Columbia Global Freedom of Expression seeks to contribute to the development of an integrated and progressive jurisprudence and understanding on freedom of expression and information around the world.  It maintains an extensive database of international case law. This is its newsletter dealing with recent developments  in the field.

With the 30th Conference of the Parties underway in Belém, Brazil, climate protests grow in number. On November 11, several dozen stormed COP30’s venue in an Indigenous-led action. “We want our territory free,” an Indigenous protester pleaded. “But the business of oil exploration, mineral exploration, and logging continues.”

At COP30, UN experts urge states to foreground human rights, citing the recent landmark decision by the International Court of Justice. “Environment is the foundation of our rights and freedoms,” says the Council of Europe, referring to the European Court of Human Rights’ more than 300 environment-related cases, including those that advance the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and access to information. Yet the civic space for climate justice action continues to shrink worldwide.

In Brazil, COP30’s host country, environmental human rights defenders face systemic violence and impunity: Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, documented assassinations of ​​Indigenous defenders, Quilombola defenders, and other activists for land rights, climate justice, and biodiversity. “A strong trend, damningly,” Lawlor wrote of global backlash, “is towards obstruction, repression and criminalization aimed at safeguarding private interests and the unjust, unsustainable status quo.”

Climate journalists, too, are being silenced. Reporters Without Borders highlights 30 of those persecuted for coverage of environmental issues: Norbert Rucabihari (Burundi), arrested while reporting on waste dumping in a lake; Katia Brasil (Brazil), founder of Amazônia Real, subjected to intimidation and smear campaigns; Chhoeung Chheng (Cambodia), murdered while investigating illegal logging.

Adding to the backlash, states persist in repressing climate demonstrations, often resorting to excessive, punitive responses. “Address the root causes of environmental protest,” Michel Forst, UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention, appeals to governments. In a pointed reiteration of international standards, Forst amplifies what must be urgently upheld globally: civil disobedience, even when disruptive, is a protected form of expression.

US: Climate Activists Condemn Jail Term for Nonviolent Protest. This past October, a federal judge in Washington handed down an 18-month sentence to Timothy Martin, who, along with Joanna Smith, staged a climate protest at the Washington, DC gallery in spring 2023. The activists marked the protective glass covering Edgar Degas’s Little Dancer Aged Fourteen Years with washable black and red paint, ensuring that the sculpture itself was neither touched nor damaged. “Tim Martin engaged in a classic example of civil disobedience to make a political point […],” Trevor Stankiewicz of Climate Rights International told The Guardian. “It’s hard to fathom how a peaceful protester can receive more prison time than many of the insurrectionists who tried to overturn an election.”

Image credit: Daily Mail

United Nations Human Rights Committee
Djakupova v. Kyrgyzstan
Decision Date: March 14, 2025
The United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) held that the Kyrgyzstan Republic violated the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of Cholpon Djakupova, a well-known human rights lawyer and former member of parliament, and Narynbek Idinov, a journalist. The case arose after Djakupova publicly criticized Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambaev during a roundtable discussion between civil society and government representatives, and Idinov published an article about it. As a result, a defamation lawsuit was filed against them, which led to a court order to delete Djakupova’s statement from the website, impose fines of 3 million Kyrgyz soms, and freeze their assets. Further, the court also imposed a travel ban, preventing both from leaving the country for over a year. The petitioners argued that the trial and sanctions were illegal and disproportionate restrictions on their freedom of expression, intended to silence criticism on matters of public interest. The State argued that the measures were legal and proportionate under its domestic law, which protects the president’s reputation against expressions considered defamatory. The Committee held that these measures constituted unlawful and disproportionate restrictions on freedom of expression. It emphasized that under Article 19 of the ICCPR and General Comment No. 34, criticism of public officials, particularly heads of state, falls within the core of protected political expression. The Committee held that the fines imposed were harsh and had a chilling effect on civil society and independent media.

Romanchik v. Belarus
Decision Date: March 20, 2025
The United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) held that Belarus violated the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly of sixteen Belarusian citizens who, between 2014 and 2018, had requested authorization to hold peaceful public gatherings. Local executive authorities rejected all applications on the grounds that they did not comply with the Public Events Act, and national courts upheld these administrative decisions. The petitioners argued before the UNHRC that, in practice, the Public Events Act functioned as a prohibitive barrier that prevented them from expressing their opinions and assembling peacefully in public spaces. Belarus responded that the law served to maintain public order and that the restrictions were legal and legitimate. The UNHRC examined the sixteen petitions jointly, noting that they reflected similar factual patterns and were part of a structural and repeated practice in Belarus in relation to restrictions on public gatherings. It concluded that Belarus had failed to assess whether the restrictions were necessary and proportionate and had violated Articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee therefore ordered Belarus to provide effective redress, including reimbursement of fines and legal costs, and urged the State to review its domestic regulatory framework, in particular the Law on Public Events and related administrative practices, in order to ensure full protection of the rights guaranteed in Articles 19 and 21.

United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
The Case of Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov
Decision Date: March 10, 2025
The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) concluded that the detention of Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov by Uzbek authorities was arbitrary and in violation of international human rights law, particularly his right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov was prosecuted for his peaceful activism in defense of the Karakalpak people’s cultural and political rights. The Government of Uzbekistan did not respond to the allegations, and the Working Group therefore issued its findings based on unchallenged claims submitted by the source. The UNWGAD found that his deprivation of liberty directly resulted from the legitimate exercise of his rights to freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, participation in public affairs, and the cultural rights of minorities. The Working Group also noted systemic violations of due process and the absence of a legal basis for Tazhimuratov’s detention. It called for his immediate release, reparations, and urged the Government of Uzbekistan to bring its legal framework into compliance with international human rights standards. The case was referred to the relevant UN Special Rapporteurs, including those on freedom of expression, minority issues, and the independence of judges and lawyers, reflecting broader international concern over the suppression of dissent in Uzbekistan.

● Kyrgyzstan: Court Brands Independent Media “Extremist.” According to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), a district court in Bishkek labeled Kyrgyzstan’s three independent media outlets “extremist,” banning their online publications. Issued last month following the request of the Prosecutor’s Office, the ruling concerns Temirov Live, Kloop.kg (member of the OCCRP network), and Ait Ait Dese. Both Temirov Live and Kloop.kg – whose employees have already been targeted with raids, arrests, and prison sentences – said they would appeal the decision. OCCRP notes that the ban is part of Kyrgyzstan’s larger crackdown on independent media, a campaign that began when President Sadyr Japarov assumed office in 2020.

● Belarus: Viasna’s October 2025 Report; PEN Submission on Cultural Rights. The latest report by the Human Rights Center “Viasna” tracks the repression of dissent in Belarus: in October 2025, Viasna registered 114 new cases of politically motivated criminal and administrative prosecutions, 78 more people were recognized as political prisoners, and the total number of those currently unjustly imprisoned reached at least 1,242. In related news, as part of the Universal Periodic Review process, PEN organizations made a joint submission on Belarus’s violations of cultural rights: liquidations of cultural NGOs and independent publishers, bans of books and artwork, and use of cultural institutions as propaganda tools. “[The authorities] have cruelly discriminated against the Belarusian language, preventing millions of Belarusians from expressing themselves in their mother tongue,” added Taciana Niadbaj, President of PEN Belarus.

● Uzbekistan: Call on EU to Use EU-Uzbekistan Enhanced Partnership to Demand Human Rights Progress. Human rights groups, including the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia and the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, urge the EU to leverage the newly signed EU-Uzbekistan Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement to demand that Uzbekistan follow through on its human rights commitments. A key concern the groups mention is the case of lawyer and blogger Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov, who is serving a 16-year prison sentence – and has reported torture – for his peaceful involvement in the 2022 mass protests in Karakalpakstan, when thousands rallied against constitutional amendments that would have ended the region’s autonomy. Security forces responded with lethal measures, killing almost two dozen people and injuring hundreds. Three years on, victims still await justice.

This section of the newsletter features teaching materials focused on global freedom of expression which are newly uploaded on Freedom of Expression Without Frontiers

Guidelines on the Right to Peaceful Environmental Protest and Civil Disobedience. In light of the global suppression of environmental protests through intimidation, surveillance, deprivation of liberty, violence, and even murder, these guidelines address States’ obligations under Article 3 (8) of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention). Compiled by Michel Forst, the first UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention, the guiding principles include: 1) Tackling the root causes of the environmental protest; 2) countering negative portrayals of environmental protesters as criminals; 3) refraining from civic space restrictions in reaction to civil disobedience; 4) avoiding the use of unnecessary or disproportionate measures against environmental defenders; 5) asserting that “the courts’ approach to peaceful environmental protest, including any sanctions imposed, does not contribute to the restriction of the civic space.”

Reporting from Inside the Amazon, by Adriana Carranca. In a piece for Columbia Journalism Review, Adriana Carranca covers the Mycelium-Sumaúma Forest journalist program built on co-training between media professionals (sementoras, or “seeders”) and Amazonian locals (myceliants). Eliane Brum, a prominent Brazilian journalist, writer, and filmmaker behind the project, shares her vision: “From this exchange, from this conversation between worlds, would emerge journalism capable of responding to climate collapse.”

This newsletter is reproduced with the permission of Global Freedom of Expression.  For an archive of previous newsletters, see here.