Category: MIL-OSI

Source: Amnesty International –

The decision by the President of India, Droupadi Murmu, to give assent to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, which denies transgender and gender diverse people the right to self-identify, is a serious setback for human rights in India,” said Amnesty International.

The amendment means that transgender people in India will now have to go through a series of official checks for their identity to be verified and approved by the authorities. 

“This regressive law dilutes safeguards and deepens state intrusion into the lives of transgender people,” said Aakar Patel, Chair of Board, Amnesty International India.  

“This law is not just a bureaucratic overreach; it is a fundamental shift in how the state views transgender people. Identity is no longer treated as something inherent, but as something to be checked, certified, and controlled. That is a dangerous precedent.” 

This regressive law dilutes safeguards and deepens state intrusion into the lives of transgender people

Aakar Patel, Chair of Board, Amnesty International India

The law provides a restrictive definition of ‘transgender’, limiting recognition to certain socio-cultural categories or biological variations. It also removes the separate definition of intersex persons and instead groups them with transgender persons, blurring the distinction between sex characteristics and gender identity.  

At the core of the law is the explicit removal of the right to self-identification – a right that was firmly recognized by the Supreme Court in 2014 in the landmark NALSA v. Union of India ruling. The court made it clear: gender identity is a personal choice, about dignity, autonomy, and the freedom to define oneself. It categorically held that no individual should be compelled to undergo medical procedures including “sex reassignment surgery, sterilization or hormonal therapy” as a prerequisite for legal recognition of their gender identity.  

The new amendment ignores the Supreme Court ruling entirely, replacing self-identification with a system where identity must be verified by a medical board and thereafter recognized by the District Magistrate. This shifts the recognition of gender identity from a matter of personal autonomy and lived experience to one governed by the state through medical and biological criteria, undermining international human rights standards and the Supreme Court judgement. 

The law also raises serious concerns about state overreach, particularly in relation to privacy and unlawful surveillance. The law allows medical institutions to share details of gender-affirming procedures with authorities. For a community already facing stigma and discrimination, this opens the door to surveillance and misuse of deeply personal data, potentially leading to harassment and abuse. It could also discourage people from seeking essential healthcare for fear of privacy infringements. 

“International standards call for legal gender recognition to be a quick, accessible and transparent administrative process based on a person’s self-determination. Instead of simplifying processes, this amendment adds more bureaucratic and medical layers, approvals, and verifications which pave the way for prejudice,” said Aakar Patel. 

In addition, the amendment places transgender persons and their allies at further risk by introducing a sweeping criminal framework. Specifically, it penalizes “compelling”, “forcing” or “alluring” a person or a child to outwardly present as transgender, with penalties extending up to life imprisonment. These criminal provisions coupled with the narrow definition of transgender persons, which excludes self-perceived gender identity, potentially allow for the targeting of traditional kinship systems, civil society, medical professionals and parents.  

The law was passed despite clear objections from a Supreme Court-appointed expert committee on transgender rights and opposition members of the Parliament. The committee had explicitly asked the government to withdraw the bill and engage in meaningful consultation with transgender communities, which they failed to do. 

The judiciary has also raised red flags. The Rajasthan High Court yesterday warned that legal changes cannot dilute constitutional guarantees, especially those already recognized under the NALSA judgement. This is a clear signal that the law may not stand against constitutional scrutiny. 

“A law that directly affects fundamental rights was pushed through without consulting with the very people it affects most,” said Aakar Patel. 

“We stand in solidarity with the transgender rights activists protesting the amendment and urge the government of India to urgently pause and reconsider this law. At the very least, implementation should be halted, and the law revisited through genuine, inclusive consultation. Transgender voices must be at the center of any decision-making process that affects their lives”, said Aakar Patel.  

Background

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, was passed by voice vote in the Lok Sabha (lower house) on Tuesday 24 March, and subsequently cleared by the Rajya Sabha (upper house) on Wednesday 25 March, completing its passage through parliament. The bill was approved despite sustained criticism from opposition parties. Opposition leaders raised concerns over the government’s haste in passing the legislation and urged that it be referred to a standing committee to allow for broader consultation with stakeholders.

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

I grew up hearing the word hosanna carried through church halls and school masses, spoken with a sense of reverence that felt both communal and contained. It was a word of praise, offered upward, shaped by ritual and repetition. At the time, it seemed complete in itself.

That understanding shifted recently, while I was attending a Palm Sunday Mass. As the faithful raised palm fronds and echoed a cry repeated across generations, Hosanna Filio David, the word took on a different weight. In his homily, the priest posed a question: “What is the nature of our hosanna?” It was a simple question, but it invited reflection beyond the ritual and the familiar cadence of the word. It was also there that I learned, or perhaps finally registered, that hosanna means “save us,” or more urgently, “save us now.”

My relationship with the church has become more distant through the years, shaped by questions and a different way of seeing the world. Yet some stories remain, not as doctrine, but as moral reference points. One of them is this: that Jesus consistently aligned himself with those at the margins. The poor, the excluded, the communities whose suffering was often overlooked. He moved toward them, even when it was contested.

Holy Week invites reflection, and I return to that word with a different lens. Because hosanna is not simply praise. At its root, it is a plea. A call that once meant “save us now,” spoken by people who knew what it was to live under pressure, to long for relief that could not wait.

What does hosanna mean in a world marked by deepening crises?

Faith should not be blind; rather, it should point us where to look. Communities continue to face the consequences of environmental degradation, often with the least resources to respond. Floods become more severe, heat more unforgiving, and livelihoods more precarious. Waste systems strain under the weight of overproduction, and when they fail, it is communities that pay the price. At the same time, conflict and war intensify these vulnerabilities. Displacement and rising costs further narrow the space for survival, especially for those already living on the edge.

In this context, hosanna begins to sound less like a distant refrain and more like something urgent—even present. It echoes in communities calling for clean water, for safe homes, for the right to live without the constant threat of disaster, and for justice. It is heard in places where people are already asking—in different words—to be saved.

If the figure at the center of these stories chose to be alongside the oppressed, then echoing that call today requires more than remembrance. It asks for attentiveness to the unequal burdens carried by communities, and to the systems that reinforce these conditions. It calls for a willingness to listen, especially when voices come from places that are often ignored.

So the question becomes personal. What is our nature of hosanna?

Is it something we speak, or something we respond to? Does it remain within the safety of reflection, or does it move us toward those who are already calling out?

Holy Week offers space for contemplation and clarity. It allows us to consider the kind of response that must follow belief. Perhaps hosanna is not only a word we offer upward, but also a cry we are meant to hear and a call we are meant to answer. 

Because if hosanna once meant “save us now,” then this imploration does not remain in the past. The cry reverberates into the present.

Is the call to “save us now” answered by changing hearts alone or by confronting the conditions that make people cry out in the first place?

Perhaps it begins there. To confront these conditions can be as direct as standing with communities already resisting harm or as quiet as refusing the narratives that keep accountability in the wrong places. It can mean paying attention to who profits from our planet’s destruction and who carries the burden. It can mean supporting movements of justice and ending greed in all its forms.

And so when hosanna is spoken today, whose voice do we recognize in it? And what does it ask of us now?

###

Eunille Santos is part of the communications team of Greenpeace Philippines. He is currently pursuing a master’s degree in development communication at the University of the Philippines Los Baños.

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

Johannesburg – Constitution Hill was awash with green banners, hand-painted placards, and the sound of singing and chanting today as activists, young people, and community members took to the streets for the Human Rights Festival People’s Walk. The march, led by Greenpeace Africa (GPAF) and allies, drew urgent attention to the human cost of Africa’s critical minerals boom and the growing gap between promises of a just transition and the lived realities of communities on the front lines.

From the steps of one of South Africa’s most historic human rights sites, marchers carried a clear message: the global race for so-called “green” minerals cannot come at the expense of African lives, land, and dignity.

“The energy transition cannot be built on exploitation,” said Siya Myeza, Climate and Energy Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa. “We are seeing a new scramble for Africa’s minerals dressed up as climate action. But for many communities, it’s a painfully familiar trajectory: displacement, pollution, and broken promises. A truly just transition must start with people, not profits.”

The People’s Walk was part of Greenpeace Africa’s broader call for resource sovereignty and accountability in the extraction of critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium, and manganese, resources essential for renewable energy technologies but often sourced under harmful conditions.

“Communities are being told to sacrifice everything in the name of ‘green growth,’ yet they are the last to benefit,” said Cynthia Moyo, Climate and Energy Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa. “We are here to say: no more decisions about us without us. Justice means communities have power, protection, and a real share in the future being built from their resources.”

Participants in the march included youth activists, civil society organisations, and members of affected communities, many of whom shared personal testimonies of environmental degradation, economic exclusion, and human rights violations linked to mining activities.

Greenpeace Africa is calling on governments, corporations, and international institutions to commit to a people-centred just transition that prioritises:

• Community consent and participation in decision-making
• Strong environmental and human rights protections
• Fair distribution of benefits from mineral wealth

As the chants echoed through Constitution Hill, one message stood above the rest: Africa’s future must be shaped by its people.

ENDS

FOR MEDIA ENQUIRIES:

Ferdinand Omondi Communications Lead, Greenpeace Africa 📧  Ferdinand Omondi  📞 +254 722 505 233 

Siyabonga Myeza Climate and Energy Campaigner  📧 Siyabonga Myeza  📞 +27 83 693 8150

Greenpeace Africa Pressdesk: Pressdesk Africa 

Greenpeace Africa is an independent campaigning organisation that uses peaceful, creative confrontation to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.

---

– ENDS –

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

CANBERRA, Tuesday 31 March 2026 — Greenpeace Australia Pacific has welcomed the Parliament’s ratification of the Global Ocean Treaty, creating the opportunity for world-first high seas ocean sanctuaries. 

Environment Minister Murray Watt today announced the treaty, the most significant global nature protection agreement in a decade, will be ratified by the Australian parliament. The bill has now passed the Senate and House of Representatives with support from the major parties, clearing the final hurdle towards ratification.

David Ritter, CEO at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Ratifying the Global Ocean Treaty is genuinely historic. At a time of unprecedented pressure from destructive industrial fishing, severe climate impacts, plastic pollution and mining, Australia has chosen to join the global effort to protect our magnificent oceans.”

Australia was one of the first countries to sign its intent to ratify the treaty in 2023, and we have a long and distinguished history of leadership on global ocean protection. Under the new treaty Australia has the necessary legal tools to drive the creation of high seas ocean sanctuaries.

“The Global Ocean Treaty is the most significant global nature agreement for many years, and has the power to protect the world’s high seas and safeguard precious and endangered wildlife,” Ritter added.

“With the Treaty now in force, Australia has an important opportunity to drive the creation of ocean sanctuaries on the high seas that are fully protected, no-take zones, which will allow wildlife populations to recover and thrive. 

“We thrill at the whales and albatross, and all of the animals of the deep wild oceans, great and small–and now the world has the legal ability to protect them by creating high seas sanctuaries; massive parks at sea where nature can thrive.

“We are an island nation of ocean lovers, and all Australians are entitled to expect that our government will take this incredible new opportunity to protect the ocean.”

Greenpeace is calling on the Australian government to build on our national legacy by ensuring that this landmark agreement delivers lasting protection for our precious oceans. 

“We’re calling on Minister Watt to create five high seas sanctuaries in our region, starting with a large ocean sanctuary in the Tasman Sea, between Australia and Aotearoa-New Zealand.”

Currently, less than 1 per cent of the global ocean is highly or fully protected. Closing the High Seas protection gap from under 1 per cent to 30 per cent in four years, to meet the globally-agreed 30×30 target, will require governments to protect ocean areas larger than entire continents and to do so faster than any conservation effort in history. Australia will now have a seat at the table for the very first Oceans COP, due before February 2027, where nations will discuss the design and implementation of the treaty.

—ENDS—

For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact Vai Shah on +61 452 290 082 or [email protected] 

High res images and footage of Australia’s oceans can be found here

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

Between 2020 and 2024, 1.347 million tonnes of fish were caught inside the UK’s Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) according to new analysis by Greenpeace of official data. That’s enough fish to fill around 500 Olympic swimming pools.

UK MPAs are designated to protect marine wildlife and fragile ocean habitats but, as the analysis of European fisheries landings data [1] proves, these designations are currently nothing more than lines on a map. 

Of the 1.3 million tonnes, over 1 million were caught by pelagic trawlers – vessels that use enormous nets up to 240 metres wide and 50 metres long, scooping up everything in their path. 250,000 tonnes were caught by bottom-towed gear, including bottom trawlers, which drag heavy, destructive nets across the seabed, devastating marine ecosystems. [2]

Campaigners say the findings expose the stark gap between political promises and reality at sea. Large-scale industrial fishing continues to devastate areas that are supposed to be safe havens – even though the UK government has had the powers to change this since Brexit.

Chris Thorne, Senior Oceans Campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: 

“Just beneath the surface of our seas, right here in the UK, lies an extraordinary world of marine life – from shoals of colourful fish to dolphins to seahorses – but it’s facing a level of vandalism greater than we’d ever accept on land.

“The government claims vast areas of UK waters are protected, but the reality is a national scandal. Since 2020, more than 1.3 million tonnes of fish have been caught inside the UK’s so-called marine protected areas. 

“Protection means nothing if these hulking industrial trawlers are allowed to devastate crucially important areas. MPAs should be safe havens where our incredible marine life and ecosystems can recover and thrive. Instead they remain protected only on paper and precious ocean life is being pushed to the brink.”

A process to ban bottom trawling across the MPA network began in 2020 [3], and this analysis highlights the cost of delay. Various governments have dragged their feet in implementing it, allowing industrial vessels to continue dragging heavy, destructive nets across the seabed, devastating marine ecosystems. Almost one fifth of the total catch (250,000 tonnes) was caught using bottom-towed gear. 

Even if a bottom trawling ban was fully implemented, the revelation that 1 million tonnes of fish caught was caught in MPAs using pelagic gear – which would not be restricted by current bottom-trawling proposals – makes it clear that marine life and habitats inside UK MPAs would remain exposed and vulnerable.

Chris Thorne continued: 

“Since leaving the EU, the UK government has had full powers to properly protect our marine protected areas – a measure that’s needed not only for marine life itself but also to support local fishing communities. Yet many remain little more than lines on a map.

“Banning bottom trawling in some sites would be a step forward, but other destructive fishing methods would still be allowed and much of the MPA network would remain vulnerable.

“If the government wants to show real leadership on ocean protection, it must stop all industrial fishing in UK MPAs and work with other states to properly protect 30% of the wider Atlantic Ocean by 2030, including the Sargasso Sea. This is the only way to ensure our oceans can recover and sustain future generations.”

ENDS

Notes to editor

[1] UK fisheries data: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-sea-fisheries-annual-statistics-report-2024 

EU fisheries data: https://stecf.ec.europa.eu/data-dissemination/fdi_en

[2] 250,000 tonnes were caught by bottom-towed gear, including beam trawls, demersal trawls, dredges and demersal seines. These are all covered by the proposed MPA bans on bottom-towed gear. 

[3] The Marine protected areas process has 4 stages. We are currently in the middle of Stage 3. 

• Stage 1, which began in 2020, focused on the initial review and introduction of byelaws for four offshore MPAs to protect specific features. 
• Stage 2 targeted 13 specific MPAs, primarily focusing on protecting “rock, and rocky and biogenic reef features” from the impacts of bottom-towed fishing gear. 
• Stage 3 aims to manage remaining fishing activities in MPAs not covered by Stage 1 or 2, and will cover parts of 42 further MPAs. We are currently waiting for the MMO to release the results of their analysis of the consultation on this stage.
• Stage 4 covers the impacts of fishing on MPAs with highly mobile species features. These are two MPAs protecting harbour porpoise, and three MPAs protecting certain bird species. The consultation on this stage is still to come. 

Methodology: 

A full brief on the method used in this analysis is available here

A breakdown of the data is available on request.

Video content:

Archive footage from 2020-2024 featuring supertrawlersfishing inside UK MPAs and supertrawlers that have previously fished inside UKMPAs plus Greenpeace supertrawler/ MPA protests: https://media.greenpeace.org/Detail/27MZIFJVQZYOW

February 2026 footage from Greenpeace UK’s latest monitoring tour of UKMPAs in the English Channel is available for download via WeTransfer here.

Key findings: 

• 1.347 million tonnes of fish were caught inside UK offshore MPAs
• More than 1 million tonnes were caught using pelagic gear, which will not be restricted by proposed bottom-trawling bans
• 250,000 tonnes of fish caught using bottom-towed fishing gear
• EU vessels caught around 800,000 tonnes, while UK vessels caught around 545,000 tonnes

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

SYDNEY, Tuesday 31 March 2026 — Two Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists have been arrested following a peaceful protest at the Australian Domestic Gas Outlook conference in Sydney, where they dropped a banner that said — “Gas Execs Profit. We Pay The Price” and held banners saying “Tax Gas Profits”. 

Photos and B Roll video of the protest and arrests are available here

Live updates on Greenpeace Instagram

The two activists were arrested by police around 9:00am AEDT and taken to Day Street Police Station. Information on this morning’s gas conference disruption can be found here.

Solaye Snider, Campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Greenpeace activists have taken a strong stand today against profit hungry gas corporations and lobbyists, who see horrific global wars as an opportunity to price gouge and profiteer, while everyday people pay the price.

“Australians have had enough of gas corporations like Santos and ConocoPhillips ripping us off, leaving us with nothing but empty pockets and climate damage. The gas industry is aggressively lobbying against being fairly taxed and pushing to drill for more gas. Change requires showing up and speaking out, and that’s what these activists have done today.

“Greenpeace Australia Pacific stands by our activists, and stands with all communities who are peacefully fighting for a safe and clean energy future. The right to peaceful protest is a fundamental pillar of a healthy democracy and a basic right of all Australians.”

-ENDS-

Media contacts:

Lucy Keller: +61 491 135 308 or [email protected] or Kate O’Callaghan: +61 406 231 892 or [email protected]

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

SYDNEY, Tuesday 31 March 2026 — Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists have disrupted the Australian Domestic Gas Outlook conference in Sydney, dropping a 3 metre-long banner in the main foyer outside the conference room saying, ‘Gas Execs Profit, We Pay The Price’.

• Images and footage for media use can be found here — more will be uploaded by 10:00am AEDT.
• Live updates on Greenpeace Instagram

Two activists dropped the banner at around 8.30AM in the grand stairwell outside the conference room. They were joined by a group of ten activists with hand banners saying, ‘Tax Gas Profits’. The two activists have locked themselves to the banner and the bannister.

With this peaceful protest, Greenpeace is calling for the gas industry to be taxed properly, and to accelerate the transition toward cheap, clean homegrown renewable energy.

The 13th annual Australian Domestic Gas Outlook conference is a gathering of fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, government  and investors at the Sheraton Grand, Sydney Hyde Park to discuss the future of the polluting gas industry.

Solaye Snider, Campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Gas corporations in Australia are ripping us off. From Ukraine to Iran, these corporations treat global conflict as an opportunity to line their pockets and drill for more gas — but while gas executives profit, we pay the price with more climate pollution, more environmental destruction, and soaring bills for Australian households.

“It’s in Australia’s interest to unhook from volatile, polluting and expensive sources of energy like gas. The fastest path to cheaper power bills and a safer climate is clear: start taxing gas exports properly and speed up the transition toward homegrown renewable energy. 

“As long as we are dependent on fossil fuels like gas, our electricity bills and our climate are at the mercy of global instability and greedy corporations who put their profits over people and planet.”

Alex Saurin, Greenpeace Australia Pacific activist who dropped the banner, said: “It feels powerful to take a stand against these gas corporations that have been trampling over the Australian people and our environment for far too long.  

“Gas giants like Santos and ConocoPhillips have spent years blocking renewable energy and dodging fair taxes to protect their record profits. While families struggle to pay the bills and the climate crisis accelerates, these companies continue to demand free right to do whatever they want.

“It is beyond time for our leaders to shake off the gas industry’s grip and start taxing these corporations fairly while clearing the path for the renewable energy we desperately need. They need to start making decisions for our people and our planet — not just for us now, but for the generations to come.”

Key facts: 

• Greenpeace activists disrupted the Australian Domestic Gas Outlook conference at the Sheraton Grand, Sydney Hyde Park at 8.20 AM today, Tuesday 31 March.
• Two activists dropped a banner over the grand stairwell that says, “Gas Execs Profit, We Pay The Price”. The activists have locked themselves to the banner and the bannister.
• A larger group of activists joined the protest, holding hand banners saying, “Tax Gas Profits”.
• Representatives from some of the biggest fossil fuel polluters in Australia and globally, including Santos, ExxonMobil and Shell are speaking at the conference.

—ENDS—

Media contacts:

Lucy Keller on +61 491 135 308 or [email protected] or Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or [email protected]

Source: Amnesty International –

• Strike on Ramat Lehi neighbourhood destroyed Tiferet Israel synagogue
• New investigation shows no military objective in vicinity of strike
• “The weapon used in the strike is wildly inaccurate” – Erika Guevara-Rosas

A missile strike by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s authorities on the Israeli city of Beit Shemesh that killed nine civilians – including four teenagers – must be investigated as a war crime, Amnesty International said in a new investigation.

The strike, just before 2pm local time on 1 March on the Ramat Lehi neighbourhood, destroyed the Tiferet Israel synagogue and caused extensive damage to the bomb shelter beneath it. An estimated 46 people were also injured.

Amnesty International analyzed verified digital evidence posted on social media, along with photos and videos the organization collected from the site of the strike, and found that an Iranian ballistic missile was used in the attack.

“The weapon used in Iran’s strike on the Ramat Lehi neighborhood in Israel is wildly inaccurate and carries a massive warhead, making it completely inappropriate for use in densely populated civilian areas,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns.

This attack destroyed a synagogue and a bomb shelter – two places that should have been areas of refuge and safety for civilians

Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns

Amnesty International’s research found no evidence of the presence of legitimate military objectives in the immediate vicinity of the attack. The nearest military objective to the site of the strike appears to be an Israeli military base near the town of Sdot Micha, which is located approximately 3.5km to the west of the impact site.

“This attack destroyed a synagogue and a bomb shelter – two places that should have been areas of refuge and safety for civilians. Nine civilians were killed, including four children. The strike must be investigated as a war crime,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas.

“The Iranian authorities’ use of a ballistic missile in this attack renders it indiscriminate and therefore a violation of international humanitarian law. Launching an indiscriminate attack that causes civilian deaths, injuries or damage to civilian objects constitutes a war crime. There must be an independent and impartial investigation, and anyone for whom there is sufficient evidence of responsibility must be prosecuted in a fair trial.”

Amnesty International verified social media footage showing the munition falling in the city of Beit Shemesh. The trajectory of the munition and the extent of the damage at the scene of the strike are consistent with the use of a ballistic missile carrying a large warhead, rather than a cruise missile or smaller drone-delivered munition. Images from the aftermath show the razed synagogue, along with widespread damage across an approximate 500-metre radius.

Israeli media outlets reported that the warhead used was approximately 500kg. Amnesty International has not been able to confirm the payload of the weapon. A 2024 analysis of the accuracy of Iranian ballistic missiles found they routinely missed their target by at least half-a-kilometre.

Between 16 March and 19 March, Amnesty International interviewed four survivors of the attack, and a rescue worker who arrived soon after the strike. The organization also analyzed satellite imagery of the site before and after the attack to corroborate the scale of destruction.

Source: Amnesty International –

Israeli authorities must urgently repeal legislative amendments expanding Israel’s use of the death penalty, adopted today with a majority of 62 Knesset members, said Amnesty international.

“Today, Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, adopted the first in what threatens to be a series of laws facilitating the use of the death penalty, in a public display of cruelty, discrimination and utter contempt for human rights. The amendment added to Israel’s Penal Law, known as the ‘Death Penalty for Terrorists’, expands the scope and facilitates the use of capital punishment, at a time when there is a global trend towards abolishing it. It also dismantles fundamental safeguards to prevent the arbitrary deprivation of life and protect the right to a fair trial, and further empowers Israel’s system of apartheid, which is maintained by scores of discriminatory laws against Palestinians,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns.

“It speaks volumes to the extent of Israel’s dehumanization of Palestinians that this law has passed in the same month in which Israeli military attorney general dropped all charges against Israeli soldiers accused of sexually assaulting a Palestinian detainee – a decision celebrated by the Prime Minister and several ministers. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity, was among those who voted in favor of the law. For years, we have seen an alarming pattern of apparent extrajudicial executions and other unlawful killings of Palestinians – with the perpetrators also enjoying near-total impunity. This new law which allows for state-sanctioned executions is a culmination of such policies.”

…Israel is brazenly granting itself carte blanche to execute Palestinians while stripping away the most basic fair-trial safeguards.

Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International

The new law explicitly creates two legal frameworks for the use of the death penalty in the occupied West Bank, excluding the illegally annexed East Jerusalem, and in Israel. Military courts in the occupied West Bank will be authorized to impose the death penalty against Palestinians convicted of deliberate killings in actions that are defined as terrorist acts under Israel’s discriminatory counter-terrorism law. Only under special circumstances that the bill fails to specify will courts be allowed to order a life sentence – and life sentence only – instead. The Defence Minister is authorized to determine whether defendants from the West Bank will be tried before military or civilian courts. Those sentenced to death are not entitled to pardon, making this one of the world’s most extreme death penalty laws.

“By authorizing military courts, which have a conviction rate of over 99% for Palestinian defendants and which are notorious for disregarding due process and fair trial safeguards, to impose effectively mandatory death sentences and ordering the execution within just 90 days of the final ruling, Israel is brazenly granting itself carte blanche to execute Palestinians while stripping away the most basic fair-trial safeguards,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas.

Under the second framework applicable in Israel and illegally annexed East Jerusalem, civilian courts’ authority to issue the death sentence would be expanded to include any person convicted of intentionally killing another with the “aim of negating the existence of the state of Israel. Such an ideological requirement for intent practically means the law is designed to target Palestinians. 

“Despite few amendments to the previous drafts, any death sentences imposed under this law would constitute a violation of the right to life and, when imposed against Palestinians from the OPT, may also amount to war crimes. The international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli authorities to immediately repeal this law, fully abolish the death penalty, and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas.

Source: Amnesty International –

Speaking ahead of the public hearings on the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No 3) Bill, 2026, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director, for East and Southern Africa, Vongai Chikwanda, said:

“Amnesty International urges the Zimbabwean authorities to guarantee, without discrimination, the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly during the upcoming public hearings.

“Restriction of public debate before, during, or after public hearings shuts down genuine participation, accountability, and the rule of law. Given past incidents of violence and suppression of dissenting voices, authorities must take concrete measures to ensure all participants can freely express their views and assemble without fear of intimidation, harassment, assault, or arrest.

Amnesty International urges the Zimbabwean authorities to guarantee, without discrimination, the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly during the upcoming public hearings. Restriction of public debate before, during, or after public hearings shuts down genuine participation, accountability, and the rule of law

Vongai Chikwanda, Deputy Regional Director, Amnesty ESARO

“Article 61 of Zimbabwe’s constitution guarantees freedom of expression, rights to peaceful assembly and association, which are key pillars of democratic participation. We urge the authorities to uphold these rights during the upcoming hearings, ensuring any restrictions are lawful, achieve a legitimate aim, and are necessary and proportionate. Overly restrictive or intimidatory measures risk creating a climate of fear and undermining the credibility of the consultative process.”

Background

The Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Bill, 2026, was gazetted on February 16, 2026. The bill, among many proposals, has clauses that seek to extend presidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years, thereby prolonging President Mnangagwa’s tenure until 2030, replacing direct presidential elections with parliamentary selection of the president, and consolidating executive control over key state institutions. Key opponents to the bill, such as National Constitutional Assembly’s Lovemore Madhuku and Constitutional Defenders Forum’s Tendai Biti, have been arrested, detained, and assaulted. Public hearings on the bill will run from 30 March 2026 to 2 April 2026.