World Press Freedom Day 2025 Global Press Freedom Index Falls to Critical Low

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Civil Society, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Press Freedom

Sea of red indicates the parlous state of press freedom in the world. Credit: Reporters Without Borders

Sea of red indicates the parlous state of press freedom in the world. Credit: Reporters Without Borders

BRATISLAVA, May 2 2025 (IPS) – Global press freedom across the world is at a “critical moment,” campaigners have warned, as a major index mapping the state of global press freedom hits an unprecedented low.

In the latest edition of the annual press freedom index produced by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which was published on May 2, the average score of all assessed countries fell below 55 points, falling into the category of a “difficult situation” for the first time in the index’s history.

More than six out of ten countries (112 in total) saw their overall scores decline in the index, while the conditions for practicing journalism are for the first time classified as poor in half of the world’s countries and satisfactory in fewer than one in four.

In 42 countries—harboring over half of the world’s population (56.7 percent)—the situation is “very serious,” according to the group. In these zones, press freedom is entirely absent and practicing journalism is particularly dangerous.

RSF says that while there has been a downward trend in press freedom globally for some time, the latest index scores are a distressing “new low.”

“Our index has been warning of this for the last ten years—the trajectory for press freedom has been a downward one—but this is a new low. Sixty percent of countries saw their scores [in the index] drop last year and the environment for media freedom globally has worsened. We are now at a critical moment for press freedom globally,” Fiona O’Brien, UK Bureau Director for RSF, told IPS.

Experts and campaigners have in recent years warned of growing threats to press freedom amid a rise of authoritarian regimes looking to muzzle dissent, as well as  growing economic pressures affecting the ability of independent media outlets to function.

RSF’s index is compiled using measurements of five different indicators—political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety—to form an overall score. It says that this year the overall global index score was dragged down by the performance of the economic index.

It says that economic pressure is an often underestimated but major factor seriously weakening media in many countries. This pressure is being largely driven by ownership concentration, pressure from advertisers and financial backers, and public aid that is restricted, absent, or allocated non-transparently.

The group warns this is leaving many media trapped between preserving their editorial independence and ensuring their economic survival.

“The pressure on media sustainability is as bad as it has ever been,” said O’Brien.

The effects of this economic pressure have been severe. Data collected for the index indicates that in 160 out of the 180 countries assessed (88.9 percent), media outlets achieve financial stability “with difficulty” or “not at all.” Meanwhile, news outlets are shutting down due to economic hardship in nearly a third of countries globally.

While the struggles of media economies in some countries have been exacerbated by political instability, general lack of resources, and war, media in other rich, ostensibly more stable countries are also facing significant economic pressures.

RSF points out that in the US, a majority of journalists and media experts told the group that “the average media outlet struggles for economic viability.”

Meanwhile, independent media that rely heavily or exclusively on foreign funding have come under increasing pressure.

A freeze on funding for the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which halted US international aid earlier this year plunged hundreds of news outlets in different countries around the world into economic uncertainty or forced others to close.

This was particularly acute in Ukraine, where nine out of ten outlets receive international aid and USAID is the primary donor.

“The US cuts have had a profound effect there,” Jeanne Cavalier, head of RSF’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk, told IPS. “Independent media is vital in any country that is at war. It’s a real blow to press freedom in the country,” she said.

She added, though, that the cuts to US funding were “an existential threat to press freedom in all countries with authoritarian governments under Russian influence,” highlighting that exiled media in particular provide a vital service to people living under such regimes.

The Meduza news outlet is one of the most prominent exiled Russian media organizations. While more than half of its financing comes through crowdfunding, until earlier this year a part of its funding came via US grants.

The group said that the combined impact of the cut and previous financial problems presented a significant challenge to its operations. It was forced to cut its workforce by 15 percent and salaries were reduced.

Speaking to IPS at the time, Katerina Abramova, Head of Communications at Meduza, said the moves would “influence the diversity of our content.” But speaking this week after the release of RSF’s index, she said the group had managed to continue its work but admitted, “it is even more challenging now.”

“Our main goal is to maintain the quality of our reporting and to keep delivering news inside Russia,” she said.

However, she said she was concerned for the future of other organizations like Meduza as press freedom and the economic health of independent media wane globally.

“I hope that there will not be a complete loss of independent reporting on countries where free speech has become illegal. But I know that many independent newsrooms are suffering and are on the edge of closing. When you are in exile, you are in a vulnerable position, so such newsrooms face the most difficult challenges,” she told IPS.

“I am also worried that the USAID cuts may be seen as a ‘good sign’ for many authoritarian regimes around the world. They might say, ‘look, the USA also doesn’t like journalists anymore.’ It would be like a validation of what they are doing to independent media [in their own countries],” she added.

Meanwhile, other organizations have also raised the alarm over growing threats to press freedom, even in countries regarded as among the strongest democracies in the world.

While in the RSF index the European Union (EU)-Balkans zone had the highest overall score globally, and its gap with the rest of the world continued to grow, a report released this week by the Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties) group highlighted how some EU governments were attacking press freedom and undermining independent media.

The report, based on the work of 43 human rights groups from 21 countries, warned that press freedom was being eroded across the bloc. It said EU media markets “feature high media ownership concentration, with these owners remaining obscured behind inadequate ownership transparency obligations, the continued erosion of public service media’s independence, ongoing threats and intimidation against journalists, and restrictions on freedom of expression and access to information.”

“The findings of this report should put EU officials on high alert: media freedom and pluralism are under attack across the EU, and in some cases they are in an existential battle against overtly undemocratic governments,” according to the group.

Liberties also warned that “EU legislation to bolster media freedom is being greeted with hostility, making enforcement efforts in 2025 and beyond decisive in protecting the free and plural media that European democracy depends on.”

However, it is this legislation, including the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which is designed to guarantee the protection of journalists and sources, independence of regulatory bodies and full ownership transparency, and the Anti-SLAPP Directive (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) to protect journalists and human rights advocates from abusive legal proceedings, that experts see as providing hope that some of the threats to media freedom can be dealt with.

“At the individual country level within the EU, there are some problems. Where there has been a recent change in government away from authoritarianism, there has been some positive progress, e.g., in Poland. But in other countries, like Slovakia, we are seeing the reverse,” Eva Simon, Senior Advocacy Officer at Liberties, told IPS.

“But at the EU level, we see positive prospects for media freedom in new legislation. The EU Media Act is coming into force soon and the anti-SLAPP directive will come into effect next year.

“The EU has the power to intervene in countries where there are persistent problems and we have high hopes that the EU will use its powers to enforce the European Media Freedom Act. The EU has more tools than ever at its disposal to ensure media freedom in member states,” she added.

On April 30, the Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPJ) issued a damning report on how, since the start of US President Donald Trump’s second term in January, press freedom has come under attack.

The report warned that press freedom is no longer a given in the United States as journalists and newsrooms face mounting pressures that threaten both their ability to report freely and the public’s right to know.

It said the executive branch of the government was taking “unprecedented steps to permanently undermine press freedom” through restricting access for some news organizations, increasingly using government and regulatory bodies against media, and launching targeted attacks on journalists and newsrooms.

In a statement, CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg said, “This is a definitive moment for U.S. media and the public’s right to be informed. Whether at the federal or state level, the investigations, hearings, and verbal attacks amount to an environment where the media’s ability to bear witness to government action is already curtailed.”

The current threats to press freedom in the US are among the most worrying anywhere, many media experts say.

“There is a head-on attack on media freedom in the US. If you look at the scores for the US [in the index], the social indicator has dropped hugely, which shows that within the US the press is operating in a hostile environment. The economic situation there has deteriorated too, which makes things difficult for them,” said O’Brien.

“But also, a lot of people look to America as a bastion of press freedom, with its constitution’s First Amendment, and what is happening there to independent media is an absolute gift to authoritarian rulers around the world. If the rest of the world just sits back and watches this and lets press freedom be restricted and attacked and does nothing, other regimes will look and just think, ‘oh, it’s OK to do this.’”

“World leaders have to now stand up for press freedom. Independent journalism is fundamental to democratic societies,” she added.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

To Save Our Planet, We Must Protect Its Defenders

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Climate Change, Crime & Justice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

A campaign to urge the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to adopt the standards of the Escazú Agreement in its upcoming Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency was launched at the Third Conference of the Parties of the Escazú Agreement held in Santiago, Chile, in April 2024. Credit: Lily Plazas

WASHINGTON DC, May 2 2025 (IPS) – The most powerful court in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, is preparing to clarify the obligations of States in relation to climate change. In its upcoming Advisory Opinion, the Court must articulate ambitious standards for respecting and protecting the human rights of environmental defenders in the context of the climate crisis.

Environmental defenders — advocates protecting environmental rights, resources, and marginalized communities — play a critical role in helping us navigate the climate crisis: they preserve ecosystem health, and mobilize and organize when the environment is under threat. Their work is vital.

Across the globe, we are witnessing the impacts of a warming planet: devastating wildfires, lethal flash floods, droughts that fuel hunger, and increasingly intense hurricanes. This strain on land and resources translates into greater pressure on those who defend the environment.

It is thus essential to strengthen the rights and work of environmental defenders, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean, a region that is amongst the most vulnerable to the effects of the climate emergency and the most dangerous in the world for environmental activism.

During public hearings in May 2024, a petition supported by over a 1,000 individuals and human rights organizations was delivered to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights urging the Court to incorporate the Escazú standards into its Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency. Credit: Romulo Serpa

Environmental defenders’ work is often deadly. In 2023, 196 environmental defenders were brutally murdered. Most of them were opposing deforestation, pollution, and land grabbing. Their struggles are for essential needs: clean air, healthy ecosystems and biodiversity, safe and sufficient water, and food.

Only four countries in Latin America and the Caribbean — Brazil, Colombia, Honduras, and Mexico — account for 85 percent of the documented murders of environmental defenders, confirming this region as the most violent one in the world for those who defend the land and the environment.

The call to strengthen environmental defenders’ rights and work was heard loud and clear at the Third Forum on Human Rights Defenders in Environmental Matters of the Escazú Agreement, where countries from the region convened in the Caribbean island State of St. Kitts and Nevis in April.

This Forum marked a historic moment: it was the first event of its kind in the Insular Caribbean, a region already experiencing — and poised to disproportionately face — the severe impacts of the climate crisis.

“It served as a vital platform not only to advance defenders’ rights but also to expose alarming new threats: rising attacks not only against individual human rights defenders but also against groups and organizations, through the spread of “laws against NGOs” and strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) suits targeting environmental lawyers.”

SLAPPs are tactics used, mostly by businesses, to intimidate and silence environmental defender organizations. Unlike genuine legal actions, SLAPPs abuse the court system to drain resources and undermine activists’ efforts. These lawsuits can create a “chilling effect” on free speech, making others hesitant to speak out for fear of being sued.

They also burden public resources and waste judicial time on unnecessary cases. These tactics aim to silence collective action and dismantle the critical support networks that defenders rely on.

The Escazú Agreement is the first binding regional treaty to promote environmental democracy — the right to information, participation, and justice — in Latin America and the Caribbean. It is also the only one in the world that contains specific provisions aiming to guarantee a safe and enabling space for environmental defenders. It is the fruit of decades of hard work by regional governments, civil society organizations, and environmental defenders.

The Environmental Defenders Forums, in the framework of the Escazú Agreement, were established for the discussion and implementation of the Action Plan on Human Rights Defenders in Environmental Matters. This Action Plan outlines strategic measures to ensure the safety of environmental defenders in the region, as well as recognize and protect their rights while ensuring that States prevent, investigate, and sanction attacks and threats against them.

Hosting the Forum in the Insular Caribbean was a notable political achievement for the countries of this region. Internationally, discussions often group Latin America and the Caribbean as a single, cohesive entity. However, the experiences of defenders in Latin American nations and the continental Caribbean differ significantly from those in the Insular Caribbean.

Key distinctions — such as country size, government capacities, and unique environmental challenges, including heightened vulnerability to specific climate events — result in diverse needs and priorities for environmental defenders.

This event was eye-opening for many, as it shed light on the diverse realities within the Caribbean that are often overshadowed when grouped under the broad label of “Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Environmental defenders in the Caribbean face significant pressures despite lower reported lethal attacks compared to Latin America. Over a decade, three lethal cases were recorded in one country, but reports acknowledge these figures as incomplete due to challenges such as limited civil society presence, media repression, and insecurity. Additionally, non-lethal aggressions — such as criminalization, harassment, and stigmatization — often go overlooked.

During the Forum, Caribbean environmental defenders highlighted socio-environmental conflicts across industries like oil and gas, mining, tourism, and infrastructure. Despite their efforts, their work is often stigmatized, infantilized, and unrecognized —even by themselves — as many identify as “climate activists” or “community leaders” rather than environmental defenders.

This lack of recognition hinders awareness of their protections and State obligations under international human rights law, underscoring the need for States to better recognize, protect, and promote defenders’ rights.

State representatives had a limited presence at the Forum, unlike mandatory participation in the Escazú Conference of the Parties, leaving “empty chairs” without accountability. This absence isolates environmental defenders in echo chambers, limiting dialogue with decision-makers.

The Forum is a vital platform to address violence and threats against defenders, but State neglect undermines its purpose. By failing to engage in the Forum and to protect defenders, States violate their rights and international law, making their absence unacceptable.
In this critical context, strengthening the rights and work of environmental defenders is essential, with the Escazú Agreement and its Action Plan providing a vital framework.

The Advisory Opinion process of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Climate Emergency presents a key opportunity for the region’s most influential Court to advance this goal.

We urge the Court to incorporate the Escazú Agreement’s specific standards as a baseline where Inter-American standards are less robust. This includes clearly defining the minimum essential content of the rights to access information, public participation, and justice in environmental matters under the American Convention.

Additionally, regional and international standards must be harmonized to ensure strong protections for environmental defenders, including a safe and enabling environment for their vital work.

There is no time to lose — every moment of inaction puts the lives of environmental defenders at greater risk. Without those who defend the planet, there can be no sustainable future. Protecting environmental defenders is not charity — it is survival.

Luisa Gómez Betancur is Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

‘The International Response Should Follow the Principle of ‘Nothing about Us, Without Us’’

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Europe, Featured, Gender, Gender Violence, Global, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Labour, Migration & Refugees, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

May 1 2025 (IPS) – CIVICUS speaks with Ukrainian gender rights activist Maryna Rudenko about the gendered impacts of the war in Ukraine and the importance of including women in peacebuilding efforts.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has profoundly impacted on women and girls. Many have been displaced and are struggling with poverty and unemployment. Those who’ve stayed endure daily missile attacks, damaged infrastructure, lack of basic services and sexual violence from Russian forces if they live in occupied territories. Women activists, caregivers and journalists are particularly vulnerable. The international community must increase support to ensure justice for victims and women’s inclusion in peace efforts.

Maryna Rudenko

What have been the impacts of the war in Ukraine, particularly on women and girls?

The war began in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea, with Indigenous women, particularly Crimean Tatars, immediately and severely affected. They risked losing their property and livelihoods, and to continue working they were forced to change their citizenship. Pro-Ukraine activists had to flee and those who stayed faced arrest. This placed a heavier burden on many women who were left in charge of their families.

At the same time in 2014, Russia began supporting separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, leading to the occupation of territories such as Donetsk and Luhansk and the displacement of over a million people. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022, many lost their homes again. Nearly seven million fled to European countries. This population loss poses a significant demographic challenge to Ukraine’s post-war development.

Since 2015, conflict-related sexual violence has been a major issue. Around 342 cases have been documented. The International Criminal Court recognised that conflict-related sexual violence has been committed in the temporarily occupied territories since 2014.

Ukraine also experienced the largest campaign of child abduction in recent history: Russia took close to 20,000 Ukrainian children from occupied territories and sent then to ‘camps’ in Crimea or Russia, where the authorities changed their names and nationalities and gave them to Russian families. Ukrainian children were forced to change their national identity. This is evidence of genocidal approach in Russia’s war activities.

The war has also devastated infrastructure and the economy. In my town, 30 km from Kyiv, the heating station was hit by 11 ballistic missiles, leaving us without electricity or water for a long time. It was very scary to stay at the apartment with my daughter and know that Russian ballistic missiles were flying over our house. Roughly 40 per cent of the economy was destroyed in 2022 alone, causing job losses at a time when the government spends over half its budget on the military. Civilians, including a record 70,000 women, have taken up arms.

Beyond the immediate human cost, the war is causing serious environmental damage, with weapons and missile debris polluting soil and water beyond national borders. Russia’s occupation of Zaporizhzhia, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, poses a very real risk of a nuclear disaster for Ukraine and Europe as a whole.

How have Ukrainian women’s organisations responded?

Starting in 2014, we focused on advocacy, championing United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1,325, which reaffirms the role of women in conflict prevention and resolution. The government adopted its National Action Plan on the implementation of the resolution in 2016. We formed local coalitions to implement this agenda, leading to reforms such as opening military roles to women, establishing policies to prevent sexual harassment, integrating gender equality in the training curriculum and gender mainstreaming as part of police reform.

Following the full-scale invasion, Ukrainian women’s civil society organisations (CSOs) shifted to providing immediate humanitarian relief, as survival became the top priority. Women’s CSOs began helping people, particularly those with disabilities, relocate to western Ukraine and providing direct aid to those who remained. As schools, hospitals and shelters for survivors of domestic violence were destroyed, women’s CSOs tried to fill the gap, providing food, hygiene packages and cash and improvising school lessons in metro tunnels.

People stood up and helped. In Kharkiv, which is located 30 km from the boarder with Russia, the local government created underground schools. It’s unbelievable that this happened in the 21st century and because of the aggression of a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Our children, women and men can’t sleep normally because every night there are missile and drone attacks.

In the second half of 2022, women’s CSOs and the government tried to refocus on long-term development. One of the first initiatives was to amend the National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security to better address conflict-related sexual violence in both occupied and liberated areas. This was a much-needed response given the many reported cases of killing, rape and torture. This involved training law enforcement officers, prosecutors and other officials on how to document these crimes and properly communicate with survivors, who often blame themselves due to stigma surrounding the violence.

We have also reported Russia’s violations of the Geneva Conventions, particularly those concerning women, to UN human rights bodies.

Women’s groups are pushing for more donor support for psychological services to address trauma and helping plan for long-term recovery, aiming to rebuild damaged infrastructure and improve services to meet the needs of excluded groups. Some donors, like the Ukrainian Women’s Fund, have agreed to support the costs of mental recovery for women activists to help them restore their strength and support others.

How should women’s voices be integrated into recovery and peacebuilding efforts?

Women must have a real seat at the negotiation table. Genuine participation means not just counting the number of women involved but ensuring their voices are heard and their needs addressed. Unfortunately, the gender impacts of the war remain a secondary concern.

We have outlined at least 10 key areas where the gender impacts of the war should be discussed and prioritised in negotiations. However, it looks like these are being largely ignored in the current high-level negotiations between Russia and the USA. We heard that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy highlighted the importance of returning Ukrainian children when he met with Donald Trump. It’s highly important for the mothers and fathers of these children and for all Ukrainians.

Women’s CSOs are working to ensure all survivors can access justice and fair reparations, and that nobody forgets and excuses the war crimes committed. We urgently need accountability; peace cannot be achieved at the expense of truth. This is particularly important because the Council of Europe’s Register of Damage for Ukraine only accepts testimonies of war crimes that happened after the 2022 invasion, leaving out many survivors from crimes committed since 2014. We are working to amend this rule.

The international response should follow the principle of ‘nothing about us, without us’. International partners should collaborate directly with women-led CSOs, using trauma-informed approaches. For women affected by combat, loss or abduction, recovery must start with psychological support, and civil society can play a vital role in this process.

The effective implementation of Resolution 1,325 also requires reconstruction funds that incorporate a gender perspective throughout. Ukrainian women’s CSOs prepared a statement to highlight the importance of analysing the war’s impact on the implementation of the UN’s Beijing Platform for Action on gender equality and we used this as common message during the recent meeting of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

Additionally, we believe it’s time to consider the successes and failures in implementation of Resolution 1,325 and its sister resolutions, because it’s 25 years since its adoption and the world is not safer.

We appreciate any platforms where we can speak about the experience of Ukraine and call for action to support Ukraine to help make a just and sustain peace in Europe and the world.

GET IN TOUCH
LinkedIn

SEE ALSO
Ukraine: ‘Civil society remains resilient and responsive, but financial constraints now hamper its efforts’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Mykhailo Savva 25.Feb.2025
Russia: Further tightening of restrictions on ‘undesirable’ organisations CIVICUS Monitor 30.Jul.2024
Russia and Ukraine: a tale of two civil societies CIVICUS Lens 24.Feb.2024

  Source

Trump’s First 100 Days Portend Long-Lasting Damage to Press Freedom

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

NEW YORK, May 1 2025 (IPS) – Press freedom is no longer a given in the United States 100 days into President Donald Trump’s second term as journalists and newsrooms face mounting pressures that threaten their ability to report freely and the public’s right to know.

A new report released April 30 by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)– “Alarm bells: Trump’s first 100 days ramp up fear for the press, democracy,” noted that the administration has scaled up its rhetorical attacks and launched a startling number of actions using regulatory bodies and powerful allies that, taken together, may cause irreparable harm to press freedom in the U.S. and will likely take decades to repair.

The level of trepidation among U.S. journalists is such that CPJ has provided more security training since the November election than at any other period.

“This is a definitive moment for U.S. media and the public’s right to be informed. CPJ is providing journalists with resources at record rates so they can report safely and without fear or favor, but we need everyone to understand that protecting the First Amendment is not a choice, it’s a necessity. All our freedoms depend on it,” said CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg.

Emerging challenges to a free press in the United States fall under three main categories:
1) The restriction of access for some news organizations; 2) The increasing use of government and regulatory bodies against news organizations; and 3) Targeted attacks against journalists and newsrooms.

While The Associated Press (AP), a global newswire agency serving thousands of newsrooms in the U.S. and across the world, has faced retaliation for not adhering to state-mandated language, the Federal Communications Commission is mounting investigations against three major broadcasters – CBS, ABC, and NBC – along with the country’s two public broadcasters – NPR and PBS – in moves widely viewed as politically motivated.

“The rising tide of threats facing U.S. journalists and newsrooms are a direct threat to the American public,” said Ginsberg. “Whether at the federal or state level, the investigations, hearings, and verbal attacks amount to an environment where the media’s ability to bear witness to government action is already curtailed.”

Journalists who reached out to CPJ in recent months are worried about online harassment and digital and physical safety. Newsrooms have also shared with us worries about the possibility of punitive regulatory actions.

Since the presidential election last November until March 7 of this year, CPJ has provided safety consultations to more than 530 journalists working in the country. This figure was only 20 in all of 2022, marking an exponential increase in the need for safety information.

Globally, the gutting of the U.S. Agency for Global Media resulted in the effective termination of thousands of journalist positions, and the elimination of USAID independent media support impoverished the news landscape in many regions across the globe where the news ecosystem is underdeveloped or information is severely restricted.

As the executive branch of the U.S. government is taking unprecedented steps to permanently undermine press freedom, CPJ is calling on the public, news organizations, civil society, and all branches, levels, and institutions of government – from municipalities to the U.S. Supreme Court – to safeguard press freedom to help secure the future of American democracy.

In particular, Congress must prioritize passage of the PRESS Act and The Free Speech Protection Act, both bipartisan bills that can strengthen and protect press freedom throughout the United States.

The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. We defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Sights Set on Highest Ambition as World Rows Through Toughest Ocean Crisis

Posted on by admin

Africa, Asia-Pacific, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Headlines, PACIFIC COMMUNITY, Pacific Community Climate Wire, Population, Small Island Developing States, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Climate Change

Kenya's high-level delegation meets the Republic of Korea's high-level delegation. Kenya will host the 11th OOC. Credit: OOC

Kenya’s high-level delegation meets the Republic of Korea’s high-level delegation. Kenya will host the 11th OOC. Credit: OOC

BUSAN, Korea, Apr 30 2025 (IPS) – Participants from over 100 countries will leave the 10th Our Ocean Conference in Busan, the Republic of Korea, with stark reminders that with sea levels rising dangerously, coastal regions and low-lying areas globally, particularly densely populated areas, are threatened.

Asia, Africa, island nations, as well as the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts are increasingly on the frontlines of the coastal climatic carnage. Countries and regions at high risk include Bangladesh, India, the Philippines, and Pacific Island nations like Tuvalu and Fiji. In 2024, floods caused the highest number of fatalities in Africa in countries such as Cameroon and Nigeria.

“We started this conference with the understanding that the ocean is under threat. A third of the world’s fisheries are overfished. Illegal and destructive fishing is damaging the ecosystems. It hurts the coastal communities that depend on it and undermines global economies. So, to risk the ocean risks the future security of all of our countries and the planet,” said Tony Long, CEO, Global Fishing Watch.

The Our Ocean Conference gathered approximately 1,000 global leaders from various sectors, including heads of state and high-level government officials from over 100 countries, and representatives from more than 400 international and non-profit organizations. Together, they discussed diverse and concrete actions for a sustainable ocean.

Today, experts highlighted the intersection of the ocean, climate, and biodiversity in finding solutions that transform science into political action. While the ocean is on the frontlines of the climate crisis, it is also a significant source of sustainable solutions because it absorbs nearly 25 percent of carbon dioxide emissions and 90 percent of the heat resulting from these emissions.

The 30×30 campaign supports the national and global movements to protect at least 30 percent of the blue planet’s land, waters, and ocean by 2030. While moderating a session on the importance of 30×30 and progress in national waters, Melissa Wright, a senior member of the environment team at Bloomberg Philanthropies, where she leads the Bloomberg Ocean Initiative, spoke about ongoing support for the global ambition.

“We’re supporting global ambition to achieve 30×30 in the ocean through equitable and inclusive partnerships and initiatives with civil society, governments, indigenous and community groups, and local leaders. Since 2014, the Blue Water Ocean Initiative has invested more than USD366 million to advance ocean conservation,” she said.

The initiative works in tandem with governments, NGOs, and local leaders to accelerate the designation and enforcement of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). Most recently, the initiative has pushed for the rapid ratification of the High Seas Treaty and ensured the creation of MPAs in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

“We do not have much time left until 2030 to achieve the 30×30. As such, we are presented with a unique and challenging opportunity for ambitious, robust enhancement to our national and global capacities for the protection, conservation, and sustainability of our oceans,” said Noralene Uy, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Planning, and Foreign-Assisted and Special Projects, Philippines Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

Noralene Uy speaking to participants about the Philippines' efforts and challenges towards achieving the 30x30 targets. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Noralene Uy speaking to participants about the Philippines’ efforts and challenges towards achieving the 30×30 targets. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

The Philippines is one of the 17 megadiverse countries in the world, meaning it possesses a high level of biodiversity and a large number of endemic species. The country is home to a significant portion of the world’s plant and animal species, including many unique and endemic species.

Within this context, she said an undue burden weighs on the Philippines given limited resources and other priority development objectives. Nonetheless, the country has turned to science and is making progress. The country has established marine scientific research stations strategically located in the major marine biogeographic regions of the country to provide insights and knowledge into their ocean.

They have also formulated the national ocean environment policy, stressing that as science and policy evolve according to the priorities of our country, organizational structures and knowledge systems must change as well.

To achieve the highest ambition in marine protection, the Philippines and coastal communities around the globe now have an ever-greater need for financing and technical resources. Brian O’Donnell, Director, Campaign for Nature, explained that the only available assessment of the cost of 30×30 on a global scale is now five years old.

“According to the assessment, it would cost about USD 100 billion a year to implement 30×30 both on land and in the sea and at the time of the assessment, only about USD 20 billion was being spent, leaving an USD 80 billion annual shortfall,” he explained.

“Not only do we need to ensure we get more money into this space, but that money is delivered efficiently and effectively to the people, communities, and countries where biodiversity is and those who are safeguarding it.”

O’Donnell said that, despite ongoing challenges in mobilizing financial resources, there is some notable progress. He spoke about the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022, which includes a target for wealthy nations to provide at least USD 20 billion annually in international biodiversity finance to developing countries by 2025, increasing to USD 30 billion by 2030.

This target aims to help developing countries implement their biodiversity strategies and action plans, particularly those in Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States. But O’Donnell said there is a need to change how things are done, as, unfortunately, much of the financing to developing countries is coming in the form of loans and short-term financing.

In all, he encouraged partnerships and collaboration in raising much-needed resources, such as the Oceans 5, which is dedicated to protecting the world’s five oceans. Oceans 5 is an international funders’ collaborative dedicated to stopping overfishing, establishing marine protected areas, and constraining offshore oil and gas development, three of the highest priorities identified by marine scientists around the world. Bloomberg Philanthropies is a founding partner of Oceans 5.

Looking ahead, there is optimism that by the time delegates settle down for the 11th Our Ocean Conference in 2026 in Kenya, the global community will have moved the needle in their efforts across finance, policy, capacity building, and research towards marine protected areas, sustainable blue economy, climate change, maritime security, sustainable fisheries, and reduction of marine pollution.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

The Disappeared: Mexico’s Industrial-Scale Human Rights Crisis

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Gender Violence, Headlines, Human Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Migration & Refugees, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Raquel Cunha/Reuters via Gallo Images

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Apr 28 2025 (IPS) – They found shoes, hundreds of them, scattered across the dirt floor of an extermination camp in Jalisco state. These abandoned shoes, once belonging to someone’s child, parent or spouse, stand as silent witnesses to Mexico’s deepest national trauma. Alongside charred human remains and makeshift crematoria meant to erase all evidence of humanity, they tell the story of a crisis that has reached industrial-scale proportions.

In March, volunteer search groups uncovered this sprawling death camp operated by the Jalisco New Generation Cartel in Teuchitlán. The discovery wasn’t made by sophisticated government intelligence operations but by mothers, sisters and wives who’ve transformed their personal grief into relentless collective action. For them, the alternative to searching is unthinkable.

Mexico is experiencing a humanitarian catastrophe of staggering proportions. Over 121,000 people have disappeared over the past decades, with 90 per cent of cases occurring since 2006, when then President Felipe Calderón militarised the fight against drug cartels. Add to this the estimated 52,000 unidentified human remains held in morgues across the country and the true scale of this national tragedy begins to unfold.

A web of complicity

What makes Mexico’s crisis particularly sinister is the systematic collusion between arms of the state and organised crime. The Jalisco camp’s proximity to federal security installations raises troubling questions about official complicity and active participation in a system that treats some populations as expendable.

The crisis follows a well-established pattern. In states such as Jalisco and Tamaulipas, criminal organisations collaborate with local authorities to enforce territorial control. They use violence to recruit forced labour, eliminate opposition and instil terror in communities that might otherwise resist. Security forces are often implicated, as seen in the 2014 disappearance of 43 students from the Ayotzinapa Rural Teachers’ College, where investigations revealed that military personnel witnessed the attack perpetrated by a criminal organisation but failed to intervene.

Young people and women from poorer backgrounds bear the brunt of this horror. In Jalisco, a third of missing people are between 15 and 29 years old. Women and girls are systematically targeted, with disappearances often linked to human trafficking and sexual exploitation. Ciudad Juárez has become notorious for femicides, with over 2,500 women and girls disappeared and murdered since the 1990s. Migrants transiting through Mexico are vulnerable to abduction for extortion or forced recruitment, as seen in the 2010 San Fernando massacre, when 72 migrants were executed for refusing to work for a criminal group.

Mothers turned activists

Faced with government inaction or complicity, civil society has stepped in. Human rights organisations document disappearances, support victims’ families and demand accountability, including by organising public demonstrations, collaborating with international bodies and bringing cases before international courts. But the most remarkable response comes from grassroots collectives formed by families of the disappeared. Throughout Mexico, hundreds of groups such as Guerreras Buscadoras, predominantly led by women – mothers, wives and sisters of the disappeared – conduct search operations, comb remote areas for clandestine graves, perform exhumations and maintain secure databases to document findings.

Their courage comes at a terrible price. In May 2024, Teresa Magueyal was assassinated by armed men on motorcycles in Guanajuato state after spending three years searching for her son José Luis. She was the sixth mother of a disappeared person to be murdered in Guanajuato within a few months. Another mother, Norma Andrade, has survived two murder attempts. Despite knowing the risks, she and countless others continue their quest for truth and justice.

Years of pressure from civil society culminated in the 2017 General Law on Forced Disappearance, which formally recognised enforced disappearance in national legislation and established a National Search Commission. While a significant achievement, implementation has proven problematic, with inconsistent application across Mexico’s federal system, inadequate information systems, insufficient forensic capacity and minimal penalties for perpetrators.

Time for change

The discovery of the Jalisco extermination camp has generated unprecedented public outrage, sparking nationwide protests. President Claudia Sheinbaum has declared combating disappearances a national priority and announced several initiatives: strengthening the National Search Commission, reforming identity documentation, creating integrated forensic databases, implementing immediate search protocols, standardising criminal penalties, publishing transparent investigation statistics and enhancing victim support services.

For meaningful progress, Mexico must undertake comprehensive reforms that address the structural underpinnings of the crisis. Critical measures include demilitarising public security, strengthening independent prosecutors and forensic institutions, guaranteeing transparent investigations free from political interference and providing sustained support for victims’ families.

The UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances has announced the opening of an urgent procedure examining Mexico’s disappearance crisis – a step that could elevate these cases to the scrutiny of the UN General Assembly. International oversight is needed to ensure state compliance with human rights obligations.

This moment – with public outrage at its peak, presidential commitments on the table and international scrutiny intensifying – creates a potential inflection point for addressing this national trauma. If there was ever a time when conditions favoured substantive action, it’s now.

But whatever happens at the official level, one thing remains certain: Mexico’s mothers of the disappeared will continue their quest. They’ll keep searching abandoned buildings, digging in remote fields and marching in the streets carrying photos of their missing loved ones. They search not because they have hope, but because they have no choice. They search because the alternative is surrender to a system that would prefer they kept silent.

And so they continue, carrying their message to the disappeared and to a state that has failed them: ‘Until we find you, until we find the truth’.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

  Source