corruption and for transparency in Ukraine, as well as the exercise of his right to freedom of expression. The Observatory calls on the Ukrainian authorities to immediately and unconditionally drop the charges against Mr Shabunin and to put an end to all forms of harassment against all human rights defenders in Ukraine.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/republique-democratique-du-congo-menaces-de-mort-et-des-attaques-a-lencontre-du-journaliste-pacifique-muliri/ Fri, 26 Sep 2025 11:44:32 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24020 Pacifique Muliri, journaliste à l’Agence congolaise de presse (ACP) et collaborateur indépendant d’Africa Mining Intelligence, organe d’information sur le secteur minier basé en France. Le 4 juillet 2025, la maison de M. Muliri à Bukavu, dans la province du Sud-Kivu, a été attaquée par des soldats du Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23)/Alliance du Fleuve Congo (AFC), et le 6 juillet 2025, son domicile a été cambriolé par des hommes non identifiés qui ont pris son ordinateur portable, son appareil photo, son enregistreur et son carnet de notes. M. Muliri était présent à son domicile lors des deux attaques, mais a réussi à s’échapper avant que les hommes n’arrivent, alerté par des voisins. Suite à ces épisodes, M. Muliri a pris la fuite et est entré en clandestinité. Du 1er au 3 juillet 2025, M. Muliri avait effectué un reportage à la mine de Lomera, dans le territoire de Kabare, dans la province du Sud-Kivu, où il enquêtait sur des allégations d’exploitation illégale d’or impliquant une collaboration entre des groupes rebelles de la région et les autorités gouvernementales de Kinshasa. Depuis la clandestinité, M. Muliri a reçu des appels téléphoniques et des menaces de mort de la part de numéros inconnus par le biais de textos. Dans des messages supplémentaires envoyés le 19 septembre 2025, les expéditeurs ont menacé de trouver et de tuer M. Muliri s’il n’abandonnait pas son travail. Selon des sources, depuis juillet, au moins trois personnes qui ont aidé M. Muliri dans son enquête sur la mine de Lomera ont été tuées à Bukavu dans des circonstances encore inexpliquées. Il s’agit de M. Fiston Wilondja, un ancien journaliste devenu photographe, et de deux autres habitants de Bukavu. L’Observatoire rappelle que ces actes se produisent dans un contexte d’attaques systématiques contre les défenseur·es des droits humains et de restriction manifeste de l’espace civique en RDC, en particulier depuis l’accession à un second mandat du président Félix Tshisekedi en décembre 2023. La situation des journalistes et défenseur·es des droits humains s’est par ailleurs gravement détériorée depuis janvier 2025, avec l’intensification du conflit à l’est du pays entre le M23, soutenu par l’armée rwandaise selon les Nations unies, et l’armée régulière de la RDC (FARDC) et ses alliés. Les groupes armés rebelles et le gouvernement congolais réduisent au silence les voix qui dénoncent les abus et violations des droits humains dans les territoires occupés par le M23 comme dans le reste du pays. L’Observatoire exprime sa vive inquiétude face aux attaques et menaces de mort à l’encontre de M. Pacifique Muliri, qui ne semblent viser qu’à restreindre sa liberté d’expression et l’exercice légitime de documentation des violations des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités congolaises à prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’assurer la sécurité physique et le bien-être psychologique de M. Pacifique Muliri. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités congolaises à mener une enquête indépendante, rigoureuse, impartiale et transparente afin d’identifier les responsables de ces attaques et menaces de mort, et de les traduire devant un tribunal indépendant, compétent et impartial. L’Observatoire rappelle au M23/AFC ses obligations au regard du droit international humanitaire et des droits humains, et l’enjoint à faire cesser immédiatement toute menace ou intimidation visant M. Pacifique Muliri, à garantir sa sécurité physique et son bien-être, à diligenter sans délai une enquête interne crédible et impartiale pour identifier les responsables, à coopérer avec les mécanismes indépendants compétents, et à adopter des mesures concrètes de non-répétition.]]> Pacifique Muliri, journaliste à l’Agence congolaise de presse (ACP) et collaborateur indépendant d’Africa Mining Intelligence, organe d’information sur le secteur minier basé en France. Le 4 juillet 2025, la maison de M. Muliri à Bukavu, dans la province du Sud-Kivu, a été attaquée par des soldats du Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23)/Alliance du Fleuve Congo (AFC), et le 6 juillet 2025, son domicile a été cambriolé par des hommes non identifiés qui ont pris son ordinateur portable, son appareil photo, son enregistreur et son carnet de notes. M. Muliri était présent à son domicile lors des deux attaques, mais a réussi à s’échapper avant que les hommes n’arrivent, alerté par des voisins. Suite à ces épisodes, M. Muliri a pris la fuite et est entré en clandestinité. Du 1er au 3 juillet 2025, M. Muliri avait effectué un reportage à la mine de Lomera, dans le territoire de Kabare, dans la province du Sud-Kivu, où il enquêtait sur des allégations d’exploitation illégale d’or impliquant une collaboration entre des groupes rebelles de la région et les autorités gouvernementales de Kinshasa. Depuis la clandestinité, M. Muliri a reçu des appels téléphoniques et des menaces de mort de la part de numéros inconnus par le biais de textos. Dans des messages supplémentaires envoyés le 19 septembre 2025, les expéditeurs ont menacé de trouver et de tuer M. Muliri s’il n’abandonnait pas son travail. Selon des sources, depuis juillet, au moins trois personnes qui ont aidé M. Muliri dans son enquête sur la mine de Lomera ont été tuées à Bukavu dans des circonstances encore inexpliquées. Il s’agit de M. Fiston Wilondja, un ancien journaliste devenu photographe, et de deux autres habitants de Bukavu. L’Observatoire rappelle que ces actes se produisent dans un contexte d’attaques systématiques contre les défenseur·es des droits humains et de restriction manifeste de l’espace civique en RDC, en particulier depuis l’accession à un second mandat du président Félix Tshisekedi en décembre 2023. La situation des journalistes et défenseur·es des droits humains s’est par ailleurs gravement détériorée depuis janvier 2025, avec l’intensification du conflit à l’est du pays entre le M23, soutenu par l’armée rwandaise selon les Nations unies, et l’armée régulière de la RDC (FARDC) et ses alliés. Les groupes armés rebelles et le gouvernement congolais réduisent au silence les voix qui dénoncent les abus et violations des droits humains dans les territoires occupés par le M23 comme dans le reste du pays. L’Observatoire exprime sa vive inquiétude face aux attaques et menaces de mort à l’encontre de M. Pacifique Muliri, qui ne semblent viser qu’à restreindre sa liberté d’expression et l’exercice légitime de documentation des violations des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités congolaises à prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’assurer la sécurité physique et le bien-être psychologique de M. Pacifique Muliri. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités congolaises à mener une enquête indépendante, rigoureuse, impartiale et transparente afin d’identifier les responsables de ces attaques et menaces de mort, et de les traduire devant un tribunal indépendant, compétent et impartial. L’Observatoire rappelle au M23/AFC ses obligations au regard du droit international humanitaire et des droits humains, et l’enjoint à faire cesser immédiatement toute menace ou intimidation visant M. Pacifique Muliri, à garantir sa sécurité physique et son bien-être, à diligenter sans délai une enquête interne crédible et impartiale pour identifier les responsables, à coopérer avec les mécanismes indépendants compétents, et à adopter des mesures concrètes de non-répétition.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/nepal-call-for-accountability-over-protest-crackdown-urging-an-end-to-digital-repression-and-police-misuse-of-force/ Wed, 10 Sep 2025 15:34:29 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23926 The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, together with the undersigned organisations, condemn the crackdown on peaceful protests in Nepal, sparked by widespread demonstrations against corruption and a government-imposed ban on social media platforms. We call on Nepali authorities to immediately end all forms of violence and repression against peaceful protestors, lift remaining curfews and amend restrictive digital legislation to align with international human rights standards, thereby safeguarding the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly both online and offline. Paris, Geneva, Kathmandu - 9 September 2025 – The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, and civil society partners from Nepal condemn the reported killing of at least 19 protestors and the injuring of hundreds more during demonstrations against corruption and the Nepal Government’s blanket ban on 26 social media and messaging platforms. The brutal response of security forces—including the use of live ammunition, tear gas, water cannon, rubber bullets, and batons—is unlawful, unnecessary, and disproportionate. Excessive force should never be used against peaceful protestors. As of 9 September 2025, the government has lifted its nationwide social media ban. This reversal doesn’t undo the grave violations against those exercising their right to peaceful assembly. A curfew remains in place in at least three districts, including Kathmandu, and police reportedly opened fire again on protesters in Chandranigahapur today. FORUM-ASIA, CIVICUS, and partners urge the Government of Nepal to immediately end the use of unlawful and excessive force against protestors, lift curfews, and withdraw the military from civilian spaces. The government should conduct a prompt, impartial, and independent investigation into all killings and injuries, ensuring accountability, justice, and reparations to victims, survivors, and their families. “The deadly crackdown on protestors in Nepal marks a regression in the handling of protests by security forces. The government’s actions have not only eroded public trust but also revealed a deeper governance failure,” said Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso, Executive Director of FORUM-ASIA. “The state resorted first to banning social media as a weapon of political control over free speech, and then deployed excessive force against its own citizens who were merely exercising their fundamental right to dissent. The government must protect, not punish, the people for demanding their rights,” Bacalso continued. Peaceful protests met with violence On 8 September, youth-led “Gen Z” protests erupted in Kathmandu and other cities, with thousands demanding an end to corruption and the lifting of the social media ban. In Kathmandu’s New Baneshwar, police opened fire after protestors entered Parliament premises. Security forces deployed water cannons, tear gas, and even live ammunition to disperse crowds. Consequently, at least 19 protestors were killed and more than a hundred were injured, many of whom remain in critical condition with bullet wounds to the head and chest. Tear gas reportedly seeped into a hospital treating the injured, disrupting urgent medical care–underscoring the indiscriminate and disproportionate nature of the response. The killing of unarmed protestors through the use of live ammunition is a grave violation of the right to life. Such excessive force violates Nepal’s Constitution and its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly. Nepal’s security forces have repeatedly used excessive force against peaceful demonstrations. As protests continue across the country in response to the killings, we remind the authorities that any use of force by law enforcement officials must comply with the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality, in line with international standards. Digital repression On 4 September, the government imposed a blanket ban on social media platforms—including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, Signal, and X—after companies were given a seven-day ultimatum to register locally under the 2023 social media directives. Protests soon broke out in response. Since November 2023, the government has issued at least five notices to social media companies to register locally, appoint grievance officers, and establish compliance mechanisms. These requirements were said to be grounded in Section 79 of the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) 2006. The Nepali civil society has argued that such directives exceed the scope of the ETA, which was not intended to license global platforms or regulate online speech, but only to regulate e-commerce and cybercrimes. By bypassing parliamentary scrutiny, these directives “go beyond the ambit of the ETA” and lack a clear statutory basis. As such, they fall short of the ICCPR’s requirement that any restrictions on rights must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate, and must be “provided by law.” The ban was not an isolated incident but part of a wider pattern. The draft Social Media Bill 2025 may impose sweeping licensing requirements, vague takedown powers, liability for local representatives, and up to five years’ imprisonment for undefined “false” or “anti-national” content. Such provisions violate international standards of legal certainty. They could institutionalize censorship, criminalize dissent, silence journalism, and weaponize laws for political control. “Nepal is following a regional authoritarian playbook—India’s IT Rules, Pakistan’s repeated shutdowns of X and YouTube, and Bangladesh’s crackdown on students in 2024 all reveal the same pattern. When governments shut down civic space—whether digital or physical—people will resist. And when states respond with bullets, it only deepens the very crisis of legitimacy it seeks to contain,” said Reylynne Dela Paz, Advocacy and Campaigns Lead at CIVICUS. Call to action

1.  We call on the government of Nepal to respect the people’s right to protest and freedom of peaceful assembly, and to immediately halt all forms of violation and brutality by authorities against protesters.
2. The government should ensure that the rollback of the social media ban is permanent. It must withdraw or substantially amend the draft Social Media Bill 2025 and related directives to align with international human rights law and standards.
3.  As a state party to ICCPR, Nepal must uphold its international obligations. To protect civic space, the government must respect the fundamental rights of its people–both online and offline.

]]> The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, together with the undersigned organisations, condemn the crackdown on peaceful protests in Nepal, sparked by widespread demonstrations against corruption and a government-imposed ban on social media platforms. We call on Nepali authorities to immediately end all forms of violence and repression against peaceful protestors, lift remaining curfews and amend restrictive digital legislation to align with international human rights standards, thereby safeguarding the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly both online and offline. Paris, Geneva, Kathmandu - 9 September 2025 – The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, and civil society partners from Nepal condemn the reported killing of at least 19 protestors and the injuring of hundreds more during demonstrations against corruption and the Nepal Government’s blanket ban on 26 social media and messaging platforms. The brutal response of security forces—including the use of live ammunition, tear gas, water cannon, rubber bullets, and batons—is unlawful, unnecessary, and disproportionate. Excessive force should never be used against peaceful protestors. As of 9 September 2025, the government has lifted its nationwide social media ban. This reversal doesn’t undo the grave violations against those exercising their right to peaceful assembly. A curfew remains in place in at least three districts, including Kathmandu, and police reportedly opened fire again on protesters in Chandranigahapur today. FORUM-ASIA, CIVICUS, and partners urge the Government of Nepal to immediately end the use of unlawful and excessive force against protestors, lift curfews, and withdraw the military from civilian spaces. The government should conduct a prompt, impartial, and independent investigation into all killings and injuries, ensuring accountability, justice, and reparations to victims, survivors, and their families. “The deadly crackdown on protestors in Nepal marks a regression in the handling of protests by security forces. The government’s actions have not only eroded public trust but also revealed a deeper governance failure,” said Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso, Executive Director of FORUM-ASIA. “The state resorted first to banning social media as a weapon of political control over free speech, and then deployed excessive force against its own citizens who were merely exercising their fundamental right to dissent. The government must protect, not punish, the people for demanding their rights,” Bacalso continued. Peaceful protests met with violence On 8 September, youth-led “Gen Z” protests erupted in Kathmandu and other cities, with thousands demanding an end to corruption and the lifting of the social media ban. In Kathmandu’s New Baneshwar, police opened fire after protestors entered Parliament premises. Security forces deployed water cannons, tear gas, and even live ammunition to disperse crowds. Consequently, at least 19 protestors were killed and more than a hundred were injured, many of whom remain in critical condition with bullet wounds to the head and chest. Tear gas reportedly seeped into a hospital treating the injured, disrupting urgent medical care–underscoring the indiscriminate and disproportionate nature of the response. The killing of unarmed protestors through the use of live ammunition is a grave violation of the right to life. Such excessive force violates Nepal’s Constitution and its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly. Nepal’s security forces have repeatedly used excessive force against peaceful demonstrations. As protests continue across the country in response to the killings, we remind the authorities that any use of force by law enforcement officials must comply with the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality, in line with international standards. Digital repression On 4 September, the government imposed a blanket ban on social media platforms—including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, Signal, and X—after companies were given a seven-day ultimatum to register locally under the 2023 social media directives. Protests soon broke out in response. Since November 2023, the government has issued at least five notices to social media companies to register locally, appoint grievance officers, and establish compliance mechanisms. These requirements were said to be grounded in Section 79 of the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) 2006. The Nepali civil society has argued that such directives exceed the scope of the ETA, which was not intended to license global platforms or regulate online speech, but only to regulate e-commerce and cybercrimes. By bypassing parliamentary scrutiny, these directives “go beyond the ambit of the ETA” and lack a clear statutory basis. As such, they fall short of the ICCPR’s requirement that any restrictions on rights must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate, and must be “provided by law.” The ban was not an isolated incident but part of a wider pattern. The draft Social Media Bill 2025 may impose sweeping licensing requirements, vague takedown powers, liability for local representatives, and up to five years’ imprisonment for undefined “false” or “anti-national” content. Such provisions violate international standards of legal certainty. They could institutionalize censorship, criminalize dissent, silence journalism, and weaponize laws for political control. “Nepal is following a regional authoritarian playbook—India’s IT Rules, Pakistan’s repeated shutdowns of X and YouTube, and Bangladesh’s crackdown on students in 2024 all reveal the same pattern. When governments shut down civic space—whether digital or physical—people will resist. And when states respond with bullets, it only deepens the very crisis of legitimacy it seeks to contain,” said Reylynne Dela Paz, Advocacy and Campaigns Lead at CIVICUS. Call to action

1.  We call on the government of Nepal to respect the people’s right to protest and freedom of peaceful assembly, and to immediately halt all forms of violation and brutality by authorities against protesters.
2. The government should ensure that the rollback of the social media ban is permanent. It must withdraw or substantially amend the draft Social Media Bill 2025 and related directives to align with international human rights law and standards.
3.  As a state party to ICCPR, Nepal must uphold its international obligations. To protect civic space, the government must respect the fundamental rights of its people–both online and offline.

]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/kenya-end-intimidation-and-judicial-reprisals-against-whistleblower-nelson-amenya/ Fri, 18 Jul 2025 15:46:47 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23826 The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (FIDH-OMCT) expresses deep concern over the case of Mr Nelson Amenya, a Kenyan whistleblower who has courageously spoken out against impunity and corruption in Kenya. The Observatory also draws attention to the broader systemic challenges faced by whistleblowers in Kenya and underscores the urgent need for comprehensive and enforceable legal safeguards to ensure their protection and uphold their rights, in line with international human rights standards. Paris-Geneva, 18 July 2025 – Mr Nelson Amenya is a Kenyan entrepreneur, economist, and whistleblower, currently based in France, where he is pursuing a Master’s degree in Business Administration (MBA). In 2024, he gained international recognition after exposing, via social media, serious irregularities in a $2 billion deal between the Kenyan government and the Indian multinational Adani Group. The agreement concerned a 30-year lease for the modernisation and management of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) in Nairobi. Nelson Amenya claimed that ‘‘government officials intended to bypass legal requirements, including public consultation, which are meant to safeguard taxpayers’ money and had no plans to consult stakeholders’’. He further affirmed that the agreement included a gradual increase in airport fees and massive tax exemptions in favour of the Adani Group, which “jeopardised national interest and threatened Kenya’s economy”. Additionally, Nelson Amenya publicly asserted on social media, alleged links between Mr Jayesh Saini - a Kenyan entrepreneur from Indian origin, healthcare tycoon, founder and CEO of Bliss Healthcare - and the disputed deal involving the Adani Group. Since Nelson Amenya’s disclosure of the controversial procurement process that would have transferred control of Nairobi’s main airport to India’s Adani Group in July 2024, he has been subjected to ongoing judicial reprisals, intimidation and online harassment. Mr Amenya has been subjected to a campaign of defamation on the internet. Initially, Indian bloggers accused him of working for France, China, or Russia. Soon after, individuals began scouring his LinkedIn and Instagram profiles, retrieving photos he had shared with school friends. One such image, taken during a school trip to Stuttgart and showing him alongside a Chinese classmate, was circulated online, with claims that it depicted him meeting with Chinese contacts. The campaign escalated when a Kenyan blogger alleged he was being funded by the opposition party. These photos were then used as supposed evidence to support the ongoing defamation against him. In 2025, later this year, high-level officials requested him to stop being critical of the regime and start “supporting them”. On 11 September 2024, Jayesh Saini initiated legal proceedings against Nelson Amenya before the Nairobi Magistrate Court at Milimani, Nairobi, seeking the removal of social media posts alleging his links to the Adani Group deal, which he deemed defamatory, as well as an injunction against any further publications that could be related to him. The court, however, rejected the application, stating that the issues raised by Nelson Amenya were matters of legitimate public interest and warranted full adjudication in a trial. On 12 September 2024, Jayesh Saini contacted Nelson Amenya’s former employer in the United Kingdom, threatening legal reprisals unless Nelson Amenya stopped posting on social media. Considering that Nelson Amenya had relocated to France to pursue his MBA and established his domicile there, Jayesh Saini filed a civil lawsuit for public defamation against him before the Versailles Judicial Court in France1 on 28 October 2024, seeking the removal of tweets published between 5 September and 13 October 2024. In an urgent interim order dated 14 January 2025, the Versailles Judicial Court dismissed Jayesh Saini’s claims, ruling that the social media posts concerned matters of public debate and legitimate interest, and were protected by the right to freedom of expression in conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights. However, on 2 December 2024, Jayesh Saini escalated his legal action by filing a criminal complaint for public defamation with the investigating judge of the Versailles judicial court. On 21 November 2024, after several days of strike action at the airport by staff contesting the deal, Kenyan President William Ruto instructed the cancellation of a planned procurement procedure that would have granted operational control of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport to the Adani Group. This decision came after chairman Gautam Adani was indicted on allegations of bribery to secure power supply contracts, and of misleading U.S. investors. Furthermore, as of late October 2024, officers from the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) in Kenya, went to Nelson Amenya’s parents claiming they were searching for a stolen vehicle on the property. However, these visits are believed to have been linked to surveillance efforts targeting Nelson Amenya due to his whistle-blowing report concerning the JKIA-Adani deal. In France and Kenya, Nelson Amenya continues to face intimidation, online harassment and judicial reprisals, underscoring the risks of transnational repression faced by whistle-blowers and the urgent need for stronger legal protections. Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are increasingly used to intimidate whistleblowers, journalists, and civil society actors. In the African context, Southern African human rights defenders, particularly environmental defenders, are especially vulnerable to SLAPPs and other forms of legal intimidation aimed at silencing them. This targeting is emblematic of a broader pattern in Kenya, where whistle-blowers often endure harassment, legal threats, and online harassment for exposing corruption and advocating for transparency. According to a 2021 review by Transparency International Kenya on the state of whistle-blower protection and defamation law, the country lacks comprehensive legislation on whistle-blowing protection. Moreover, the newly proposed Whistle-blower Protection Bill 2024 has yet to be enacted into law. The Observatory calls on the relevant Kenyan authorities to take all necessary measures to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Mr Nelson Amenya and his family, and to promptly, thoroughly, independently, and impartially investigate all threats, acts of intimidation, and online harassment directed against him. Furthermore, the Observatory urges Kenyan authorities to ensure that Nelson Amenya is able to exercise his right to freedom of expression without fear of judicial reprisals, as per Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and that any legal proceedings against him fully respect international fair trial standards. Finally, the Observatory affirms the legitimate role of whistle-blowers as human rights defenders in exposing corruption and advancing transparency and accountability.]]> The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (FIDH-OMCT) expresses deep concern over the case of Mr Nelson Amenya, a Kenyan whistleblower who has courageously spoken out against impunity and corruption in Kenya. The Observatory also draws attention to the broader systemic challenges faced by whistleblowers in Kenya and underscores the urgent need for comprehensive and enforceable legal safeguards to ensure their protection and uphold their rights, in line with international human rights standards. Paris-Geneva, 18 July 2025 – Mr Nelson Amenya is a Kenyan entrepreneur, economist, and whistleblower, currently based in France, where he is pursuing a Master’s degree in Business Administration (MBA). In 2024, he gained international recognition after exposing, via social media, serious irregularities in a $2 billion deal between the Kenyan government and the Indian multinational Adani Group. The agreement concerned a 30-year lease for the modernisation and management of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) in Nairobi. Nelson Amenya claimed that ‘‘government officials intended to bypass legal requirements, including public consultation, which are meant to safeguard taxpayers’ money and had no plans to consult stakeholders’’. He further affirmed that the agreement included a gradual increase in airport fees and massive tax exemptions in favour of the Adani Group, which “jeopardised national interest and threatened Kenya’s economy”. Additionally, Nelson Amenya publicly asserted on social media, alleged links between Mr Jayesh Saini - a Kenyan entrepreneur from Indian origin, healthcare tycoon, founder and CEO of Bliss Healthcare - and the disputed deal involving the Adani Group. Since Nelson Amenya’s disclosure of the controversial procurement process that would have transferred control of Nairobi’s main airport to India’s Adani Group in July 2024, he has been subjected to ongoing judicial reprisals, intimidation and online harassment. Mr Amenya has been subjected to a campaign of defamation on the internet. Initially, Indian bloggers accused him of working for France, China, or Russia. Soon after, individuals began scouring his LinkedIn and Instagram profiles, retrieving photos he had shared with school friends. One such image, taken during a school trip to Stuttgart and showing him alongside a Chinese classmate, was circulated online, with claims that it depicted him meeting with Chinese contacts. The campaign escalated when a Kenyan blogger alleged he was being funded by the opposition party. These photos were then used as supposed evidence to support the ongoing defamation against him. In 2025, later this year, high-level officials requested him to stop being critical of the regime and start “supporting them”. On 11 September 2024, Jayesh Saini initiated legal proceedings against Nelson Amenya before the Nairobi Magistrate Court at Milimani, Nairobi, seeking the removal of social media posts alleging his links to the Adani Group deal, which he deemed defamatory, as well as an injunction against any further publications that could be related to him. The court, however, rejected the application, stating that the issues raised by Nelson Amenya were matters of legitimate public interest and warranted full adjudication in a trial. On 12 September 2024, Jayesh Saini contacted Nelson Amenya’s former employer in the United Kingdom, threatening legal reprisals unless Nelson Amenya stopped posting on social media. Considering that Nelson Amenya had relocated to France to pursue his MBA and established his domicile there, Jayesh Saini filed a civil lawsuit for public defamation against him before the Versailles Judicial Court in France1 on 28 October 2024, seeking the removal of tweets published between 5 September and 13 October 2024. In an urgent interim order dated 14 January 2025, the Versailles Judicial Court dismissed Jayesh Saini’s claims, ruling that the social media posts concerned matters of public debate and legitimate interest, and were protected by the right to freedom of expression in conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights. However, on 2 December 2024, Jayesh Saini escalated his legal action by filing a criminal complaint for public defamation with the investigating judge of the Versailles judicial court. On 21 November 2024, after several days of strike action at the airport by staff contesting the deal, Kenyan President William Ruto instructed the cancellation of a planned procurement procedure that would have granted operational control of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport to the Adani Group. This decision came after chairman Gautam Adani was indicted on allegations of bribery to secure power supply contracts, and of misleading U.S. investors. Furthermore, as of late October 2024, officers from the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) in Kenya, went to Nelson Amenya’s parents claiming they were searching for a stolen vehicle on the property. However, these visits are believed to have been linked to surveillance efforts targeting Nelson Amenya due to his whistle-blowing report concerning the JKIA-Adani deal. In France and Kenya, Nelson Amenya continues to face intimidation, online harassment and judicial reprisals, underscoring the risks of transnational repression faced by whistle-blowers and the urgent need for stronger legal protections. Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are increasingly used to intimidate whistleblowers, journalists, and civil society actors. In the African context, Southern African human rights defenders, particularly environmental defenders, are especially vulnerable to SLAPPs and other forms of legal intimidation aimed at silencing them. This targeting is emblematic of a broader pattern in Kenya, where whistle-blowers often endure harassment, legal threats, and online harassment for exposing corruption and advocating for transparency. According to a 2021 review by Transparency International Kenya on the state of whistle-blower protection and defamation law, the country lacks comprehensive legislation on whistle-blowing protection. Moreover, the newly proposed Whistle-blower Protection Bill 2024 has yet to be enacted into law. The Observatory calls on the relevant Kenyan authorities to take all necessary measures to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Mr Nelson Amenya and his family, and to promptly, thoroughly, independently, and impartially investigate all threats, acts of intimidation, and online harassment directed against him. Furthermore, the Observatory urges Kenyan authorities to ensure that Nelson Amenya is able to exercise his right to freedom of expression without fear of judicial reprisals, as per Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and that any legal proceedings against him fully respect international fair trial standards. Finally, the Observatory affirms the legitimate role of whistle-blowers as human rights defenders in exposing corruption and advancing transparency and accountability.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/kyrgyzstan-end-renewed-crackdown-on-independent-kloop-media-platform/ Wed, 04 Jun 2025 15:38:16 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23593 3 June 2025 - We, the undersigned human rights organisations, are deeply alarmed by the renewed crackdown on Kloop, a leading independent Kyrgyzstani media platform known for investigating and reporting on corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations. In a sweeping security service operation between 28 and 30 May 2025, the authorities arbitrarily detained current and former Kloop staff in a clear attempt to intimidate and stifle the platform’s investigative reporting – further undermining the country’s already deteriorating space for dissent and independent journalism, and threatening the rule of law. We call on Kyrgyzstan’s authorities to immediately halt the intimidation and harassment of Kloop and its staff, release the platform’s contributors who are still in detention, and uphold their international obligations to protect media workers and safeguard press freedom. We also urge Kyrgyzstan’s international partners – in particular the European Union – to take a firm public stance demanding an end to the dismantling of independent journalism in the country. Officials from the State Committee for National Security (SCNS) detained at least eight current and former Kloop employees— both journalists and non-editorial staff. They are: Aleksander Aleksandrov, Joomart Duulatov, Ziyagul Bolot Kyzy, Aiday Erkebaeva, Zara Sadygalieva, Abdil Torobaev, Symbat Baimurzaeva as well as an accountant, who requested to remain anonymous. Two others, friends of Kloop contributors, were arbitrarily detained at the same time because they happened to be present when the arrests took place. As reported by Kloop, SCNS officials failed to explain the reasons for the detentions, and searched the homes of media workers – confiscating computers, cameras, equipment for live broadcasting, and phones – without presenting search warrants. They also seized documentation and equipment from Kloop premises. They interrogated the detained Kloop contributors for several hours without allowing access to legal counsel and did not allow them to contact their families or colleagues. Lawyers representing those detained described these actions as flagrant violations of due process. Most of those detained – including the two friends of Kloop contributors – were eventually released after lengthy questioning. Classified as witnesses, they were placed under gag orders preventing them from speaking about their experiences. However, following a closed court hearing on 30 May, Kloop’s video operator Aleksander Aleksandrov and former contributor Joomart Duulatov were remanded in pre-trial detention until 21 July, pending further investigation. They will be held in the SCNS pre-trial detention in Bishkek. The two journalists face charges of “public calls for mass unrest” under Article 278 of the Criminal Code—a vague and overly broad provision frequently used to silence dissent. If convicted, they could face lengthy prison terms. Both reportedly “confessed” to the charges while being interrogated without a lawyer present. While the SCNS has not disclosed further details of the charges, a 30 May press release from the agency accused Kloop of operating illegally following a 2024 court ruling ordering the liquidation of the Kloop Media Public Foundation – the organisation running the Kloop news platform. Kloop’s top management—currently in exile for security reasons—has refuted these claims, stating that since the 2024 ruling, the platform has continued to operate legally through a separate legal entity that has not faced any official complaints. The SCNS also accused Kloop of spreading “negative” and “distorted” content aimed at “manipulating” public opinion and provoking ‘‘discontent’’ and unrest—language similar to that previously used to justify the court-ordered closure of the Kloop Media Public Foundation, although the official reason cited was that this organisation had allegedly operated beyond the scope of its charter. In a troubling move, the SCNS released a video on its official Instagram account showing several of the detained individuals expressing regret for contributing to Kloop’s allegedly “destructive” activities and to the dissemination of content ‘‘denigrating’’ the president and his allies. They were also shown pledging to cease cooperation with the platform. In addition to constituting public shaming, this video footage raised concerns that detainees may have been subjected to pressure while being interrogated without legal protection. We are seriously concerned that the SCNS’s recent actions are part of a broader retaliatory campaign against Kloop in response to its independent and investigative reporting, which has uncovered high-level corruption, government misconduct, and serious human rights abuses. Such journalism plays a vital role in ensuring transparency and accountability and upholding the rule of law – it is not a crime. By targeting Kloop staff in an attempt to silence the platform, the authorities are violating Kyrgyzstan’s international obligations to safeguard media freedom and freedom of expression – including the duty to ensure that media outlets and journalists can criticise those in power without fear of reprisal. The reports of serious due process violations—searches conducted without warrants, arbitrary detentions, incommunicado detention, denial of access to legal counsel, and potential pressure—further reflect a profound disregard for the rule of law and fundamental rights protected under both international and national law. The renewed crackdown on Kloop comes amid an escalating assault on media freedom and critical voices in Kyrgyzstan. In the last few years, authorities have increasingly targeted independent outlets, journalists, and bloggers through raids, prosecutions, and other tactics designed to intimidate and silence them. For example, in 2024, during coordinated raids similar to those now affecting Kloop, the authorities detained a group of journalists linked to the Temirov Live platform—also known for investigating corruption. Four of them were later convicted under the same Criminal Code provision used in the Kloop case, and the platform’s director, Makhabat Tazhibek Kyzy, is currently serving a six-year prison sentence. The authorities have also sought to link the current detentions of Kloop staff to their alleged cooperation with Temirov Live’s founder, Bolot Temirov, who has lived abroad since being unlawfully stripped of his citizenship and expelled from Kyrgyzstan in 2022. In a Facebook post, a presidential spokesperson claimed that detained Kloop contributors had been paid by Temirov to conduct ‘‘false’’ investigations. The video recorded by SCNS – mentioned above – also featured such allegations. While Temirov Live and Kloop have cooperated on joint corruption investigations, the detained individuals are not known to have had any direct contact with Temirov. A growing number of other journalists, bloggers, and activists have also faced charges under broadly worded Criminal Code provisions for criticising those in power. An independent journalist, Kanyshay Mamyrkulova, remains in detention pending trial, following her March 2025 arrest for allegedly inciting mass unrest and inter-ethnic hatred through social media posts critical of the government’s stance on the Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan border issue. A human rights defender, Rita Karasartova, is likewise in pre-trial detention on mass unrest-related charges after sharing a message on social media from an opposition activist in April 2025. On 27 May 2025, Zhoomart Karabaev, a whistleblower, received a three-year suspended sentence in a case brought against him for allegedly calling for mass unrest and the forceful seizure of power—charges that followed his exposure of how expert assessments dictated by security services are used in politically motivated prosecutions. These targeted prosecutions and the broader pattern of ongoing persecution signal a systematic attempt to dismantle independent reporting and suppress open debate on issues of public concern in Kyrgyzstan. It has had a deeply chilling effect, fuelling growing fear and self-censorship among media contributors, civil society representatives, and ordinary social media users—aware that criticism of the authorities could result in harassment, criminal charges, or even imprisonment. The downward trend is also reflected in international surveys: in the recently released 2025 World Press Freedom Index, Kyrgyzstan ranked 144th out of 180 countries – down 24 places from the previous year and, for the first time, below neighbouring Kazakhstan and just above Uzbekistan. We call on Kyrgyzstan’s authorities to: - End this dangerous backsliding, uphold their international human rights obligations, and; - Drop all charges against current and former Kloop employees brought in retaliation for the platform’s independent and investigative reporting, and immediately and unconditionally release the two journalists in pre-trial detention. - Thoroughly and impartially investigate all reported due process violations relating to the detentions of Kloop staff and their friends and hold those responsible to account. This should include an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the recorded “repentant” video messages, as well as any possible ill-treatment of detainees. - Cease the harassment and intimidation of Kloop and its contributors, as well as others targeted for independent reporting, or criticism of those in power, and ensure they can carry out their professional and civic activities safely and without obstruction. We further urge the European Union and Kyrgyzstan’s other international partners to respond resolutely to this renewed crackdown. Diplomatic engagement and international solidarity are urgently needed to defend Kyrgyzstan’s shrinking space for independent journalism and open public debate and to support those engaged in these activities in the face of increasing repression. The persecution of Kloop’s staff sends a chilling message to all independent voices in Kyrgyzstan and is part of an immediate and direct threat to the rule of law and democracy. It cannot afford to go unchallenged.]]> 3 June 2025 - We, the undersigned human rights organisations, are deeply alarmed by the renewed crackdown on Kloop, a leading independent Kyrgyzstani media platform known for investigating and reporting on corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations. In a sweeping security service operation between 28 and 30 May 2025, the authorities arbitrarily detained current and former Kloop staff in a clear attempt to intimidate and stifle the platform’s investigative reporting – further undermining the country’s already deteriorating space for dissent and independent journalism, and threatening the rule of law. We call on Kyrgyzstan’s authorities to immediately halt the intimidation and harassment of Kloop and its staff, release the platform’s contributors who are still in detention, and uphold their international obligations to protect media workers and safeguard press freedom. We also urge Kyrgyzstan’s international partners – in particular the European Union – to take a firm public stance demanding an end to the dismantling of independent journalism in the country. Officials from the State Committee for National Security (SCNS) detained at least eight current and former Kloop employees— both journalists and non-editorial staff. They are: Aleksander Aleksandrov, Joomart Duulatov, Ziyagul Bolot Kyzy, Aiday Erkebaeva, Zara Sadygalieva, Abdil Torobaev, Symbat Baimurzaeva as well as an accountant, who requested to remain anonymous. Two others, friends of Kloop contributors, were arbitrarily detained at the same time because they happened to be present when the arrests took place. As reported by Kloop, SCNS officials failed to explain the reasons for the detentions, and searched the homes of media workers – confiscating computers, cameras, equipment for live broadcasting, and phones – without presenting search warrants. They also seized documentation and equipment from Kloop premises. They interrogated the detained Kloop contributors for several hours without allowing access to legal counsel and did not allow them to contact their families or colleagues. Lawyers representing those detained described these actions as flagrant violations of due process. Most of those detained – including the two friends of Kloop contributors – were eventually released after lengthy questioning. Classified as witnesses, they were placed under gag orders preventing them from speaking about their experiences. However, following a closed court hearing on 30 May, Kloop’s video operator Aleksander Aleksandrov and former contributor Joomart Duulatov were remanded in pre-trial detention until 21 July, pending further investigation. They will be held in the SCNS pre-trial detention in Bishkek. The two journalists face charges of “public calls for mass unrest” under Article 278 of the Criminal Code—a vague and overly broad provision frequently used to silence dissent. If convicted, they could face lengthy prison terms. Both reportedly “confessed” to the charges while being interrogated without a lawyer present. While the SCNS has not disclosed further details of the charges, a 30 May press release from the agency accused Kloop of operating illegally following a 2024 court ruling ordering the liquidation of the Kloop Media Public Foundation – the organisation running the Kloop news platform. Kloop’s top management—currently in exile for security reasons—has refuted these claims, stating that since the 2024 ruling, the platform has continued to operate legally through a separate legal entity that has not faced any official complaints. The SCNS also accused Kloop of spreading “negative” and “distorted” content aimed at “manipulating” public opinion and provoking ‘‘discontent’’ and unrest—language similar to that previously used to justify the court-ordered closure of the Kloop Media Public Foundation, although the official reason cited was that this organisation had allegedly operated beyond the scope of its charter. In a troubling move, the SCNS released a video on its official Instagram account showing several of the detained individuals expressing regret for contributing to Kloop’s allegedly “destructive” activities and to the dissemination of content ‘‘denigrating’’ the president and his allies. They were also shown pledging to cease cooperation with the platform. In addition to constituting public shaming, this video footage raised concerns that detainees may have been subjected to pressure while being interrogated without legal protection. We are seriously concerned that the SCNS’s recent actions are part of a broader retaliatory campaign against Kloop in response to its independent and investigative reporting, which has uncovered high-level corruption, government misconduct, and serious human rights abuses. Such journalism plays a vital role in ensuring transparency and accountability and upholding the rule of law – it is not a crime. By targeting Kloop staff in an attempt to silence the platform, the authorities are violating Kyrgyzstan’s international obligations to safeguard media freedom and freedom of expression – including the duty to ensure that media outlets and journalists can criticise those in power without fear of reprisal. The reports of serious due process violations—searches conducted without warrants, arbitrary detentions, incommunicado detention, denial of access to legal counsel, and potential pressure—further reflect a profound disregard for the rule of law and fundamental rights protected under both international and national law. The renewed crackdown on Kloop comes amid an escalating assault on media freedom and critical voices in Kyrgyzstan. In the last few years, authorities have increasingly targeted independent outlets, journalists, and bloggers through raids, prosecutions, and other tactics designed to intimidate and silence them. For example, in 2024, during coordinated raids similar to those now affecting Kloop, the authorities detained a group of journalists linked to the Temirov Live platform—also known for investigating corruption. Four of them were later convicted under the same Criminal Code provision used in the Kloop case, and the platform’s director, Makhabat Tazhibek Kyzy, is currently serving a six-year prison sentence. The authorities have also sought to link the current detentions of Kloop staff to their alleged cooperation with Temirov Live’s founder, Bolot Temirov, who has lived abroad since being unlawfully stripped of his citizenship and expelled from Kyrgyzstan in 2022. In a Facebook post, a presidential spokesperson claimed that detained Kloop contributors had been paid by Temirov to conduct ‘‘false’’ investigations. The video recorded by SCNS – mentioned above – also featured such allegations. While Temirov Live and Kloop have cooperated on joint corruption investigations, the detained individuals are not known to have had any direct contact with Temirov. A growing number of other journalists, bloggers, and activists have also faced charges under broadly worded Criminal Code provisions for criticising those in power. An independent journalist, Kanyshay Mamyrkulova, remains in detention pending trial, following her March 2025 arrest for allegedly inciting mass unrest and inter-ethnic hatred through social media posts critical of the government’s stance on the Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan border issue. A human rights defender, Rita Karasartova, is likewise in pre-trial detention on mass unrest-related charges after sharing a message on social media from an opposition activist in April 2025. On 27 May 2025, Zhoomart Karabaev, a whistleblower, received a three-year suspended sentence in a case brought against him for allegedly calling for mass unrest and the forceful seizure of power—charges that followed his exposure of how expert assessments dictated by security services are used in politically motivated prosecutions. These targeted prosecutions and the broader pattern of ongoing persecution signal a systematic attempt to dismantle independent reporting and suppress open debate on issues of public concern in Kyrgyzstan. It has had a deeply chilling effect, fuelling growing fear and self-censorship among media contributors, civil society representatives, and ordinary social media users—aware that criticism of the authorities could result in harassment, criminal charges, or even imprisonment. The downward trend is also reflected in international surveys: in the recently released 2025 World Press Freedom Index, Kyrgyzstan ranked 144th out of 180 countries – down 24 places from the previous year and, for the first time, below neighbouring Kazakhstan and just above Uzbekistan. We call on Kyrgyzstan’s authorities to: - End this dangerous backsliding, uphold their international human rights obligations, and; - Drop all charges against current and former Kloop employees brought in retaliation for the platform’s independent and investigative reporting, and immediately and unconditionally release the two journalists in pre-trial detention. - Thoroughly and impartially investigate all reported due process violations relating to the detentions of Kloop staff and their friends and hold those responsible to account. This should include an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the recorded “repentant” video messages, as well as any possible ill-treatment of detainees. - Cease the harassment and intimidation of Kloop and its contributors, as well as others targeted for independent reporting, or criticism of those in power, and ensure they can carry out their professional and civic activities safely and without obstruction. We further urge the European Union and Kyrgyzstan’s other international partners to respond resolutely to this renewed crackdown. Diplomatic engagement and international solidarity are urgently needed to defend Kyrgyzstan’s shrinking space for independent journalism and open public debate and to support those engaged in these activities in the face of increasing repression. The persecution of Kloop’s staff sends a chilling message to all independent voices in Kyrgyzstan and is part of an immediate and direct threat to the rule of law and democracy. It cannot afford to go unchallenged.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/el-salvador-la-persecucion-contra-personas-defensoras-de-los-derechos-humanos-alcanza-un-nuevo-umbral/ Wed, 28 May 2025 17:48:30 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23559

La abogada y defensora de los derechos humanos Ruth López fue detenida sin orden judicial. Desaparecida desde hace más de doce horas, permanece detenida sin cargos.

En el contexto de un estado de emergencia, la aprobación de la nueva ley de «agentes extranjeros» restringe aún más el espacio para la sociedad civil en El Salvador.

La FIDH y la OMCT, a través de su programa conjunto del Observatorio para la Protección de las Personas Defensoras de Derechos Humanos, hacen un llamado a las autoridades salvadoreñas para que la liberen inmediatamente y a la comunidad internacional para que no permanezca en silencio frente a la continua persecución de las personas defensoras de derechos humanos.

28 de mayo de 2025, París, Ginebra. La arbitrariedad se convierte en la norma para silenciar las voces independientes en El Salvador. El 18 de mayo de 2025, a las 23 horas, Ruth López, reconocida abogada y jefa de la Unidad Anticorrupción de la organización Cristosal, fue detenida en su domicilio por la Policía Nacional Civil. Privada de contacto con su familia y sus abogados por más de doce horas, fue trasladada sin explicación a través de varios centros de detención. Hasta la fecha, no se le han formulado cargos de manera oficial, aunque la Fiscalía la acusa públicamente de malversación de fondos. «Lo que está sufriendo Ruth López no es un caso aislado: es una estrategia de terror destinada a silenciar a quienes se atreven a decir la verdad», declaró Jimena Reyes, responsable de la oficina para las Américas en la FIDH. Cristosal, fundada por obispos anglicanos y comprometida con la defensa de personas desplazadas, perseguidas o en situación de vulnerabilidad, está ahora en la mira de las autoridades. Su labor se vuelve cada vez más difícil en un país que se hunde en el autoritarismo. Cristosal se une así a otras organizaciones señaladas por el gobierno, como la Unidad de Defensa de Derechos Humanos y Comunitarios (UNIDEHC). La libertad de prensa también está amenazada, con recientes agresiones a periodistas del medio de comunicación en línea El Faro, tras la revelación de presuntos vínculos entre el gobierno y estructuras del crimen organizado. La última ofensiva registrada: la adopción, el 20 de mayo de 2025, de la “Ley de Agentes Extranjeros”, una legislación liberticida que amenaza la supervivencia financiera y la existencia misma de la sociedad civil independiente. «Estamos presenciando una instrumentalización alarmante del derecho penal para silenciar voces críticas. Este clima de miedo es incompatible con cualquier Estado de derecho o democracia», declaró Gerald Staberock, Secretario General de la Organización Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT). Una ley para silenciar a la sociedad civil Aprobada con carácter de urgencia, la “Ley de Agentes Extranjeros” obliga a las ONG que reciben financiamiento internacional a registrarse como tales, bajo pena de sanciones. Se impone un impuesto del 30 % sobre estos fondos, y se prohíbe cualquier actividad considerada política, una formulación ambigua que deja margen a la más absoluta arbitrariedad. Este texto se inspira en leyes ya utilizadas para reprimir los contrapesos en regímenes autoritarios, como en Nicaragua, y marca una nueva etapa en la criminalización de la solidaridad en El Salvador, bajo régimen de excepción desde 2022.]]>

La abogada y defensora de los derechos humanos Ruth López fue detenida sin orden judicial. Desaparecida desde hace más de doce horas, permanece detenida sin cargos.

En el contexto de un estado de emergencia, la aprobación de la nueva ley de «agentes extranjeros» restringe aún más el espacio para la sociedad civil en El Salvador.

La FIDH y la OMCT, a través de su programa conjunto del Observatorio para la Protección de las Personas Defensoras de Derechos Humanos, hacen un llamado a las autoridades salvadoreñas para que la liberen inmediatamente y a la comunidad internacional para que no permanezca en silencio frente a la continua persecución de las personas defensoras de derechos humanos.

28 de mayo de 2025, París, Ginebra. La arbitrariedad se convierte en la norma para silenciar las voces independientes en El Salvador. El 18 de mayo de 2025, a las 23 horas, Ruth López, reconocida abogada y jefa de la Unidad Anticorrupción de la organización Cristosal, fue detenida en su domicilio por la Policía Nacional Civil. Privada de contacto con su familia y sus abogados por más de doce horas, fue trasladada sin explicación a través de varios centros de detención. Hasta la fecha, no se le han formulado cargos de manera oficial, aunque la Fiscalía la acusa públicamente de malversación de fondos. «Lo que está sufriendo Ruth López no es un caso aislado: es una estrategia de terror destinada a silenciar a quienes se atreven a decir la verdad», declaró Jimena Reyes, responsable de la oficina para las Américas en la FIDH. Cristosal, fundada por obispos anglicanos y comprometida con la defensa de personas desplazadas, perseguidas o en situación de vulnerabilidad, está ahora en la mira de las autoridades. Su labor se vuelve cada vez más difícil en un país que se hunde en el autoritarismo. Cristosal se une así a otras organizaciones señaladas por el gobierno, como la Unidad de Defensa de Derechos Humanos y Comunitarios (UNIDEHC). La libertad de prensa también está amenazada, con recientes agresiones a periodistas del medio de comunicación en línea El Faro, tras la revelación de presuntos vínculos entre el gobierno y estructuras del crimen organizado. La última ofensiva registrada: la adopción, el 20 de mayo de 2025, de la “Ley de Agentes Extranjeros”, una legislación liberticida que amenaza la supervivencia financiera y la existencia misma de la sociedad civil independiente. «Estamos presenciando una instrumentalización alarmante del derecho penal para silenciar voces críticas. Este clima de miedo es incompatible con cualquier Estado de derecho o democracia», declaró Gerald Staberock, Secretario General de la Organización Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT). Una ley para silenciar a la sociedad civil Aprobada con carácter de urgencia, la “Ley de Agentes Extranjeros” obliga a las ONG que reciben financiamiento internacional a registrarse como tales, bajo pena de sanciones. Se impone un impuesto del 30 % sobre estos fondos, y se prohíbe cualquier actividad considerada política, una formulación ambigua que deja margen a la más absoluta arbitrariedad. Este texto se inspira en leyes ya utilizadas para reprimir los contrapesos en regímenes autoritarios, como en Nicaragua, y marca una nueva etapa en la criminalización de la solidaridad en El Salvador, bajo régimen de excepción desde 2022.]]>