Human Rights Watch Warns of Surge in Executions in Saudi Arabia

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Headlines, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Eloy Alfaro de Alba (with gavel), Permanent Representative of Panama to the United Nations and President of the Security Council for the Month of August, chairs the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 21 2025 (IPS) – Human rights groups have expressed alarm over the surge in unprecedented executions in Saudi Arabia in 2025. Humanitarian experts have underscored the Saudi Arabian monarchy’s use of the death penalty to silence peaceful dissent among civilians and impose justice for minor offenses, with little to no due process.

On August 11, Human Rights Watch (HRW) raised the alarm on the rise in executions of civilians and foreign nationals in Saudi Arabia. Their new report highlighted the June 14 execution of journalist Turki al-Jasser, who worked to expose corruption and human rights violations linked to the Saudi monarchy.

Following al-Jasser’s execution, Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry issued a statement in which it accused al-Jasser of committing “terrorist crimes” and “destabilizing the security of society and the stability of the state”. This follows the 2024 execution of Abdullah al-Shamri, a Saudi political analyst, after appearing as a political commentator on broadcast news for prominent media organizations.

“The June 2025 execution of Saudi journalist Turki al-Jasser, after seven years of arbitrary imprisonment on fabricated charges over his online publications, is a chilling testament to the kingdom’s zero tolerance to peaceful dissent and criticism, and a grim reminder of the peril journalists face in Saudi Arabia,” said Sylvia Mbataru, a researcher of civic space at CIVICUS Global Alliance.

HRW reports that Saudi authorities are pursuing the death penalty against Islamic scholar Salman al-Odah and religious reformist activist Hassan Farhan al-Maliki on vague charges related to the peaceful and public expression of their beliefs.

“Behind closed doors, Saudi Arabia is executing peaceful activists and journalists following politicized trials,” said Abdullah Alaoudh, senior director of countering authoritarianism at the Middle East Democracy Center. “These state-sanctioned killings are an assault on basic human rights and dignity that the world cannot afford to ignore.”

Figures from HRW show that as of August 5, Saudi authorities had carried out over 241 executions in 2025. including 22 alone on the week of August 4. Amnesty International reports that 2024 set a new record for annual executions in Saudi Arabia, documenting at least 345. The human rights organization Reprieve projects that if executions are carried out at the same rate, 2025 could exceed all prior records.

“Saudi authorities have weaponized the country’s justice system to carry out a terrifying number of executions in 2025,” said Joey Shea, researcher for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates at Human Rights Watch. “The surge in executions is just the latest evidence of the brutally autocratic rule of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.”

Estimates from Reprieve show that roughly 162 of this year’s recorded executions were for minor drug-related offenses, with over half involving foreign nationals. HRW reports that none of these executions followed due process, making it highly unlikely that any of those executed received a fair trial.

“Saudi Arabia’s relentless and ruthless use of the death penalty after grossly unfair trials not only demonstrates a chilling disregard for human life; its application for drug-related offenses is also an egregious violation of international law and standards,” said Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“We are witnessing a truly horrifying trend, with foreign nationals being put to death at a startling rate for crimes that should never carry the death penalty. This report exposes the dark and deadly reality behind the progressive image that the authorities attempt to project globally.”

Earlier this year, Amnesty International, the European Saudi Organization for Human Rights, and Justice Project Pakistan documented the cases of 25 foreign nations who were on death row or have been executed in Saudi Arabia for drug-related offenses. The investigation found that the majority of individuals on death row were not afforded their fundamental human rights, such as access to a legal representative, interpretation services, and consular support. Additionally, Amnesty International reported that in many of these cases, individuals from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds faced heightened risks of discrimination in legal proceedings.

Furthermore, it was reported that at least four of these cases involved the use of torture and ill treatment in detention facilities to extract confessions from individuals charged with drug-related crimes. For many of these individuals, their families were not informed of the status of their convictions and were only notified of an execution the day prior. In all cases of execution, Amnesty International reported that the bodies of executed individuals were withheld by Saudi authorities.

The recent surge in executions has drawn immense criticism from human rights groups for violating international humanitarian law. Although Saudi Arabia has not acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a multilateral treaty adopted by the UN that promoted an inherent right to life and due process, it has ratified the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which obligates that Saudi Arabian security forces are only to use the death penalty for the “most serious crimes”.

Mandeep Tiwana, the Secretary-General of CIVICUS Global Alliance, informed IPS that the current civic space conditions in Saudi Arabia are listed as “closed”, indicating that civilians hold little to no power and are bereft of the ability to represent themselves in governmental affairs and peacefully dissent. “This means that those who criticize the authorities or engage in protests of any kind or seek to form associations that demand transformational change can face severe forms of persecution including imprisonment for long periods, physical abuse and even death.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Southern Voices: Grief, Resilience, and Daily Life in Jnoub

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, COP29 Blog, Disaster Management, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Armed Conflicts

Morning after an Israeli attack in Tyre, Lebanon. Credit: Nour

JNOUB, Lebanon, Aug 15 2025 (IPS) – “Special, targeted operations in southern Lebanon,” a phrase that has echoed repeatedly over the past two years in Israeli Defence Force (IDF) statements. But behind these clinical military terms lies a human cost that statistics cannot capture.

The residents of southern Lebanon—mothers, fathers, children, and elders—are the ones who face the daily reality of displacement, loss, and uncertainty. Their homes become coordinates on military maps; their neighborhoods, theaters of “operations.” Yet their stories of endurance, grief, and quiet acts of resilience rarely reach beyond the headlines.

Through interviews with residents of “Jnoub,” we examine how communities are navigating displacement, processing communal loss, and finding ways to grieve while continuing to live. These are voices from a region too often reduced to geopolitical analysis, voices that reveal the profound human dimension of conflict.

“Ironically, my workplace is close to my old house’s rubble. I see it, as well as the zone where my pet died, on a daily basis. I haven’t grieved as I should… haven’t cried as much as I should have.

“I hate the sound of phone calls, especially the landlines and my father’s good old Blackberry phone, as they remind me of the time we received the threat and people were calling to warn us,” said Sarah Soueidan when asked about her daily routine after her home was destroyed.

Having both her residential house and her family’s house bombed by the Israeli Defence Forces, she and her family had to move repeatedly throughout the past two years. Her hometown, Yater, located in South Lebanon, was directly affected by the war, leaving nothing but old memories and rubble.

The night they had to flee their house in Southern Beirut, Sara and her family woke up to a series of calls while listening to the sounds of ‘warning shots’ on the streets. These shootings were made to help draw attention to residents who did not receive the warning to leave their houses and find shelter before the attack.

As it was only 10 am, they had to act fast, so she and her mother left the house first to see what was going on and then realized that their building would be hit. Sarah had to go back home to warn her father and siblings. Since there was not enough time, and her father needed assistance in movement, they had to pick him up and leave the house with as few objects as possible.

They made sure to put Halloum (Sarah’s cat) in his cage, but due to the rush and many people in the house trying to help, Halloum got scared and jumped out of his cage. Sara and her siblings tried to look for him before leaving, but there was no more time; people were dragging them out of the house. On that day, Sarah took his toys and food, hoping to find him again, but she never did. The Israeli attack on Sarah’s house in Southern Beirut reduced it to rubble.

Sarah and her family had nowhere to go as their house in their hometown, Yater, was also bombed, and they had to leave the area until things settled down.

The interview took place a while after the attack, as Sarah was now ready to talk about what happened with her and her family, stating, “While I am not politically affiliated with anyone, nor would I discuss the reasons for escalation, as it is debatable, yet aggression and terrorism would always be so, without any reason. I was born and raised in these areas and streets. None of the allegations regarding ‘weapons, machinery, or drones under a three-story building’ are true. We need answers or proof.”

Halloum the cat, lying next to a Christmas tree. Credit: Sarah Soueidan

Many neighborhoods, streets, and buildings were targeted in the process; no one knew how or why, they only received images of their building with a warning that they needed to evacuate.

“The bomb was so close and I heard the sound of the missiles just before they reached the ground (and here you didn’t know if the missile would fall on you or no) and when I heard that, I ran toward my son and hugged him, then the missile exploded. This was repeated three or four times,” said Zaynab Yaghi, who is a resident in Ansar, a village in South Lebanon. Zaynab and her family had to leave South Lebanon under stress and fear of the unknown, all while trying to control the emotions of her son in order not to scare him even more.

Zaynab, like many others, had to live under stressful conditions, waiting for the unknown. Even after the ceasefire was agreed upon, residents in Southern Lebanon were still unable to go back home or live a normal life.

“Nearby buildings were struck after the ceasefire (one as far as 100m away from our own home). We were very surprised the first time it happened and scrambled to leave. It was very frightening,” said Mohammad Wehbe, who lost his home in Ainata and his apartment in the suburbs of Beirut, which was affected by the bombing of nearby buildings.

After talking to many people from different villages and areas in South Lebanon, there was one thing that made them feel a sense of hope, and that was community, traditions, and resistance. Resistance by choosing to go back, to have a future, present, and past within their grandparents’ land, and to grieve by holding on to what was left.

When asked, Nour described her village as a step back in time, a place of simplicity, serenity, and beauty. Nature all around and people who are warm and always have their doors open for strangers. Nour’s village, which is located within the Tyre district, was directly affected by the Israeli attacks. Her old neighborhood was completely demolished, and while the streets feel empty, she is trying to visit the area as much as possible to remember, to tell the story of those forgotten, and to belong to something greater than a title.

“The first time I went in winter, it felt strange: silence and destruction. But visit after visit, nature and the people of nature try to live again. That gives me hope. We’ll be fixing our home again. What matters is that we acknowledge this land is ours. And on our land, I can sense existence.”

While Nour gets her strength from people around her and her will to go back and build her home again, some have lost it completely, as it is not black or white; there is not a single way of grieving, existing, and living within times of chaos and displacement. “What beliefs I had before the war are long gone now. I don’t think I have processed what happened and I cope by ignoring everything and focusing on survival. Hope certainly feels like a big word these days,” Mohammad Wehbe said.

Compounding these challenges is the absence of government support. None of the interviewees have received any assistance from official channels, instead relying on their savings and help from family members to survive. This reality adds another layer of uncertainty to their daily struggles, as they navigate displacement and loss without institutional backing

These stories from Southern Lebanon reveal the complexity of human resilience in the face of displacement and loss. While some find strength in community and connection to their ancestral land, others struggle with the weight of survival itself. What remains constant is the need to bear witness to these experiences, to ensure that behind every military briefing and policy discussion, the human cost is neither forgotten nor reduced to mere statistics.

The residents of Jnoub continue to navigate an uncertain future, carrying with them the memories of what was lost and the fragile hope of what might be rebuilt. Their voices remind us that recovery is not just about reconstructing buildings but about healing communities and honoring the stories of those who endure.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Fiji’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Aims To Restore Trust and Peace After Decades of Political Crises

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Conferences, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, PACIFIC COMMUNITY, Peace, Small Island Developing States, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Democracy

Fiji is a Pacific Island nation renowned for its tourism industry, but it has also endured four armed coups and 38 years of political instability. Photo credit: Julie Lyn

Fiji is a Pacific Island nation renowned for its tourism industry, but it has also endured four armed coups and 38 years of political instability. Credit: Julie Lyn

SYDNEY, Aug 14 2025 (IPS) – Fiji, a nation located west of Tonga in the central Pacific, is renowned for its natural beauty and beach resorts. But for 38 years it has endured a political rollercoaster of instability with four armed coups that overturned democratically elected governments and eroded human rights.

Now, following a peaceful transition of power at the last 2022 election, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and his coalition government want to deal with the past with a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to pave the way for a more peaceful and resilient future.

The commission will “facilitate open and free engagement in truth-telling regarding the political upheavals during the coup periods and promote closure and healing for the survivors,” Rabuka, who led the first coup, told parliament before supporting legislation that was passed in December last year. Now he has pledged to oversee the country’s reconciliation and return to democratic norms.

The TRC is tasked with investigating what happened during the coups d’état of 1987, 2000 and 2006, related human rights abuses and the grievances that have driven the relentless struggle for power between Fiji’s indigenous and Indo-Fijian communities. Its focus is on truth-telling and preventing a repetition of conflict; it will not prosecute perpetrators of abuses or provide reparations to victims.

“This commission aims to serve the people of Fiji to come to terms with your own history… the purpose is not to put blame and to deepen the trauma and the difficulties, but to help the people of Fiji to move on for a better future for everyone,” Dr. Marcus Brand, the TRC chairman, who has extensive experience with transitional justice initiatives and held senior roles in the United Nations and European Union, said in January.

He is joined by four Fijian commissioners, namely former High Court Judge Sekove Naqiolevu, former TV journalist Rachna Nath, former Fiji Airways Captain Rajendra Dass, and leadership expert Ana Laqeretabua.

The Fiji Parliament, Suva, Fiji. Credit: Josuamudreilagi

The Fiji Parliament, Suva, Fiji. Credit: Josuamudreilagi

Florence Swamy, Executive Director of the Pacific Centre for Peacebuilding, a non-governmental organization based in the capital, Suva, told IPS that the TRC is important to building trust in the country, where many people still experience fear and anxiety about the violence they witnessed.

“As a first step, it is creating a safe space for people to talk about what happened to them,” she emphasized.

Fiji’s political turmoil has roots in the past. British colonization in the nineteenth century was accompanied by policies that were intended to strengthen indigenous land rights and prevent dispossession, rights that were reinforced in Fiji’s first constitution at Independence in 1970.

But, at the same time, Fijian society was irrevocably changed by the organized immigration of Indians to work on sugar plantations and boost development of the colony. By the mid-twentieth century, the Indo-Fijian population was larger than the indigenous community and their demands for equal rights increased.

“Fijian Indians were brought to the country, in many cases, under the false pretense of better work and wage opportunities, to develop the economy of Fiji…while indigenous Fijians were hardly consulted about such a momentous decision,” Dr. Shailendra Singh, Head of Journalism at the University of the South Pacific in Fiji, told IPS.

Soon the country’s politics were mired in a fierce contest for power. And in 1987, Rabuka, then an officer in the Fiji military, led the overthrow of the first elected Indo-Fijian government under Prime Minister Timoci Bavadra.

Rabuka then became Prime Minister from 1992 to 1999 before another Indo-Fijian government, led by Mahendra Chaudhry, was voted in. This triggered a second coup instigated by nationalist George Speight in 2000 in which the government was held hostage in the nation’s parliament for weeks. Then, in 2006, Frank Bainimarama, head of the armed forces, orchestrated the third coup, which he claimed was necessary to eliminate corruption and divisive policies in the government of the day presided over by Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase. For the next eight years he oversaw an authoritarian military government until democratic elections were held again in 2014.

Suva, capital city of Fiji. Photo credit: Maksym Kozlenko

Fiji’s capital city Suva. Credit: Maksym Kozlenko

The coups inflicted a significant human cost. Lawlessness, inter-community violence, military and police brutality, and arrests and torture of people critical of the regime occurred increasingly after 2006.

Three years later, Amnesty International called for “an immediate halt to all human rights violations by members of the security forces and government officials, including the arbitrary arrests, intimidation and threats, and assaults and detentions of journalists, government critics and others.” It also called for the repeal of the Public Emergency Regulations imposed by the government in 2009 that led to impunity for state officials involved in abuses.

Today, the demographic balance has shifted again in the wake of an outward exodus of Indo-Fijians, who now comprise about 33 percent of Fiji’s population of about 900,000, while Melanesians constitute about 56 percent. But societal divisions remain entrenched and the past has not been forgotten.

The commission is now preparing to hold hearings over the next 18 months. And Rabuka has promised to be one of the first to testify of his involvement in the political upheavals.

I will swear to say everything, the truth… I want to continue to live with a clear conscience. I want people to know that at least they understand my reasons for doing it,” he told the media in January. But the TRC also promises to place victims and survivors at the center of its mission, claiming that “their lived experiences are vital to fostering accountability, encouraging healing and building a more united and compassionate society.”

However, there are voices of caution, too, warning of the risks of reviving memories of conflict and pain and the need to prevent this from inflaming divisions.

While experts in the country speak of the need to go beyond the TRC and tackle structural issues of inequality and disenfranchisement, which have driven community grievances, “to make everyone feel a sense of belonging and loyalty to the country of their birth,” Singh said.

In particular, “indigenous fears concerning political dominance in Fiji” and “Indo-Fijians’ feeling of being marginalized by the state and not treated as equal citizens” need to be addressed, she continued.

The Fijian armed forces, which played a decisive role in executing the coups, often justifying their actions in protecting Fiji’s internal order, are also critical to the success of the country’s return to democratic governance.

In 2023 an internal reconciliation process began, aimed at ending military intervention in the country’s politics and elections. In April, during an official meeting with the TRC, the military leadership pledged ‘to ensure that past mistakes are not repeated, and that its role as a guardian of Fiji’s constitutional order remains anchored in service to all citizens, regardless of ethnicity, background or political belief.’

After the commission has concluded its estimated two years of work, it will make recommendations in its final report for public measures and policy reforms to support the country’s social cohesion. Here Swamy emphasizes that it is crucial the recommendations do not remain on paper but are acted on.

“In terms of the recommendations, who will be responsible for them? Will they ensure that the recommendations are implemented? And what mechanisms will be put in place to make sure that institutions are held accountable?” she declared.

Looking into the future, Swamy said that she would like to see her country become one “where everyone feels safe, where there is equal opportunity… a country where everyone can realize their potential.”

Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

How the UN Can Prevent AI from Automating Discrimination

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The AI for Good Global Summit took place in Geneva on 8 July 2025. Credit: ITU/Rowan Farrell

 
The Summit brought together governments, tech leaders, academics, civil society and young people to explore how artificial intelligence can be directed toward Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – and away from growing risks of inequality, disinformation and environmental strain, according to the UN.

 
“We are the AI generation,” said Doreen Bogdan-Martin, chief of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) – UN’s specialized agency for information and communications technology – in a keynote address. But being part of this generation means more than just using these technologies. “It means contributing to this whole-of-society upskilling effort, from early schooling to lifelong learning,” she added.

ABUJA, Nigeria, Aug 14 2025 (IPS) – Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping the world at a speed we’ve never seen before. From helping doctors detect diseases faster to customizing education for every student, AI holds the promise of solving many real-world problems. But along with its benefits, AI carries a serious risk: discrimination.

As the global body charged with protecting human rights, the United Nations—especially the UN Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)—has a unique role to play in ensuring AI is developed and used in ways that are fair, inclusive, and just.

The United Nations must declare AI equity a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) by 2035, backed by binding audits for member states. The stakes are high. A 2024 Stanford study warns that if AI bias is left unchecked, 45 million workers could lose access to fair hiring by 2030, and 80 percent of those affected would be in developing countries.

The Promise—and Peril—of AI

At its core, AI is about using computer systems to solve those problems or perform those tasks that us to use human intelligence. Algorithms drive the systems that make these possible—sets of instructions that help machines make sense of the world and act accordingly.

But there’s a catch: algorithms are only as fair as the data they are trained on and the humans who designed them. When the data reflects existing social inequalities, or when developers overlook diverse perspectives, the result is biased AI. In other words, AI that discriminates.

Take, for example, facial recognition systems that perform poorly on people with darker skin tones. Or hiring tools that favor male candidates because they’re trained on data from past hires in male-dominated industries.

Or a LinkedIn verification system that can only verify NFC-enabled national passports that the majority of Africans don’t yet possess. These are more than technical glitches; they are human rights issues.

What the UN Has Already Said

The UN is not starting from scratch on this. The OHCHR has already sounded the alarm. In its 2021 report on the right to privacy in the digital age, the OHCHR warned that poorly designed or unregulated AI systems can lead to violations of human rights, including discrimination, loss of privacy, and threats to freedom of expression and thought.

The report asked powerful questions we must keep asking:

    • ● How can we ensure that algorithms don’t replicate harmful stereotypes?
    • ● Who is responsible when automated decisions go wrong?
    • ● Can we teach machines our values? And if so, whose values?

These are very vital, practical questions that go to the heart of how AI will shape our societies and who will benefit or suffer as a result, and I commend the UN for conceptualizing these questions.

UNESCO, another UN agency, has also taken a bold step by adopting the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, the first global standard-setting instrument of its kind. Their Recommendation emphasizes the need for fairness, accountability, and transparency in AI development, and calls for banning AI systems that pose a threat to human rights.

This is a good start. But the real work is just beginning.

The Danger of Biased Data

A major driver of AI discrimination remains biased data. Many AI systems are trained on historical data; data that often reflects past inequalities. If a criminal justice algorithm is trained on data from a system that has historically over-policed Black communities, it will likely continue to do so.

Even well-meaning developers can fall into this trap. If the teams building AI systems lack diversity, they may not recognize when an algorithm is biased or may not consider how a tool could impact marginalized communities.

That’s why it’s not just about better data. It’s also about better processes, better people, and better safeguards.

Take the ongoing case with Workday as an example.

When AI Gets It Wrong: 2024’s Most Telling Cases

In one of the most significant AI discrimination cases moving through the courts, the plaintiff alleges that Workday’s popular artificial intelligence (AI)-based applicant recommendation system violated federal antidiscrimination laws because it had a disparate impact on job applicants based on race, age, and disability.

Judge Rita F. Lin of the US District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in July 2024 that Workday could be an agent of the employers using its tools, which subjects it to liability under federal anti-discrimination laws. This landmark decision means that AI vendors, not just employers, can be held directly responsible for discriminatory outcomes.

In another case, the University of Washington researchers found significant racial, gender, and intersectional bias in how three state-of-the-art large language models ranked resumes. The models favored white-associated names over equally qualified candidates with names associated with other racial groups.

In 2024, a University of Washington study investigated gender and racial bias in resume-screening AI tools. The researchers tested a large language model’s responses to identical resumes, varying only the names to suggest different racial and gender identities.

The financial impact is staggering. A 2024 DataRobot survey of over 350 companies revealed: 62% lost revenue due to AI systems that made biased decisions, proving that discriminatory AI isn’t just a moral failure—it’s a business disaster. It’s too soon for an innovation to result in such losses.

Time is running out. A 2024 Stanford study estimates that if AI bias is not addressed, 45 million workers could be pushed out of fair hiring by 2030, with 80 percent of those workers living in developing countries. The UN needs to take action now before these predictions turn into reality.

What the UN Can—and Must—Do

To prevent AI discrimination, the UN must lead by example and work with governments, tech companies, and civil society to establish global guardrails for ethical AI.

Here’s what that could look like:

    • 1. Develop Clear Guidelines: The UN should push for global standards on ethical AI, building on UNESCO’s Recommendation and OHCHR’s findings. These should include rules for inclusive data collection, transparency, and human oversight.
    • 2. Promote Inclusive Participation: The people building and regulating AI must reflect the diversity of the world. The UN should set up a Global South AI Equity Fund to provide resources for local experts to review and assess tools such as LinkedIn’s NFC passport verification. Working with Africa’s Smart Africa Alliance, the goal would be to create standards together that make sure AI is designed to benefit communities that have been hit hardest by biased systems. This means including voices from the Global South, women, people of color, and other underrepresented groups in AI policy conversations.
    • 3. Require Human Rights Impact Assessments: Just like we assess the environmental impact of new projects, we should assess the human rights impact of new AI systems—before they are rolled out.
    • 4. Hold Developers Accountable: When AI systems cause harm, there must be accountability. This includes legal remedies for those who are unfairly treated by AI. The UN should create an AI Accountability Tribunal within the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to look into cases where AI systems cause discrimination.
    • This tribunal should have the authority to issue penalties, such as suspending UN partnerships with companies that violate these standards, including cases like Workday.
    • 5. Support Digital Literacy and Rights Education: Policy makers and citizens need to understand how AI works and how it might impact their rights. The UN can help promote digital literacy globally so that people can push back against unfair systems.
    6. Mandate Intersectional Audits: AI systems should be required to go through intersectional audits that check for combined biases, such as those linked to race, disability, and gender. The UN should also provide funding to organizations to create open-source audit tools that can be used worldwide.

The Road Ahead

AI is not inherently good or bad. It is a tool, and like any tool, its impact depends on how we use it. If we are not careful, AI could lengthen problem-solving time, deepen existing inequalities, and create new forms of discrimination that are harder to detect and harder to fix.

But if we take action now—if we put human rights at the center of AI development—we can build systems that uplift, rather than exclude.

Ahead of the UN General Assembly meeting in September, the United Nations must declare AI equity a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) by 2035, backed by binding audits for member states. The time for debate is over; the era of ethical AI must begin now.

The United Nations remains the organization with the credibility, the platform, and the moral duty to lead this charge. The future of AI—and the future of human dignity—may depend on it.

Chimdi Chukwukere is a researcher, civic tech co-founder, and advocate for digital justice. His work explores the intersection of technology, governance, and social justice. He holds a Masters in Diplomacy and International Relations from Seton Hall University and has been published at Politics Today, International Policy Digest, and the Diplomatic Envoy.

Gift Nwammadu is a Mastercard Foundation Scholar at the University of Cambridge, where she is pursuing an MPhil in Public Policy with a focus on inclusive innovation, gender equity, and youth empowerment. A Youth for Sustainable Energy Fellow and Aspire Leader Fellow, she actively bridges policy and grassroots action. Her work has been published by the African Policy and Research Institute addressing systemic barriers to inclusive development.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Bending the Curve: Overhaul Global Food Systems to Avert Worsening Land Crisis

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, COP30, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Food Systems

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Current rates of land degradation pose a major environmental and socioeconomic threat, driving climate change, biodiversity loss, and social crises. Food production to feed more than 8 billion people is the dominant land use on Earth. Yet, this industrial-scale enterprise comes with a heavy environmental toll.

Preventing and reversing land degradation are key objectives of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and are also fundamental for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

These three conventions emerged from the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to address the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss, climate change and land degradation. A paper published today in Nature by 21 leading scientists argues that the targets of “these conventions can only be met by ‘bending the curve’ of land degradation and that transforming food systems is fundamental for doing so.”

Lead author Fernando T. Maestre of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia, says the paper presents “a bold, integrated set of actions to tackle land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change together, as well as a clear pathway for implementing them by 2050.”

“By transforming food systems, restoring degraded land, harnessing the potential of sustainable seafood, and fostering cooperation across nations and sectors, we can ‘bend the curve’ and reverse land degradation while advancing towards goals of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and other global agreements.”

Co-author Barron J. Orr, UNCCD’s Chief Scientist, says, “Once soils lose fertility, water tables deplete, and biodiversity is lost, restoring the land becomes exponentially more expensive. Ongoing rates of land degradation contribute to a cascade of mounting global challenges, including food and water insecurity, forced relocation and population migration, social unrest, and economic inequality.”

“Land degradation isn’t just a rural issue; it affects the food on all our plates, the air we breathe, and the stability of the world we live in. This isn’t about saving the environment; it’s about securing our shared future.”

The authors suggest an ambitious but achievable target of 50 percent land restoration for 2050—currently, 30 percent by 2030—with enormous co-benefits for climate, biodiversity and global health. Titled ‘Bending the curve of land degradation to achieve global environmental goals,’ the paper argues that it is imperative to ‘bend the curve’ of land degradation by halting land conversion while restoring half of degraded lands by 2050.

“Food systems have not yet been fully incorporated into intergovernmental agreements, nor do they receive sufficient focus in current strategies to address land degradation. Rapid, integrated reforms focused on global food systems, however, can move land health from crisis to recovery and secure a healthier, more stable planet for all,” reads parts of the paper.

Against this backdrop, the authors break new ground by quantifying the impact of reducing food waste by 75 percent by 2050 and maximizing sustainable ocean-based food production—measures that alone could spare an area larger than Africa. They say restoring 50 percent of degraded land through sustainable land management practices would correspond to the restoration of 3 Mkm² of cropland and 10 Mkm² of non-cropland, a total of 13 Mkm².

Stressing that land restoration must involve the people who live on and manage the land—especially Indigenous Peoples, smallholder farmers, women, and other vulnerable people and communities. Co-author Dolors Armenteras, Professor of Landscape Ecology at Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, says land degradation is “a key factor in forced migration and conflict over resources.”

“Regions that rely heavily on agriculture for livelihoods, especially smallholder farmers, who feed much of the world, are particularly vulnerable. These pressures could destabilize entire regions and amplify global risks.”

To support these vulnerable segments of the population, the paper calls for interventions such as shifting agricultural subsidies from large-scale industrial farms toward sustainable smallholders, incentivizing good land stewardship among the world’s 608 million farms, and fostering their access to technology, secure land rights, and fair markets.

“Land is more than soil and space. It harbors biodiversity, cycles water, stores carbon, and regulates climate. It gives us food, sustains life, and holds deep roots of ancestry and knowledge. Today, over one-third of Earth’s land is used to grow food – feeding a global population of more than 8 billion people,” says Co-author Elisabeth Huber-Sannwald, Professor, the Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, San Luis Potosí, Mexico.

“Yet today,” she continues, “Modern farming practices, deforestation, and overuse are degrading soil, polluting water, and destroying vital ecosystems. Food production alone drives nearly 20 percent of global emissions of greenhouse gases. We need to act. To secure a thriving future – and protect land – we must reimagine how we farm, how we live, and how we relate to nature – and to each other.”

With an estimated 56.5 Mkm² of agricultural land, cropland, and rangelands being used to produce food, and roughly 33 percent of all food produced being wasted, of which 14 percent is lost post-harvest at farms and 19 percent at the retail, food service and household stages, reducing food waste by 75 percent, therefore, could spare roughly 13.4 Mkm² of land.

The authors’ proposed remedies include policies to prevent overproduction and spoilage, banning food industry rules that reject “ugly” produce, encouraging food donations and discounted sales of near-expiry products, education campaigns to reduce household waste and supporting small farmers in developing countries to improve storage and transport.

Other proposed solutions include integrating land and marine food systems, as red meat produced in unsustainable ways consumes large amounts of land, water, and feed and emits significant greenhouse gases. Seafood and seaweed are sustainable, nutritious alternatives. Seaweed, for example, needs no freshwater and absorbs atmospheric carbon.

The authors recommend measures such as replacing 70 percent of unsustainably produced red meat with seafood, such as wild or farmed fish and mollusks. Replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up over 0.4 Mkm² of cropland.

They nonetheless note that these changes are especially relevant for wealthier countries with high meat consumption. In some poorer regions, animal products remain crucial for nutrition. The combination of food waste reduction, land restoration, and dietary shifts, therefore, would spare or restore roughly 43.8 Mkm² in 30 years (2020-2050).

The proposed measures combined would also contribute to emission reduction efforts by mitigating roughly 13.24 Gt of CO₂-equivalent per year through 2050 and help the world community achieve its commitments in several international agreements, including the three Rio Conventions and UN SDGs.

Overall, the authors call for the UN’s three Rio conventions—CBD, UNCCD and UNFCCC—to unite around shared land and food system goals and encourage the exchange of state-of-the-art knowledge, track progress and streamline science into more effective policies, all to accelerate action on the ground.

A step in the right direction, UNCCD’s 197 Parties, at their most recent Conference of Parties (COP16) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, have already adopted a decision on avoiding, reducing and reversing land and soil degradation of agricultural lands.

The Findings By Numbers

  • 56%: Projected increase in food production needed by 2050 if we stay on our current path
  • 34%: Portion of Earth’s ice-free land already used for food production, headed to 42% by 2050
  • 21%: Share of global greenhouse gas emissions produced by food systems
  • 80%: Proportion of deforestation driven by food production
  • 70%: Amount of freshwater consumption that goes to agriculture
  • 33%: Fraction of global food that currently goes to waste
  • USD 1 trillion: Estimated annual value of food lost or wasted globally
  • 75%: Ambitious target for global food waste reduction by 2050
  • 50%: Proposed portion of degraded land to be restored by 2050 using sustainable land management
  • USD 278 billion: Annual funding gap to achieve UNCCD land restoration goals
  • 608 million: Number of farms on the planet
  • 90%: Percentage of all farms under 2 hectares
  • 35%: Share of the world’s food produced by small farms
  • 6.5 billion tons: Potential biomass yield using 650 million hectares of ocean for seaweed farming
  • 17.5 million km²: Estimated cropland area saved if humanity adopts the proposed Rio+ diet (less unsustainably produced red meat and more sustainably sourced seafood and seaweed-derived food products)
  • 166 million: Number of people who could avoid micronutrient deficiencies with more aquatic foods in their diet

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Four Ways Asia Can Strengthen Regional Health Security Before the Next Pandemic

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Featured, Global, Headlines, Health, Humanitarian Emergencies, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Regional cooperation can help countries respond more effectively to future pandemics. Credit: Asian Development Bank (ADB)

MANILA, Philippines, Aug 13 2025 (IPS) – In an interconnected world when infections can circle the globe in hours, cooperation in preparing for pandemics is essential. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted just how vulnerable countries are when surveillance is fragmented, laboratory networks are underfunded and underequipped, and vaccines are not dispersed equitably.

To safeguard regional health security, several health interventions must be treated as regional public goods.

Regional public goods are services or assets that benefit multiple countries but cannot be provided by a single nation alone. They allow developing economies to cooperate on costs, expertise, and technology for greater development impact than they could achieve individually.

For example, efficient regional infrastructure and trade facilitation brings down transportation and trade costs and promotes freer movement of people and goods; delivering energy across borders improves access to sustainable energy; and financial agreements, such as the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization, boost regional financial stability during crises.

Regional public goods fall into three broad categories: economic initiatives such as transport infrastructure, energy networks, and trade agreements like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership; environmental efforts including river basin management, pollution control, and cross-border conservation programs; and social investments such as public health systems, regional education platforms, and collaborative research networks.

Countries in Asia and the Pacific already work together on trade, infrastructure, and climate action. Broadening areas of cooperation, however, can help countries meet their development goals and address increasingly complex health challenges, including emergencies.

This partnership is particularly important in the area of health emergency response.

A succession of human and animal infections including SARS, avian influenza, African swine fever and COVID-19 have shown just how quickly pathogens can go from a local problem to one that threatens regional and even global security. Countries can protect themselves through early alerts and early action via coordinated surveillance, data-sharing, and equitable vaccine access.

Responses to many recent outbreaks, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have been slow, fragmented, and unfair. Greater regional cooperation can mitigate the impacts of epidemics, especially for the most vulnerable, by pooling expertise, resources, and response capacities.

Health intersects with transport, trade, gender equality, education, and livelihoods. A healthy population underpins a resilient economy and supports social stability. Supporting each other to build systems that can prevent and respond to outbreaks makes sense for countries and the region.

To respond faster and smarter to the next pandemic, countries in Asia and the Pacific should focus on four high-impact areas regional integration and collective action:

Contact Tracing Networks

Early detection saves lives but only if data move faster than the disease. A regional contact tracing network, using interoperable digital tools and shared protocols, can help track outbreaks across borders.

By linking national systems through common standards and real-time data-sharing agreements, countries can monitor risks in high-risk areas, such as along borders and major transit corridors, and prevent spread.

Health Communications Coordination

Misinformation was a major problem during the COVID-19 pandemic, eroding public trust and weakening response efforts. A regional health communications framework, backed by multilingual messaging templates, rumor tracking systems, and coordinated press briefings, can ensure consistent, culturally relevant, and science-based public information across countries. Successes in reaching vulnerable populations and mobile communities can also be quickly shared.

Telemedicine for Cross-Border Care

Regional telemedicine platforms can connect healthcare providers across borders, especially in remote or small island states, ensuring continued access to care even when in-person services are disrupted. Joint investments in infrastructure, digital health standards, and clinician training can allow countries to offer virtual consultations, diagnostics, and even specialist referrals across the region.

Region-wide Public Health Funds

Collaborative procurement of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics have helped countries respond to disease outbreaks, and eradicate public health threats. Region-wide public health funds maintained by cooperating counties offer a means of improving timely access to life saving countermeasures.

Effectively preventing and preparing for pandemics requires countries to work in concert. These approaches can strengthen all types of health services and build resilience to all kinds of health threats. Now is the time to act decisively and secure a healthier, more prosperous future for all.

This article was originally published on the Asian Development Blog, and is based, in part, on research related to ADB’s 1st INSPIRE Health Forum: Inclusive, Sustainable, Prosperous and Resilient Health Systems in Asia and the Pacific. Ben Coghlan contributed to this blog post.

Dr. Eduardo P. Banzon is ADB Director, Health Practice Team, Human and Social Development Sectors Office, Sectors Group, who champions Universal Health Coverage and has long provided technical support to countries in Asia and the Pacific in their pursuit of this goal.

Dr. Michelle Apostol is a Health Officer for the Health Practice Team of ADB supporting the bank’s initiatives in strengthening health systems of member countries and advocating for the advancement of Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

Anne Cortez is a communications and knowledge management consultant with ADB. She brings over a decade of experience working with governments, think tanks, nonprofits, and international organizations on initiatives advancing health equity, climate action, and digital inclusion across Asia and the Pacific.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source