rights

Eric Neff’s tenure at the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office ended after he was placed on administrative leave in 2022 over accusations of misconduct in the prosecution of the CEO of Konnech, a software company that election conspiracy theorists said was in the thrall of the Chinese government.

Now, three years later, Neff is serving as one of the Trump administration’s top election watchdogs.

Late last year , his name began appearing on lawsuits filed by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, listed as “acting chief” of the voting section.

Neff’s appointment, first reported by Mother Jones, has prompted renewed scrutiny of his work at the L.A. County district attorney’s office.

The Times interviewed several of Neff’s former colleagues, who revealed new details about claims of misconduct that emerged from the Konnech case, and said they were alarmed that someone with almost no background in federal election law was named to a senior position.

Neff led the 2022 investigation of Konnech, a tiny Michigan company whose software is used by election officials in several major cities. In a criminal complaint, Neff accused the company’s CEO, Eugene Yu, of fraud and embezzlement, alleging the company stored poll worker information on a server based in China, a violation of its contract with the L.A. County registrar’s office.

Six weeks after a complaint was filed, prosecutors dropped the case and launched an investigation into “irregularities” and bias in the way evidence was presented against Konnech, the D.A.’s office said in a 2022 statement.

The county paid Konnech $5 million and joined a motion to find Yu factually innocent as part of a legal settlement.

The internal probe was focused on accusations that Neff misled supervisors at the district attorney’s office about the role of election deniers in his investigation, according to two officials with direct knowledge of the case who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Neff also allegedly withheld information about potential biases in the case from a grand jury, according to the two officials.

In a civil lawsuit filed last year, Neff said the internal review by the D.A.’s office cleared him of wrongdoing. The two officials familiar with the probe who spoke on the condition of anonymity disputed Neff’s characterization of the findings.

A spokesman for Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman declined to comment or provide the results of the investigation into Neff, which the officials said was conducted by an outside law firm that generated a report on the case. Neff’s attorney also did not provide a copy of the report.

A Department of Justice spokesman declined to comment.

Neff’s attorney, Tom Yu — no relation to the Konnech CEO — said his client had no obligation to provide background information about the origins of the case to the grand jury.

Neff’s appointment comes as President Trump continues to remake the DOJ in his own image by appointing political loyalists with no criminal law background as U.S. attorneys in New Jersey and Virginia and seeking prosecutions of his political enemies, such as former FBI Director James Comey.

Trump has never recanted his false claim that he won the 2020 election.

When then-L.A. County Dist. Atty. George Gascón announced the charges against Konnech in 2020, Trump said the progressive prosecutor would become a “National hero on the Right if he got to the bottom of this aspect of the Voting Fraud.”

The Konnech case was centered on contract fraud, not voter fraud or ballot rigging. Six weeks after the charges were filed, the case disintegrated.

The D.A.’s office cited Neff’s over-reliance on evidence provided by True the Vote, the group that pushed the unfounded Chinese government conspiracies about Konnech and also appeared in a film that spread claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

Gascón initially denied that True the Vote was involved in the case, but weeks later, a D.A.’s office spokesman said a report from the group’s co-founder, Gregg Phillips, sparked the prosecution. Phillips testified in court in July 2022 that it was Neff who first contacted him about Konnech.

The two officials who spoke to The Times said that Neff withheld True the Vote’s role from high-level D.A.’s office staff, including Gascón, when presenting the case.

Gascón declined an interview request, noting he is named in Neff’s pending lawsuit, which is slated for trial in early 2026.

Neff’s attorney insisted the case against Konnech was solid.

“He was let go because Trump tweeted a statement of ‘Go George Go’,” the attorney said. “That’s why Eugene Yu was let go. Because Gascón was so scared he was going to lose votes.”

Calls and emails to an attorney who previously represented Eugene Yu were not returned.

In his lawsuit, Neff claimed he had evidence that “Konnech used third-party contractors based in China and failed to abide by security procedures” to protect L.A. County poll worker data. The evidence was not attached as an exhibit in the lawsuit.

A DOJ spokesperson declined to describe Neff’s job duties. His name appears on a number of lawsuits filed in recent months against states that have refused to turn over voter registration lists to the Trump administration.

Neff is also involved in a suit filed against the Fulton County clerk’s office in Georgia seeking records related to the 2020 election, records show.

“We will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal elections laws,” Asst. Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon, the California conservative who now leads the civil rights division, said in a recent statement. “If states will not fulfill their duty to protect the integrity of the ballot, we will.”

Dhillon declined to comment through a DOJ spokesman.

The voting section “enforces the civil provisions of the federal laws that protect the right to vote, including the Voting Rights Act,” according to the DOJ’s website.

It does not appear that Neff has any background working on cases related to federal election law. He first became an L.A. County prosecutor in 2013 and spent years handling local crime cases out of the Pomona courthouse. He was promoted and reassigned to the Public Integrity Division, which investigates corruption issues, in 2020, according to his lawsuit.

While there, he handled only two prosecutions related to elections. One was the Konnech case. The other involved allegations of election rigging against a Compton city council member.

In August 2021, Isaac Galvan, a Democrat, was charged with conspiring to commit election fraud after he allegedly worked to direct voters from outside his council district to cast ballots for him. Galvan won the race by just one vote, but was booted from office when a judge determined at least four improper ballots had been cast.

Galvan’s criminal case is still pending; he recently pleaded guilty to charges in a separate corruption and bribery case in federal court. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles said there was no overlap between the D.A.’s election rigging case and the bribery case against Galvan. Federal prosecutors are not reviewing the Konnech case, the spokesman said.

Court filings show Neff was involved in Galvan’s L.A. County case, but the prosecution was led by a more senior attorney.

Justin Levitt, a constitutional law professor at Loyola Law School who served in the civil rights division during the Obama administration, said section chiefs normally have decades of experience in the area of law they’re meant to supervise.

“The biggest problem with somebody with Neff’s history is the giant screaming red flag that involves filing a prosecution based on unreliable evidence,” Levitt said. “That’s not something any prosecutor should do.”

Neff’s attorney, Yu, scoffed at the idea that his client was not experienced enough for his new role in the Trump administration, or that he was selected due to his involvement in the Konnech case.

“Eric got the job because he’s qualified to get the job. He didn’t get the job for any other reason. He got the job because he’s an excellent advocate,” Yu said. “I think the Justice Department is very fortunate to have Eric.”

Times Staff Writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.

Second release of prisoners related to 2024 election protests seen as possible conciliatory move from Maduro.

The government of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro has released dozens of prisoners held for protesting his disputed victory in the country’s 2024 election.

The release of at least 87 prisoners comes as the administration of United States President Donald Trump has continued its pressure campaign against Caracas.

It was the second release within a week, in what some observers have viewed as an effort by Maduro to strike a more conciliatory tone, even as he has accused Trump of seeking to topple his government and seize Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Two rights groups, the Committee for the Freedom of Political Prisoners and the Committee of Mothers in Defense of the Truth, confirmed the release on Thursday.

“On the morning of January 1, mothers and relatives reported new releases of political prisoners from Tocoron prison in Aragua state” in northern Venezuela, the Committee for the Freedom of Political Prisoners wrote on social media.

Venezuela’s government had previously announced the release of 99 prisoners on December 25, calling it “a concrete expression of the State’s commitment to peace, dialogue and justice”.

However, Foro Penal, a leading Venezuelan rights group, said afterwards it was only able to verify the release of 61 prisoners at the time.

Maduro claimed victory in the July 2024 vote, maintaining he had secured a third six-year term. The opposition has alleged widespread fraud, publishing results later verified by independent experts showing that Edmond Gonzalez had won by a landslide.

Gonzalez ran in place of opposition leader Maria Corina Machado after she was banned from standing in the election. Machado recently emerged in Oslo, Norway, after spending months in hiding.

The disputed vote prompted widespread protests across the country, resulting in at least 28 deaths and thousands of arrests.

Official records show that at least 2,000 people have since been released, while more than 700 people are still believed to be held for political reasons.

The disputed election has, in part, undergirded the Trump administration’s pressure against Maduro, whom they have accused of running a drug trafficking operation that aims to destabilise the US.

The Pentagon has surged military assets off the coast of Venezuela since August, with Trump earlier this week revealing the first attack on Venezuelan soil targeting a dock allegedly used to load drug boats earlier this week.

The US has also blockaded sanctioned oil tankers entering and exiting Venezuela, while simultaneously carrying out strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, in what rights groups say amount to extrajudicial killings.

More than 100 people have been killed in the strikes so far.

From exile, Machado has vocally supported the US pressure campaign. She has been more circumspect on strikes on Venezuelan territory, while maintaining that Venezuela has been “invaded” by “terrorist groups” and “drug cartels”.

Venezuela experts have warned that many opposition groups in the country oppose US military action.

Four members of the Palestine Action group, which has been proscribed as a terrorist organisation in the United Kingdom, are continuing with their hunger strikes in different prisons around the country.

Four other Palestine Action members have ended their hunger strikes – some after being hospitalised.

Here is what we know about the four remaining hunger strikers.

Why are the Palestine Action protesters on hunger strike?

Imprisoned Palestine Action members have been on hunger strikes in prisons around the UK for more than 50 days.

The Palestine Action members are being held on remand in prisons over their alleged involvement in break-ins at the UK subsidiary of Elbit Systems in Filton near Bristol, where equipment was reportedly damaged, and at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire, where two military aircraft were sprayed with red paint.

The prisoners deny the charges against them, which include burglary and violent disorder.

Of the four still on hunger strikes, three were imprisoned in November 2024 for their alleged involvement in break-ins at the UK subsidiary of Israeli weapons group Elbit Systems in Filton near Bristol, where equipment was reportedly damaged. One has been in prison since July 2025 for alleged involvement in damage at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire, where two military aircraft were sprayed with red paint.

Palestine Action, a protest group launched in July 2020, describes itself as a movement “committed to ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”.

The UK parliament voted in favour of proscribing the group on July 2, 2025, classifying it as a “terrorist” organisation and bringing it into the same category as armed groups like al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS). Critics decried the move, arguing that while members of the group have caused damage to property, they have not committed acts of violence that amount to terrorism.

More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. The ban has been challenged in court.

The hunger strikers have five key demands: immediate bail, the right to a fair trial – which they say includes the release of documents related to “the ongoing witch-hunt of activists and campaigners” – ending censorship of their communications, “de-proscribing” Palestine Action and shutting down Elbit Systems, which operates several UK factories.

“The UK government has forced their bodies to a breaking point,” pro-Palestine activist Audrey Corno told Al Jazeera Mubasher.

“A promise to the government is that the prisoners’ resistance and the people’s resistance against the genocide [in Gaza], Israel’s occupation and apartheid of genocide will not stop until it ends.”

Who are the remaining hunger strikers?

Heba Muraisi, Kamran Ahmed, Teuta Hoxha and Lewie Chiaramello are the four people, aged between 20 and 31, who are continuing their hunger strikes.

Heba Muraisi

Muraisi, 31, was on day 60 of her hunger strike on Thursday. She is being held in HMP [His Majesty’s Prison] New Hall in Wakefield, a prison in West Yorkshire about 180 miles (290km) north of London.

Muraisi was arrested in November 2024 for her alleged role in an August 2024 raid on the Israel-based Elbit Systems in Bristol, which is believed to have cost the Israeli weapons manufacturer more than $1.34m.

According to social media posts, Muraisi is of Yemeni origin. However, Al Jazeera could not independently verify this.

She was transferred to the West Yorkshire prison in October 2025 from HMP Bronzefield in Surrey, about 18 miles from the UK capital.

“Heba is demanding to be transferred back to HMP Bronzefield. She was transferred very suddenly, very far away from her entire support network and family, which is based in London. She’s been experiencing consistent medical negligence. Her body is, as you’d imagine, increasingly weak,” Corno said.

In a statement shared with Al Jazeera on December 29, Muraisi said: “I’ve been force-fed repression and I’m stuffed with rage and that’s why I’m doing what I’m doing now. I am bringing acute awareness to the unjust application of UK laws by our Government and I’m glad that people can now see this after a year of imprisonment and human rights violations. Keep going, keep fighting.”

Muraisi’s trial is set for June 2026, according to the protest group Prisoners For Palestine.

Kamran Ahmed

Ahmed, 28, was also arrested in November 2024 and is being held in HMP Pentonville in north London. He was also arrested for his alleged involvement in the raid on Elbit Systems in Bristol. Ahmed has been on a hunger strike for more than 50 days.

According to a report by Middle East Eye, Ahmed is a mechanic.

Ahmed was hospitalised for a third time on December 20 after he refused food, his sister, Shahmina Alam, told Al Jazeera.

“We know that he’s rapidly been losing weight in the last few days, losing up to half a kilogramme [1.1lbs] a day,” Alam told Al Jazeera in late December.

Ahmed, who is 180cm (5′11′), entered prison at a healthy 74kg (163lbs), but his last recorded weight was 60kg (132lbs).

“Kamran has been hospitalised for the fourth time recently,” Corno said.

Teuta Hoxha

Hoxha, 29, was on day 54 of her hunger strike on Thursday. She is being held at HMP Peterborough. She was also arrested in November 2024 on allegations of involvement in the Elbit Systems raid.

According to Prisoners for Palestine, Hoxha was moved from HMP Bronzefield on the day UK parliamentarians voted to proscribe Palestine Action – July 2, 2025.

Corno told Al Jazeera that she is in regular contact with Hoxha and that she has been having heart palpitations. “She’s not been able to sleep through the night for weeks on end. I can see her memory start to deteriorate.”

In a statement published on the Prisoners for Palestine website, Hoxha said: “This is a witch hunt, not a fair fight, and that behind the arrests of dissenting voices under counterterrorism powers, holding us on remand without trial for nearly two years and targeting protesters who condemn Palestinian suffering, is the palpably desperate attempt to force us all under the imperial boot of submission.”

Lewie Chiaramello

Chiaramello, 22, has type 1 diabetes and hence, he has been fasting every other day. He is on day 28 of his hunger strike.

He has been held in HMP Bristol since July 2025 in connection with an incident at RAF Brize Norton, according to Prisoners for Palestine, and faces charges of conspiring to enter a restricted area for purposes harmful to the UK’s safety and interests, as well as conspiracy to commit criminal damage. His trial is set for January 18, 2027.

On June 20, a group of Palestine Action activists broke into RAF Brize Norton, the largest Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire, and sprayed two military planes with red paint, causing an estimated $9.4m worth of damage.

“He’s been having to manage his insulin intake on his own with no medical supervision,” Corno said.

Who else has been on a hunger strike?

Four other imprisoned Palestine Action activists have ended their hunger strikes, mostly after being hospitalised.

This includes Qesser Zuhrah, 20 and Amu Gib, 30, who are being held at Bronzefield prison in Surrey. The pair began their hunger strikes on November 2 to coincide with the Balfour declaration of 1917, when Britain pledged to establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

Umar Khalid, 22, who has muscular dystrophy, ended his hunger strike after 13 days. Jon Cink ended his hunger strike after 41 days when he was hospitalised. Qesser Zuhrah ended her hunger strike after 48 days and was hospitalised. Amy Gib was also hospitalised.

As we enter 2026, one truth is impossible to ignore: children around the world are facing their greatest levels of need in modern history – just as the humanitarian system meant to protect them and their futures is battling some of its biggest challenges in decades.

The events of 2025 marked a dramatic rupture in global humanitarian and development efforts. When the United States abruptly halted foreign aid in January, billions of dollars vanished overnight. Critical programmes were suspended, offices closed, and millions suddenly lost access to food, healthcare, education, and protection. Overnight, lifelines that communities had depended on for decades were thrown into jeopardy – and children, as always, paid the highest price.

For international NGOs, the shock was immediate and severe. At Save the Children, we were forced to take some of the toughest decisions in our 106-year history. We had to close country offices, cut thousands of staff positions, and wind down life-saving operations. We estimated that about 11.5 million people – including 6.7 million children – would feel the immediate impacts of these cuts, while many more would be impacted in the longer term.

The aid cuts came at a time when children globally were already facing major challenges, from conflict to displacement, to climate change, with decades of progress at risk of being reversed.

The facts are startling. In 2025, one in every five children was living in an active conflict zone where children are being killed, maimed, sexually assaulted and abducted in record numbers. About 50 million children globally are displaced from their homes. Nearly half the world’s children – about 1.12 billion – cannot afford a balanced diet, and some 272 million were out of school.

These numbers point to a global failure. Behind each statistic is a child whose childhood is being cut short, a childhood defined by fear, hunger and lost potential.

For children, the collapse of aid was not an abstract budgetary decision, but it was deeply personal.  Health clinics closed, classrooms closed, and protection services disappeared just as violence, climate shocks and displacement intensified. Years of hard-won progress in child survival, education and rights were suddenly at risk of being undone, leaving millions of children more vulnerable to hunger, exploitation and violence.

The crisis also revealed the fragility of the global aid system itself. When humanitarian support is concentrated among a handful of government donors, sudden political shifts reverberate directly through children’s lives. The events of 2025 showed how quickly international commitments can unravel – and how devastating that can be for the youngest and least protected.

Yet amid this turmoil, something extraordinary happened.

In many places, families, teachers, health workers and local organisations found ways to keep learning going, to provide care, and to create spaces where children could still play, heal and feel safe. These efforts underscored a simple truth: Responses are strongest when they are rooted close to children themselves.

There were also moments of progress. In a year marked by pushback against human rights, important legal reforms advanced children’s protection – from a ban on corporal punishment in Thailand, to the criminalisation of child marriage and the passing of a digital protection law in Bolivia. These gains reminded us that change is possible even in difficult times, when children’s rights are put at the centre of public debate and policy.

Out of the shocks of 2025 has come a moment of reckoning and an opportunity: to adapt, to innovate, towards approaches that are more sustainable, more locally led and more accountable to the people they are meant to serve. For children, this shift is critical. Decisions made closer to communities are more likely to reflect children’s real needs and aspirations.

This period of reinvention has also revived difficult questions that can no longer be postponed. How can life-saving assistance be insulated from political volatility? How can funding be diversified so that children are not abandoned when a single donor withdraws? And how can children and young people meaningfully participate in decisions that shape their futures?

Innovation alone will not save children, but it can help. When digital tools, data and community-led design are used responsibly, they can improve access, accountability and trust. Used poorly, they risk deepening inequalities. The challenge is not technological — it is political and ethical.

Children do not stop wanting to learn, play or dream because bombs fall or aid dries up. In camps, cities and ruined neighbourhoods, they organise, speak out and imagine futures that adults have failed to secure for them. They remind us why our work – and our ability to adapt – matters so profoundly.

In Gaza this year, I witnessed the horrors that children are living through daily, with the war now raging for more than two years and most of the Strip covered in rubble. I saw children facing malnutrition at our healthcare clinics and heard how some now wish to die to join their parents in heaven. No child should ever be living under such terror that death is preferable. They are children, and their voices need to be heard.

If 2025 exposed the failures of the old aid model, 2026 must become a turning point. A different choice is possible — one that builds systems resilient to political shocks, grounded in local leadership and accountable to the children they claim to serve. The challenge now is to reshape our systems so that, no matter how the world changes, we can put children first, always, everywhere.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Sapang Kawayan, Philippines – Two hours north of the capital, Manila, on the vast grounds of a former United States military base, the Philippine government is pushing ahead with plans for a multibillion-dollar “smart city” that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr hopes to turn into a future “mecca for tourists” and a “magnet for investors”.

The New Clark City, which is being built on the former Clark Air Base, is central to the government’s effort to attract foreign investment and ease congestion in Manila, where nearly 15 million people live.

To accompany the city’s development, the government has also laid out an ambitious slate of projects at a nearby airport complex — new train lines, expanded airport runways, and a $515m stadium that officials hope will be enticing enough to draw the global pop singer Taylor Swift.

Caught between the rising new city and the site of the proposed stadium lies the Indigenous Aeta village of Sapang Kawayan. For the roughly 500 families who live there, in houses of nipa grass and rattan, the developments spell disaster.

“We were here before the Americans, even before the Spanish,” said Petronila Capiz, 60, the chieftain of the Aeta Hungey tribe in Sapang Kawayan. “And the land continues to be taken from us.”

Historians say American colonisers, who seized the Philippines from Spain in 1898, took over the 32,000-hectare (80,000-acre) tract that became Clark Air Base in the 1920s, dispossessing the Aetas, a seminomadic and dark-skinned people thought to be among the archipelago’s earliest inhabitants.

Many were displaced, though some moved deeper into the jungle inside the base and were employed as labourers.

The US turned over the base to the Philippine government in 1991, some four decades after granting the country independence. Since then, the Bases Conversion and Development Authority, or BCDA, has managed the complex. Some 20,000 Aetas are thought to remain in the Clark area today, spread across 32 villages.

But most of their claims to the land are not recognised.

In Sapang Kawayan, residents fear the government’s development boom means they could be pushed out long before they can establish such claims. The community – along with other Aeta villages in Clark – is working with researchers from the University of the Philippines to expedite a long-pending application for a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title, or CADT — the only legal mechanism that would allow them to assert rights to their territory and its resources.

In January, July and September, Aetas young and old gathered under makeshift wooden shelters in Sapang Kawayan, assembling family trees and sharing stories and photographs. Volunteers documented each detail in hopes of demonstrating that the community there predates colonial rule.

Their 17,000-hectare claim overlaps with nearly all of the 9,450 hectares designated for New Clark City, while 14 kilometres to the south is the airport complex where the new railway line, runway and stadium are slated to rise.

Together, the new city and airport complex “will eat up the fields where we farm, the rivers where we fish and the mountains where we get our herbs”, Capiz said.

‘Taylor Swift-ready’

The Philippine government first announced plans for New Clark City under then-President Rodrigo Duterte, promoting it as a solution to the crippling congestion in Metro Manila. The BCDA describes the development as a “green, smart and disaster-resilient metropolis”.

Construction began in 2018 with major roads and a sports complex that hosted the Southeast Asian Games in 2019.

Designed to accommodate 1.2 million people, the city is expected to take at least 30 years to complete.

The BCDA is now building three highways linking New Clark City to the airport complex, where the “Taylor Swift–ready” stadium is planned. Officials have hyped that the stadium, to be built by 2028, will lure Swift after she skipped the Philippines during the South Asian leg of her Eras tour last year.

“One of the main elements that make Clark so attractive to investors is its unmatched connectivity,” the BCDA’s president, Joshua Bingcang, said this year, citing the airport, a nearby seaport and major expressways. “But we need to further build on this connectivity and invest more in infrastructure.”

That expansion has come at a cost for Aeta communities.

Counter-Mapping PH, a research organisation, and campaigners estimate that hundreds of Aeta families have been displaced since construction of the city began, including dozens of families who were given just a week in 2019 to “voluntarily” vacate ahead of the Southeast Asian Games.

They warn that thousands more could be uprooted as development continues.

The BCDA has offered financial compensation of $0.51 per square metre as well as resettlement for affected families. In July, it broke ground on 840 housing units, though it is unclear whether they are intended for displaced Aetas.

The agency maintains that no displacement has occurred because Aetas have no proven legal claim to the area. In a statement to Al Jazeera, the BCDA said it “upholds the welfare and rights of Indigenous peoples” and acknowledges their “long historical presence” in central Luzon, where Clark is located. However, it noted that Clark’s boundaries follow “long-established government ownership” dating to the US military base, and that the New Clark City does not encroach on any recognised ancestral domains.

The BCDA also contended that it is the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) that deals with the applications for a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title, and stressed that it respected “lands awarded to Indigenous peoples”.

The Clark International Airport Corporation, which oversees the airport complex, offered similar assurances, stating that “there are no households or communities existing in the said location”. The group added that while the extended Clark area has Aeta communities, none exist within the airport complex itself.

‘Since time immemorial’

Only a handful of Aeta tribes have been awarded CADTs.

Two certificates have been granted on the outskirts of Clark, while the application filed by Sapang Kawayan and other villages inside the base have languished since 1986.

Marcial Lengao, head of NCIP’s Tarlac office, told Al Jazeera that to grant Aetas in Clark a CADT they must “prove that they have been there since time immemorial”, meaning, during or before the arrival of the Spanish colonisers to the archipelago 400 years ago.

The commission, he said, specifies minimum requirements for a CADT: a genealogy of at least five clans dating back at least three generations or to the precolonial period, testimonies from elders, a map of the domain and a census of the current population.

Lengao said Sapang Kawayan’s application has yet to complete these.

But even if the application is granted, the village faces another unique hurdle. Because the BCDA owns land rights to Clark, any CADT approved by the commission in the area must then be deliberated by the executive branch or the president’s office.

“They will be responsible for finding a win-win solution,” Lengao said.

Activists, however, denounced the NCIP’s requirements as onerous and warned that the longer Aetas remain without a CADT, the more vulnerable they are to losing their lands.

“Without a CADT and without genuine recognition from the government, the Aetas will continue to be treated like squatters on their own land,” said Pia Montalban of Karapatan-Central Luzon, a local rights group.

‘Among the most abused Indigenous Filipinos’

The Aetas, who rely on small-scale subsistence farming, are among the most historically disenfranchised Indigenous peoples in the Philippines. No official data exists on the Aeta population, but the government believes them to be a small subset of the Philippines’s Indigenous peoples, numbering in the tens of thousands nationwide.

The Aeta Tribe Foundation describes them as among the “poorest and least educated” groups in the nation.

“They are among the most abused Indigenous Filipinos,” said Jeremiah Silvestre, an Indigenous psychology expert who worked closely with Aeta communities until 2022 while teaching at the Tarlac State University. “Partly because of their good-natured culture, many have taken advantage of Aetas. Worse, they live off a land that is continuously taken from them.”

Silvestre, too, described the CADT process as “unnecessarily academic”, saying it required Indigenous elders to present complete genealogies and detailed maps to government officials in what he likened to “defending your dissertation”.

Changes in government personnel can restart the entire process, he noted.

A World Bank report last year found that Indigenous peoples in the Philippines “often face insurmountable bureaucratic hurdles in their efforts to process CADTs”. The report called recognising and protecting Indigenous land rights a “crucial step in addressing poverty and conflict”.

For the families of Sapang Kawayan, experts fear the lack of formal recognition could lead to displacement and homelessness.

“There’s no safety net,” Silvestre said. “We may see more Aetas begging on the street if this continues. Systemic poverty will also mean the loss of an Indigenous culture.”

Victor Valantin, an Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representative for Tarlac Province, which includes parts of Clark, fears that the territory for the Aetas in the former base is shrinking as the new projects accelerate.

“We’ll have to move and move,” he said. “Shopping centres won’t move for us.”

Valantin went on to lament what he sees as a familiar imbalance.

“BCDA projects happen so fast,” he said. “But anything for us will be awfully slow.”

Israel says it will suspend more than two dozen humanitarian organisations, including Doctors Without Borders, for failing to meet its new rules for aid groups working in the war-ravaged Gaza Strip.

Organisations facing bans starting on Thursday didn’t meet new requirements for sharing information on their staffs, funding and operations, Israeli authorities said.

Other major organisations affected include the Norwegian Refugee Council, CARE International, the International Rescue Committee and divisions of major charities such as Oxfam and Caritas.

Israel accused Doctors Without Borders, known by its French acronym MSF, of failing to clarify the roles of some staff members, alleging they cooperated with Hamas.

“The message is clear: Humanitarian assistance is welcome. The exploitation of humanitarian frameworks for terrorism is not,” Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli said.

MSF – one of the largest medical groups operating in Gaza, where the health sector has been targeted and largely destroyed – said Israel’s decision will have a catastrophic impact on its work in the enclave, where it supports about 20 percent of the hospital beds and one-third of births. The organisation also denied Israel’s accusations about its staff.

“MSF would never knowingly employ people engaging in military activity,” it said.

International organisations said Israel’s rules are arbitrary. Israel said 37 groups working in Gaza didn’t have their permits renewed.

‘Appalling conditions’

Aid organisations help with a variety of social services, including food distribution, healthcare, mental health and disability services, and education.

Amjad Shawa from the Palestine NGOs Network said the decision by Israel is part of its ongoing effort  “to deepen the humanitarian catastrophe” in Gaza.

“The limitations on the humanitarian operations in Gaza are in order to continue their project to push out the Palestinians, deport Gaza. This is one of the things Israel continues doing,” Shawa told Al Jazeera.

Israel’s move comes as at least 10 countries expressed “serious concerns” about a “renewed deterioration of the humanitarian situation” in Gaza, describing it as “catastrophic”.

“As winter draws in civilians in Gaza are facing appalling conditions with heavy rainfall and temperatures dropping,” Britain, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Japan, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland said in a joint statement.

“1.3 million people still require urgent shelter support. More than half of health facilities are only partially functional and face shortages of essential medical equipment and supplies. The total collapse of sanitation infrastructure has left 740,000 people vulnerable to toxic flooding.”

The countries urged Israel to ensure international NGOs can operate in Gaza in a “sustained and predictable” way and called for the opening of land crossings to boost the flow of humanitarian aid.

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the joint statement “false but unsurprising” and “part of a recurring pattern of detached criticism and one-sided demands on Israel while deliberately ignoring the essential requirement ‌of disarming Hamas”.

‘Needs in Gaza are enormous’

Four months ago, more than 100 aid groups accused Israel of obstructing life-saving aid from entering Gaza and called on it to end its “weaponisation of aid” as it refused to allow aid trucks to enter the battered Gaza Strip.

More than 71,000 Palestinians have been killed since Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza in October 2023. Hundreds have died from severe malnutrition and thousands more from preventable diseases because of a lack of medical supplies.

Israel claims it’s upholding the aid commitments laid out in the latest ceasefire, which took effect on October 10, but humanitarian groups dispute Israel’s numbers and say a lot more aid is desperately needed in the devastated enclave of more than two million Palestinians.

Israel changed its registration process for aid groups in March, which included a requirement to submit a list of staff, including Palestinians in Gaza.

Some aid groups said they didn’t submit a list of Palestinian staff for fear those employees would be targeted by Israel.

“It comes from a legal and safety perspective. In Gaza, we saw hundreds of aid workers get killed,” said Shaina Low, communications adviser for the Norwegian Refugee Council.

Desperately needed lifelines

The decision not to renew aid groups’ licences means their offices in Israel and occupied East Jerusalem will close and organisations won’t be able to send international staff or aid into Gaza.

“Despite the ceasefire, the needs in Gaza are enormous, and yet we and dozens of other organisations are and will continue to be blocked from bringing in essential lifesaving assistance,” Low said. “Not being able to send staff into Gaza means all of the workload falls on our exhausted local staff.”

Israel’s decision means the aid groups will have their licences revoked on Thursday and, if they are located in Israel, they will need to leave by March 1, according to the ministry.

This isn’t the first time Israel has tried to crack down on international humanitarian organisations. Throughout the war, it accused the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, of being infiltrated by Hamas and Hamas of using UNRWA’s facilities and taking its aid. The UN has denied that.

In October, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion saying Israel must support UN relief efforts in Gaza, including those conducted by UNRWA.

The court found Israel’s allegations against UNRWA – including that it was complicit in the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel – were unsubstantiated.

The court also said Israel, as the occupying power, must ensure the “basic needs” of the Palestinian population of Gaza are met, “including the supplies essential for survival”, such as food, water, shelter, fuel and medicine.

A number of countries halted funding for UNRWA after Israel’s accusations, jeopardising one of Gaza’s most desperately needed lifelines.

The intensity of the current backlash against Alaa Abdelfattah in Britain is striking – not because it reflects a renewed concern for justice, but because it exposes how selectively outrage is deployed.

Alaa, an Egyptian-British writer and activist, spent more than a decade in and out of Egyptian prisons following the 2011 uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak. His detention was marked by prolonged hunger strikes, denial of basic rights and treatment that human rights organisations described as cruel and degrading. He was released on September 23 after a years-long campaign by his mother, sister and close friends. A travel ban on him was lifted only this month, and he was able to join his family in the UK on December 26.

Alaa left behind a decade of repression in Cairo only to be welcomed in London with public attacks and a call for the revocation of his British citizenship and his deportation. Public hostility was whipped up by the uncovering of a social media post from 2010 in which Alaa said he considered “killing any colonialists … heroic”, including Zionists.

The tweet has been widely condemned, referred to the counter-terrorism police for review, and seized upon by politicians calling for punitive measures.

The speed and intensity of this reaction stand in stark contrast to the silence surrounding far more consequential statements and actions that the UK not only tolerates but actively enables.

This is what selective outrage looks like.

While Alaa’s words are dissected and framed as a moral emergency, the UK continues to host and collaborate with senior Israeli officials who have been accused of participating in and inciting genocide.

In July, for example, Israel’s air force chief Tomer Bar – the man who has overseen the carpet bombing of Gaza, destruction of hospitals, schools and homes and the extermination of entire families – was granted special legal immunity to visit the UK. Reporting by Declassified UK showed that this immunity shielded him from arrest for war crimes while on British soil.

There has been no comparable outcry over this.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog was also able to pay a visit to the UK in September and hold high-level meetings. This is the same man who, at the start of the genocide, suggested that the “entire [Palestinian] nation” is responsible and that “This rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved – it’s not true.” This and other statements by Herzog have been collected in a large database that currently supports the genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Yet, despite being accused of incitement to genocide, the Israeli president entered the UK without a problem and was welcomed by Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Those quarters concerned about Alaa’s tweet displayed no outrage over the visit of a potential war criminal.

They have also been silent about British citizens who have travelled to serve in the Israeli military, including during Israel’s offensives in Gaza and the ongoing genocide. These operations, documented by the United Nations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths, the destruction of hospitals and universities, and the devastation of entire neighbourhoods.

Despite extensive documentation of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and the ICJ’s warning of a serious risk of genocide, there has been no systematic investigation into whether British nationals may have been involved in violations of international law.

Again, there is little sustained outrage.

At the same time, the UK continues to license arms exports to Israel and to engage in political, military and intelligence cooperation. These policies have persisted even as international bodies have warned of grave humanitarian consequences and potential violations of international law. All of this unfolds with relatively little political cost.

And yet it is a decade-old tweet – not mass killing, not siege, not the destruction of civilian life on a vast scale, not incitement to genocide – that triggers political panic in the UK.

This contrast is not incidental. It reveals a hierarchy of outrage in which dissenting voices are policed and punished, and state violence is not, and in which public hostility is directed downward at individuals rather than upward at power. Alaa’s case shows how moral language is deployed selectively – not to restrain impunity, but to manage discomfort.

This asymmetry corrodes the credibility of the principles the UK claims to uphold. When human rights are defended selectively, they become tools of convenience rather than universal norms. When outrage is loud but inconsistent, it becomes performative. And when accountability is withheld from powerful allies, impunity hardens into policy.

Those who defend this approach often invoke “quiet diplomacy”, arguing that restraint is more effective than confrontation. Yet there is little evidence that silence has delivered accountability – either for Alaa or for civilians subjected to mass violence in Gaza. In both cases, discretion has functioned less as a strategy than as permission.

The UK has the tools to act differently: Suspending arms exports, investigating potential crimes by its nationals, conditioning cooperation on respect for international law, restricting visits by officials implicated in serious abuses. That these tools remain largely unused is itself revealing.

Until that changes, outrage will remain selective, accountability conditional, and impunity intact – widening the gap between the values the UK professes and the violence it continues to enable.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Egyptian-British writer Alaa Abd El-Fattah, who faced years of imprisonment in Egypt, ‘unequivocally’ apologises for the tweets.

Alaa Abd El-Fattah, an Egyptian-British human rights campaigner, has “unequivocally” apologised after right-wing leaders in the United Kingdom dug up decade-old tweets to demand he be stripped of British citizenship.

In a lengthy apology posted online, the writer and blogger – who returned to Britain this week after 12 years of imprisonment in Egypt – said the tweets were “shocking and hurtful”, but added that some had been “completely twisted”.

Conservative Party and far-right Reform UK leaders, along with right-wing commentators, took to sympathetic outlets and social media to demand that Abd El-Fattah be stripped of citizenship for the posts dating back to 2010, which included alleged references to killing Zionists and police officers.

The tweets were “expressions of a young man’s anger and frustrations in a time of regional crises”, including the wars on Iraq and Gaza, and a pervasive culture of “online insult battles”, Abd El-Fattah wrote.

Still, “I should have known better”, he said.

“I am shaken that, just as I am being reunited with my family for the first time in 12 years, several historic tweets of mine have been republished and used to question and attack my integrity and values, escalating to calls for the revocation of my citizenship,” he added.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch wrote in a Daily Mail op-ed that Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood should consider how Abd El-Fattah “can be removed from Britain” and added that she does “not want people who hate Britain coming to our country”.

Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, posted a letter he wrote to Mahmood on X and took a swipe at Badenoch for being part of the 2021 administration, then under Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson, that granted Abd El-Fattah citizenship.

Human rights activists and supporters of Abd El-Fattah dismissed the efforts as a smear campaign and directed followers to his apology.

Jewish academic and writer Naomi Klein wrote on social media that right-wingers were “playing politics with his hard-won freedom”, while Mai El-Sadany, executive director of the Washington, DC-based Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, said the citizenship revocation campaign was “coordinated” to “impugn his reputation and harm him”.

British law allows the home secretary to revoke citizenship if doing so is considered “conducive to the public good”, a policy that critics say is disproportionately wielded against British Muslims.

In a 2022 report, the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion estimated that at least 175 people had been stripped of British citizenship since 2006, including more than 100 in 2017 – prompting the group to deem the UK “a global leader in the race to the bottom” for revocations.

Part of British conservatives’ ire appeared to stem from the reaction of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Abd El-Fattah’s release. Earlier this week, he said the case had been a “top priority” and added that he was “delighted” by Abd El-Fattah’s return, a sentiment echoed by Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.

Abd El-Fattah had been jailed during Egypt’s mass protests in 2011 that ousted then-leader Hosni Mubarak. He went on to become a top critic of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who took power in a military coup two years later.

The writer received a 15-year prison sentence in 2014 on charges of spreading fake news. He was briefly released in 2019 before receiving another five-year sentence.

He received a pardon in September, along with five other prisoners, after repeated international calls to release him.

Families celebrate Christmas releases while calling for full freedom of detainees.

Authorities in Venezuela have released at least 60 people arrested during protests against President Nicolas Maduro’s re-election, according to a human rights advocacy group, though campaigners say hundreds remain behind bars.

The releases began early on Thursday, over Christmas, according to the Committee for the Freedom of Political Prisoners, a group of rights activists and relatives of detainees arrested during unrest that followed July’s presidential election.

“We celebrate the release of more than 60 Venezuelans, who should never have been arbitrarily detained,” committee head Andreina Baduel told the AFP news agency.

“Although they are not entirely free, we will continue working for their full freedom and that of all political prisoners.”

Maduro secured a third term in office in the July 2024 vote, a result rejected by parts of the opposition amid allegations of fraud. The disputed outcome triggered weeks of demonstrations, during which authorities arrested about 2,400 people. Nearly 2,000 have since been released, according to rights groups.

Despite the latest releases, Venezuela still holds at least 902 political prisoners, according to Foro Penal, an NGO that monitors detentions.

Relatives said many of those freed had been held at Tocoron prison, a maximum-security facility in Aragua state, roughly 134km (83 miles) from the capital Caracas. Officials have not publicly clarified the conditions under which detainees were released.

“We must remember that there are more than 1,000 families with political prisoners,” Baduel said. Her father, Raul Isaias Baduel, a former defence minister and once an ally of the late president, Hugo Chavez, died in custody in 2021.

WASHINGTON — In a dramatic development that threatens William Lucas’ nomination as the government’s chief civil rights enforcer, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) Thursday withdrew his endorsement a day after introducing Lucas to the Senate Judiciary Committee with warm praise.

Conyers told a hushed session of the panel that he was taking the unusual action with “a slightly heavy heart” because of Lucas’ hands-off position on recent Supreme Court rulings that civil rights leaders regard as disastrous setbacks.

“I want someone who is deeply disturbed” by the decisions, Conyers said, contending that they had plunged the civil rights movement into a crisis.

Conyers’ reversal could provide Lucas’ foes with crucial momentum in their struggle against his nomination as assistant attorney general for civil rights. Conyers is an influential black leader in Congress and the Administration had turned to him to introduce Lucas, who also is black, after the nominee’s two home state Michigan senators broke with tradition and declined to do so.

In another blow to Lucas’ prospects, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr.(D-Del.), who advised civil rights leaders last week that he was inclined to vote for Lucas, told the same officials Thursday at the panel hearing that he is now leaning against confirmation.

Biden cited Lucas’ lack of an opinion when he asked him about the Supreme Court rulings, whether the country was moving in the right direction on civil rights and whether the Ronald Reagan Administration had been for or against civil rights.

Despite the setbacks, David Runkel, spokesman for Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh, said: “I still expect Bill Lucas to be confirmed.”

Conyers’ withdrawal of support–he said he was not asking the committee to vote against recommending Lucas’ confirmation–came after he met Thursday morning with Lucas and John Mackey of the Justice Department’s office of congressional affairs.

Justice Department officials then discussed with Conyers’ staff issuing a joint statement that “they share a commitment to civil rights,” but Conyers, after reviewing Lucas’ testimony, decided that did not go far enough, sources familiar with the meeting said.

In introducing his longtime friend Wednesday to the Senate committee, Conyers had said he was “convinced Bill Lucas will go to greatness” in the high-level Justice Department post. “If he doesn’t, I will be the first one calling for his head on a pike.”

But after reviewing a transcript of Lucas’ testimony on “the most enormous question facing the civil rights community,” which he did not remain in Wednesday’s session to hear, Conyers said he “was frankly astounded.”

Lucas, echoing comments by Thornburgh, President Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle, said he did not view the high court rulings as having substantial impact on civil rights law and promised to monitor them aggressively instead of proposing legislation to counteract the rulings. The rulings narrowed the use of affirmative action and plaintiffs’ options in job discrimination complaints.

He contended that the Justice Department’s civil rights division believes that the rulings have “a sound basis in law” and that they have not undermined civil rights, an assessment that Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.) said he found hard to believe.

“He said he could live with these cases,” Conyers told the hearing. “I can’t live with these cases.”

In predicting that Lucas would win Senate confirmation, Runkel said: “This guy went up there and voiced the views of the Administration. It’s unrealistic to think that he would do other than that. If the expectation of some people is that a liberal Democrat is going to be nominated” to the civil rights post, “they’re wrong. It ain’t going to happen.”

Lucas, a former Wayne County, Mich., sheriff and county executive, has also drawn criticism from the NAACP.

In other testimony Thursday, Henry Sanders, president of the Alabama New South Coalition, one of that state’s major civil rights groups, said: “I submit to you that if Mr. Lucas was white that there would be no problem in rejecting him. But he’s black, and it’s civil rights and both of those have a different standard.

“I think it’s terrible when you have to deal with a different standard.”

Although Conyers’ reversal and Biden’s comment mark significant setbacks for Lucas, his opponents were cautious in assessing the impact.

“I think it’s very close,” said Ralph G. Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. “He came out of the hearings in much worse shape than he went into them.”

In addition to Biden, Sens. Howard M. Metzenbaum (D-Ohio), Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), Howell Heflin (D-Ala.), Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Simon have all seemed concerned by Lucas’ testimony. The committee has 14 members, and Lucas went into the hearing backed by five Republicans and one of the panel’s eight Democrats, Sen. Dennis DeConcini of Arizona.

A transgender employee of the National Security Agency is suing the Trump administration and seeking to block enforcement of a presidential executive order and other policies the employee says violate federal civil rights law.

Sarah O’Neill, an NSA data scientist who is transgender, is challenging President Trump’s Inauguration Day executive order that required the federal government, in all operations and printed materials, to recognize only two “immutable” sexes: male and female.

According to the lawsuit filed Monday in a U.S. District Court in Maryland, Trump’s order “declares that it is the policy of the United States government to deny Ms. O’Neill’s very existence.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The order, which reflected Trump’s 2024 campaign rhetoric, spurred policies that O’Neill is challenging, as well.

Since Trump’s initial executive action, O’Neill asserts the NSA has canceled its policy recognizing her transgender identity and “right to a workplace free of unlawful harassment,” while “prohibiting her from identifying her pronouns as female in written communications” and “barring her from using the women’s restroom at work.”

O’Neill contends those policies and the orders behind them create a hostile work environment and violate Section VII of the Civil Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that Section VII’s prohibition on discrimination based on sex applied to gender identity.

“We agree that homosexuality and transgender status are distinct concepts from sex,” the court’s majority opinion stated. “But, as we’ve seen, discrimination based on homosexuality or transgender status necessarily entails discrimination based on sex; the first cannot happen without the second.”

O’Neill’s lawsuit argued, “The Executive Order rejects the existence of gender identity altogether, let alone the possibility that someone’s gender identity can differ from their sex, which it characterizes as ‘gender ideology.’ ”

In addition to restoring her workplace rights and protections, O’Neill is seeking financial damages.

Trump’s order was among a flurry of executive actions he took hours after taking office. He has continued using executive action aggressively in his second presidency, prompting many legal challenges that are still working their way through the federal judiciary.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

The way the story is often told is that Western countries gifted human rights to the world and are the sole guardians of it. It may come as a surprise for some, then, that the international legal framework for prohibiting racial discrimination largely owes its existence to the efforts of states from the Global South.

In 1963, in the midst of the decolonisation wave, a group of nine newly independent African states presented a resolution to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) calling for the drafting of an international treaty on the elimination of racial discrimination. As the representative from Senegal observed: “Racial discrimination was still the rule in African colonial territories and in South Africa, and was not unknown in other parts of the world … The time had come to bring all States into that struggle.”

The groundbreaking International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) was unanimously adopted by the UNGA two years later. The convention rejected any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation as “scientifically false, morally condemnable and socially unjust”.

Today, as we mark 60 years since its adoption, millions of people around the world continue to face racial discrimination – whether in policing, migration policies or exploitative labour conditions.

In Brazil, Amnesty International documented how a deadly police operation in Rio de Janeiro’s favelas this October resulted in the massacre by security forces of more than 100 people, most of them Afro-Brazilians and living in poverty.

In Tunisia, we have seen how authorities have for the past three years used migration policies to carry out racially targeted arrests and detentions and mass expulsions of Black refugees and asylum seekers.

Meanwhile, in Saudi Arabia, Kenyan female domestic workers face racism and exploitation from their employers, enduring gruelling and abusive working conditions.

In the United States, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives aimed at tackling systemic racism have been eliminated across federal agencies. Raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targeting migrants and refugees are a horrifying feature of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation and detention agenda, rooted in white supremacist narratives.

Migrants held in detention centres have been subjected to torture and a pattern of deliberate neglect designed to dehumanise and punish.

Elsewhere, Amnesty International has documented how new digital technologies are automating and entrenching racism, while social media offers inadequately moderated forums for racist and xenophobic content. For example, our investigation into the United Kingdom’s Southport racist riots found that X’s design and policy choices created fertile ground for the inflammatory, racist narratives that resulted in the violent targeting of Muslims and migrants.

Even human rights defenders from the Global South face racial discrimination when they have to apply for visas to Global North countries in order to attend meetings where key decisions are made on human rights.

All these instances of systemic racism have their roots in the legacies of European colonial domination and the racist ideologies on which they were built. This era, which spanned nearly four centuries and extended across six continents, saw atrocities that had historical consequences – from the erasure of Indigenous populations to the transatlantic slave trade.

The revival of anti-right movements globally has led to a resurgence of racist and xenophobic rhetoric, a scapegoating of migrants and refugees, and a retrenchment in anti-discrimination measures and protections.

At the same time, Western states have been all too willing to dismantle international law and institutions to legitimise Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and shield Israeli authorities from justice and accountability.

Just as the creation of the ICERD was driven by African states 60 years ago, Global South countries continue to be at the forefront of the fight against racial oppression, injustice and inequality. South Africa notably brought the case against Israel at the International Court of Justice and cofounded The Hague Group – a coalition of eight Global South states organising to hold Israel accountable for genocide.

On the reparations front, it is Caribbean and African states, alongside Indigenous peoples, Africans and people of African descent, that are leading the pursuit of justice. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has been intensifying pressure on European governments to reckon with their colonial past, including during a recent visit to the United Kingdom by the CARICOM Reparations Commission.

As the African Union announced 2026-36 the Decade of Reparations last month, African leaders gathered in Algiers for the International Conference on the Crimes of Colonialism, at which they consolidated demands for the codification of colonialism as a crime under international law.

But this is not enough. States still need to confront racism as a structural and systemic issue, and stop pretending slavery and colonialism are a thing of the past with no impact on our present.

Across the world, people are resisting. In Brazil, last month, hundreds of thousands of Afro-Brazilian women led the March of Black Women for Reparations and Wellbeing against racist and gendered historic violence. In the US, people fought back against the wave of federal immigration raids this year, with thousands taking to the streets in Los Angeles to protest and residents of Chicago mobilising to protect migrant communities and businesses against ICE raids.

Governments need to listen to their people and fulfil their obligations under ICERD and national law to protect the marginalised and oppressed against discrimination.

The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

In 2017, a reckoning over sexual violence called “#MeToo” swept the globe. Eight years later, has the movement done enough for survivors? And what will it take for some of the world’s most powerful men accused of sexual misconduct to face consequences?

This week on UpFront Marc Lamont Hill speaks to founder of the Me Too movement, Tarana Burke.

The Department of Justice has released files related to the late convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein after mounting pressure led President Donald Trump to sign the Epstein Files Transparency Act last month. Trump, who himself has been accused dozens of times of sexual assault and misconduct, has already appeared in photos, emails and other documents in connection with Epstein, causing a rift in his base. Other business elites, academics, politicians and world leaders have also been named in connection to Epstein. While some have faced minor consequences, only Ghislaine Maxwell has been criminally convicted as part of Epstein’s sex trafficking of minors. Will newly released documents lead to new convictions and genuine accountability for survivors?

Why does the public understanding of disability lag so far behind reality? TikTok influencer and disability activist Imani Barbarin lays this out for her audiences on social media, where she has amassed nearly a million followers across platforms. In this episode, Barbarin shares her perspectives on disability at the intersection of issues, including COVID and the genocidal war on Gaza.

Winter cold ‘becomes lethal’ as Israel restricts entry of tents, blankets and other shelter supplies to ravaged enclave.

A Palestinian infant has frozen to death in the Gaza Strip, local authorities say, as Israel continues to restrict the entry of shelter supplies and other humanitarian aid to the enclave despite the harsh winter conditions there.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza said on Tuesday that the two-week-old baby, Mohammed Khalil Abu al-Khair, died a day earlier after seeking treatment for severe hypothermia, brought on by the extreme cold gripping Gaza.

Reporting from Gaza City, Al Jazeera’s Tareq Abu Azzoum noted that the child’s death comes as basic protections in Gaza have been “systematically dismantled” due to Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the territory.

“Families are living in tents on wet ground without heating, electricity or sufficient clothing,” Abu Azzoum said. “When food, fuel, shelter and aid are banned, cold absolutely becomes lethal.”

Israel’s two-year war has decimated more than 80 percent of the structures across Gaza, forcing hundreds of thousands of families to take refuge in flimsy tents or overcrowded makeshift shelters.

A huge storm that recently hit the Strip killed at least 11 people as torrential rains and fierce winds flooded tents and caused damaged buildings to collapse.

“We try to dry the children’s clothes over the fire,” Umm Mohammed Assaliya, a displaced Palestinian mother, told Al Jazeera from Gaza City.

“There are no spare clothes for them. I am exhausted. The tent we were given cannot withstand winter conditions. We need blankets,” she said.

Humanitarian groups have urged Israel to allow unimpeded deliveries of aid to Gaza.

But the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, which the UN says is best suited to distribute supplies in the territory, says the Israeli government has blocked it from bringing aid directly into Gaza.

“People have reportedly died due to the collapse of damaged buildings where families were sheltering. Children have reportedly died from exposure to the cold,” UNRWA said in a social media post on Tuesday.

“This must stop. Aid must be allowed in at scale, now.”

Hamas slams Israeli ceasefire violations

Meanwhile, Hamas has condemned Israel for its repeated violations of a ceasefire deal that came into effect in October.

At least 393 Palestinians have been killed and 1,074 others wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza since the first full day of the ceasefire on October 11, according to the latest figures from the enclave’s Health Ministry.

The Israeli military also killed a senior Hamas leader, Raed Saad, in a targeted attack on a vehicle in western Gaza City on Saturday, further straining the tenuous truce.

On Tuesday, Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad accused Israel of “manipulating” the text of the US-brokered agreement.

“We want to make it absolutely clear: the ceasefire agreement is straightforward, detailed, and unambiguous. However, it’s evident that the Israeli occupation has distorted the text, manipulating and violating every single article,” Hamad said.

“Since day one, Hamas has fully abided by the agreement and honoured its commitments. In contrast, Israel has deliberately committed several systematic and preplanned breaches.”