Reprisals Against Human Rights Defenders in Saudi Arabia
Human right defenders have suffered greatly from reprisals due to their activism and involvement with international human rights organizations, such as the United Nations (UN), and the Human Rights Council (HRC), among others. ADHRB has and continues to monitor the situation in Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf. Since May 2018, Saudi Arabia has implemented travel bans, engaged in incommunicado detention, and participated in other forms of reprisals as a method for preventing human right defenders (HRDs) from participating in international human right sessions or engaging with groups such as the UN.
ADHRB’s work surrounding reprisals in Saudi Arabia has focused on Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) and the systematic reprisals that they face because of their activism. The condition of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia country has always been precarious due to the ingrained patriarchy in which the society is based. Women, in fact, are considered of less value because of their sex thus affecting the attitude in which Saudi society has viewed women when they speak out about prominent and pressuring issues. These issues include fundamental restrictions on woman’s’ freedom, including freedom of expression and association, and freedom of movement. A clear example is the guardianship system, implemented by the Saudi government, which requires women to have their male guardian’s permission before undertaking basic activities such as travelling, seeking employment, or health care access.
Read the full article here.
COVID-19: How the Pandemic used by GCC Governments to Double Down on Human Rights Violations

The COVID-19 has infected millions of people around the world and has compelled governments to take extraordinary measures to combat its spread across the population. However, these actions pose a risk of infringing upon international human rights law standards, even if COVID-19 poses a significant threat to public health.
Declaring a state of emergency can be one method in which governments can quickly respond to the immediate crisis. This is where state constitutions allow for the executive power to take extraordinary measures in exceptional situations much more quickly, such as in the current health crisis, without having to go through all the stages that make up the normal decision-making process. Although declaring a state of emergency is not inherently illegal, it is evident that a number of governments around the world are using this constitutional tool to severely restrict fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of information, expression, assembly and association. In reality, many measures that were imposed with the pretext of combatting COVID-19 are in fact being used as an excuse to oppress government opposition.
Read the full article here.
|