GENEVA, September 9, 2026 — China today launched an extraordinary attack against UN Watch at the United Nations Human Rights Council, accusing the Geneva-based human rights organization of “fabricating lies” and “maliciously smearing China” after UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer questioned Beijing’s $100,000 contribution to the mandate of a senior UN human rights expert.

The Chinese delegation invoked its right of reply after Neuer challenged George Katrougalos, the UN’s Independent Expert on “the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order,” over a report that repeatedly praises China while ignoring the victims of Beijing’s repression.

Katrougalos also serves as Chair of the Coordination Committee of UN Special Procedures, the body representing and overseeing the UN Human Rights Council’s independent experts, including special rapporteurs.

“Mr. Katrougalos, your report mentions China 33 times,” Neuer told the Council. He cited passages portraying China as a “central actor” defending international order, President Xi Jinping as the “new guardian of global rules for free trade,” and Chinese discourse as “closely aligned with the UN Charter” and “peaceful coexistence.”

“If your report is truly about human rights, then where are China’s victims?” Neuer asked.

He challenged Katrougalos to explain why the report omitted the mass detention, forced labour and religious persecution of Uyghurs; Beijing’s suppression of Tibetan culture, language and religion; imprisoned Hong Kong democracy activists such as Jimmy Lai; jailed lawyers, journalists and dissidents; mass censorship; the surveillance state; and China’s threats against Taiwan.

Neuer also questioned Katrougalos about China’s decision to contribute $100,000 to his UN mandate.

“Why did Beijing choose you? What exactly did its money finance? Did it support this report? Who funded your two trips to China, mentioned on page 2 of your report?” Neuer asked. “Will you acknowledge that such funding creates a conflict? Will you commit today that all China’s money will be returned?”

UN Expert Responds With Personal Attack

Katrougalos did not answer why his report excluded China’s victims, whether Beijing’s money supported the report, who financed his China trips, or whether the Chinese contribution would be returned.

Instead, he launched a lengthy attack against UN Watch, accusing the organization of conducting a “smear campaign” against UN experts and the United Nations as a whole. (UN Watch recently released a 100-page investigation finding that the UNHRC’s experts have abandoned the role of independent monitors and are advancing politicized agendas that erode the credibility of the international human rights system.)

Katrougalos claimed that UN Watch had “misinterpreted or doctored” passages from his report, although he acknowledged that it referred to China 32 times. He defended his favorable account of Chinese-backed “multipolarity” by invoking recent comments by UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

Though Neuer never mentioned the Middle East in his speech, Katrougalos’ reply accused UN Watch of denying what he called “the genocide in Gaza,” alleged that the organization had orchestrated a “campaign of lies against the United Nations,” and declared that UN Watch had become a “champion of antisemitism.”

Katrougalos insinuated that UN Watch was a “GONGO” (a government-organized NGO) and attacked its funding, without his ever addressing the Chinese government’s documented $100,000 contribution to his own mandate, as documented in the UN’s disclosure on 2025 funding.

“Mr. Katrougalos responded to questions about China’s funding and human rights abuses by attacking the organization that asked them,” said Neuer. “He spoke at length, yet said not one word to reply to our question on why his report, supposedly on human rights, managed to cite China 32 times without ever raising the Uyghurs, Tibetans, Jimmy Lai or China’s other victims.”

“He did not explain whether Beijing’s $100,000 financed his report or his travel to China. Instead, the chair of the UN’s human rights experts called a Jewish-led human rights organization a ‘champion of antisemitism.’ This was not an answer. It was a grotesque inversion, and an attempt at intimidation and diversion.”

Beijing Attacks UN Watch, Says Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong Are “Purely China’s Internal Affairs”

The Chinese government then exercised a right of reply to denounce UN Watch’s intervention.

“This morning, certain NGOs fabricated lies and maliciously smeared China’s economic cooperation with UN Special Procedure mandate holders, which we firmly reject,” the Chinese delegate told the Council.

China defended its cooperation with the UN human rights system, cited its payment of more than 20 percent of the UN budget and contrasted its conduct with that of a “major country” that had withheld its contributions, an apparent reference to the United States.

The Chinese delegate also rejected international scrutiny of abuses in Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong, declaring them “purely China’s internal affairs.”

He insisted that China’s treatment of ethnic minorities was characterized by “equality, unity, mutual assistance and harmony.”

China did not explain why it selected Katrougalos’s mandate to receive $100,000, what activities the money financed, whether it supported the report, or whether it paid for either of his two visits to China.

“The sequence was revealing,” said Neuer. “We asked a UN expert why his report glorified Beijing, erased its victims and benefited from $100,000 in Chinese funding. The expert called us ‘antisemitic.’ China accused us of ‘fabricating lies.’ Neither answered our questions. The world has a right to know. We are demanding that Secretary-General Antonio Guterres provide full disclosure and transparency on how China’s direct funding was used in connection with a supposedly independent report replete with praise of Beijing.”

“China’s intervention only underscores the need for full transparency concerning government funding of supposedly independent UN human rights mandates,” Neuer added. “When an authoritarian regime finances a mandate whose report subsequently praises that state while ignoring its political prisoners and persecuted minorities, the public is entitled to clear answers.”

UN Watch called on Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and High Commissioner for Human Rights Volcker Turk to disclose:

• Every expenditure financed by China’s $100,000 contribution to Katrougalos’ mandate;
• Whether any of the funds supported Katrougalos’s report or related research;
• Who financed Katrougalos’s two visits to China;
• All communications between Chinese officials, the mandate holder and UN staff concerning the contribution; and
• What safeguards were implemented to protect the mandate’s independence and prevent actual or perceived conflicts of interest.

Watch the complete exchange here:

3/ Katrougalos’ response:

❌ Not 1 word on the Uyghurs, Tibetans, Jimmy Lai or China’s other victims.
❌ No answer on China’s $100,000 donation or his trips there.
❌ Instead, a false harangue attacking UN Watch’s independence—and calling us a “champion of antisemitism.”

Watch: pic.twitter.com/fDukNaDj12

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) September 9, 2026

4/ Then 🇨🇳 Beijing's delegate joined in, exercising a Right of Reply:

China accused UN Watch of “fabricating lies” and “maliciously smearing China’s economic cooperation with UN Special Procedure mandate holders, which we firmly reject.”

“China has always constructively… pic.twitter.com/Y9yGpIT1Uy

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) September 9, 2026

The post China Attacks Watchdog at United Nations After Questions Over $100,000 Payment to UN Expert’s Mandate appeared first on UN Watch.

GENEVA, Aug. 6, 2026 — UN Watch today strongly condemned the appointment of the Eritrean regime as Chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council’s 2026 Social Forum, calling the decision “a grotesque farce that places one of the world’s most repressive dictatorships in charge of a body tasked with advancing human rights.”

The post UN Watch Condemns Appointment of Eritrea as Chair of UN Human Rights Council Social Forum: “Inmates Running the Asylum” appeared first on UN Watch.

By acclamation, the 54-nation council elected Algeria’s Amar Bendjamav to a one-year term.

BREAKING: 🇩🇿 Algeria's authoritarian regime has just been elected by acclamation to become President of the United Nations Economic and Social Council, the primary UN organ overseeing human rights commissions.

“I hear no objection.” Room breaks out into long applause. pic.twitter.com/pTZeIWUIag

— UN Watch (@UNWatch) July 23, 2026

“Handing the gavel of a key UN human rights body to a regime that jails journalists, tortures dissidents, and outlaws its own human rights groups sends absolutely the wrong message to human rights victims worldwide,” said Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch.

Neuer called on UN chief Antonio Guterres and rights chief Volker Türk to condemn the election, citing Algeria’s human rights violations.

Algeria’s Record of Repression

Algeria is rated by Freedom House in 2025 as “Not Free,” with a score of 31/100 on civil liberties and political rights. It has recently escalated a crackdown on fundamental freedoms.

On July 7, 2026, Algerian authorities arrested journalist Mourad At-Mimou over social media posts critical of Algeria’s July 2 parliamentary elections, which had record-low voter turnout after the government barred nearly a third of prospective candidates. Mimou’s arrest follows a well-established pattern of journalist arrests to suppress freedom of speech and political dissent, with three other journalists, Hassan Bouras, Omar Ferhat, and Abdelali Mezghiche, also imprisoned in 2026.

According to the U.S. State Department’s 2024 report, security forces routinely detain people for participating in unauthorized protests or publicly criticizing the government, often holding them for hours before releasing them without charge. Human rights groups have documented at least 250 arbitrary detentions in 2024 alone of individuals merely for expressing their opinions.

Algerian government officials also use torture against detainees. Trade unionist Ali Mammeri, who was held incommunicado for several days after his March 2025 arrest over social media posts supporting imprisoned activists, said he was tortured during interrogation. In February 2026, a court upheld his conviction and 10-year prison sentence.

Algerian authorities have targeted civil society groups that criticize the government’s human rights violations. On June 29, 2022, an Algerian administrative court dissolved the Algerian League for the Defense of Human Rights, the country’s oldest independent human rights organization.

This pattern of repression has continued. In March 2026, authorities forcibly closed SOS Disparus, which advocates for families of dissidents and journalists forcibly disappeared.

As ECOSOC president, the regime that silences rights groups and dissidents at home now gets to preside over the body that determines their access to the world stage.

The post UN Elects Algeria President of Key Body Overseeing Human Rights appeared first on UN Watch.

Former Human Rights Watch chief Kenneth Roth has joined the criticism, warning against the “clandestine” reappointment. “Turk has been a disaster,” Roth wrote, noting that unlike his predecessor’s powerful report on China’s persecution of the Uyghurs, Türk “hasn’t voiced a single word of public criticism.” He called the post “far too important… to be refilled in this clandestine manner without proper debate” and urged governments to insist on “a public airing of his mediocrity before voting,” rather than allowing a rushed decision while attention is focused elsewhere.

Türk, an Austrian diplomat and longtime Guterres aide who took office in October 2022, is seeking to become the first rights chief to ever secure a four-year renewal. His current term expires later this year. Guterres, whose own mandate ends Dec. 31, is pushing the lengthy reappointment before his successor takes over.

UN Watch, the Geneva-based monitoring group, called on democracies to reject the move. It cited Türk’s pattern of selective silence on major abusers alongside disproportionate criticism of democracies.

According to UN Watch’s report, which examined his record over two years:

• Türk condemned the United States more times than he condemned China, North Korea, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Qatar combined.

• He remained completely silent on gross and systematic violations by the regimes of Cuba, North Korea, Algeria, Eritrea, Mauritania, Lebanon and Qatar, while freely criticizing democracies including the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Italy and France.

• Of his limited criticisms of China, none mentioned the mass imprisonment of more than one million Uyghurs.

• He issued 58 condemnations of Israel — 49 related to the Hamas-Israel war — more than his combined statements on Ukraine, Sudan and Myanmar. By contrast, he criticized Venezuela’s Maduro regime only four times.

• He stayed silent when serial abusers including China, Cuba, Qatar and Eritrea were elected to the Human Rights Council; when Iran was named chair of the council’s Social Forum; and when Nicaragua was elected to the UN committee overseeing thousands of UN-accredited NGOs.

“China, Iran, Cuba and North Korea want Volker Türk renewed for an unprecedented four more years as UN high commissioner for human rights. The free world should vote no,” UN Watch said in a statement Wednesday.

Took Sides During Iran War 

Türk has also shown a pattern of softness toward Tehran’s rulers. Instead of calling them out, he repeatedly posed for photos with Iranian regime officials accused of atrocities.

When the United States and Israel conducted airstrikes on Iranian regime targets in February 2026, Türk immediately “deplored” the U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iran. Though he also deplored Iran’s actions, he qualified these as “retaliatory,” lending legitimacy to the regime’s missile attacks on its neighbors.

Türk ignored Iran’s aggression across the region, making no mention of the IRGC’s sponsorship of the Houthis in Yemen, militias in Iraq and Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the West Bank and Gaza. Nor did he mention Iran’s decades-long campaign against American and Israeli targets worldwide and against its own dissidents abroad, including assassinations and murder-for-hire plots on European and American soil.

Though U.S. and Israeli forces struck some 15,000 regime targets, Türk repeatedly tried to portray their campaign as focused on civilians. “It is civilians who end up paying the ultimate price,” he said. In another statement he added that he was “deeply shocked by the impacts of the widespread hostilities on civilians and civilian infrastructure.”

By contrast, when the Iranian regime began violently suppressing protesters on December 28, 2025, Türk remained silent for 12 days. He said nothing when the government imposed a nationwide internet shutdown in advance of the massacre. Türk issued a statement only on January 9, 2026—after the killings had already begun—saying he was merely “deeply disturbed” by “reports” of “violence during nationwide protests,” including “reported deaths and destruction of property,” and failing to condemn the government-sanctioned killings.

Guterres Rushing to Preempt His Successor

Hillel Neuer, the group’s executive director, said Guterres was rushing to “entrench his protégé” before leaving office.

Neuer contrasted Türk’s willingness to seek renewal with the stance of his predecessor Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein in 2018. Zeid declined a second term, stating: “I have decided not to seek a second four-year term. To do so, in the current geopolitical context, might involve bending a knee in supplication; muting a statement of advocacy; lessening the independence and integrity of my voice.”

“Why isn’t Türk saying the same?” Neuer asked Thursday. The decision to pursue another term, he argued, signals that Türk is prepared to mute criticism of powerful abusers to secure the position — precisely what Zeid refused to do.

“Volker Türk is not fit to serve as the top authority on human rights on account of his documented record of placing political considerations over human rights, and turning a blind eye to hundreds of millions of victims of the world’s most oppressive regimes,” Neuer said.

“Democracies should stop lending legitimacy to a UN human rights system that has become corrupted by selectivity, politicization, and the dangerous domination of dictatorships.”

The High Commissioner is appointed by the secretary-general and approved by the General Assembly for a fixed four-year term, renewable once. UN Watch urged member states to reject the renewal.

The post Ken Roth and UN Watch Oppose Guterres’ Quiet Rush to Renew Volker Türk as UN Rights Chief appeared first on UN Watch.

The following analysis evaluates the declared candidates based on their public records, leadership experience, and positions on issues central to UN Watch’s mission, including defending universal human rights, confronting authoritarian regimes, combating institutional bias, and restoring the UN’s credibility.

Analysis of the Candidates for UN Secretary-General

Rafael Grossi

Director-General of the IAEA, Argentine Diplomat

Rafael Grossi is a capable and seasoned diplomat with strong technical credibility, particularly on nuclear non-proliferation. At the same time, his greatest strength — his ability to maintain relationships with all sides — raises legitimate concerns about whether he would be willing to confront Russia and China over human rights violations with clarity and firmness.

On Iran, Grossi’s record is mixed. His public posture has at times appeared too cautious toward Tehran and overly critical of Israel and the United States, raising questions about balance and resolve.

Grossi’s stated commitment to human rights is welcome, but it remains unclear whether he is prepared to meet the challenges plaguing the UN system. Key questions remain about whether he would challenge the politicization, corruption, and double standards deeply entrenched within the UN system — or accommodate them.

Question for Candidate: Mr. Grossi, Iran has repeatedly obstructed IAEA inspectors while advancing its nuclear program. Yet your public statements have often emphasized dialogue, restraint, and cooperation rather than directly holding Tehran accountable. Looking back, do you believe this was the correct approach, and what does your record on Iran tell member states about how you would confront authoritarian regimes as Secretary-General?

Rebeca Grynspan

Secretary-General of UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Former Vice President of Costa Rica

Rebeca Grynspan presents herself as a reform candidate, but her record suggests continuity more than change. She is an appointee of António Guterres and closely aligned with the status quo, raising concerns that the same patterns of bias and politicization would persist.

She was a major player in the UN effort to ship Ukrainian and Russian grains to global markets at the start of the war in Ukraine and outgoing Secretary-General António Guterres designated her as the senior U.N. official to deal with the Russians.

While Grynspan has spoken favorably of democratic governance, she has also shown a tendency to tread lightly around major powers like Russia and China, raising doubts about whether she would be willing to confront human rights violations by the world’s worst offenders.

Under her leadership, the UN body she heads has produced a series of harsh and one-sided reports on Israel, raising concerns about fairness and reinforcing fears that she may be too willing to align with the system’s entrenched bias.

Question for Candidate: If at all, how would your leadership differ in practice from Secretary-General Guterres on confronting authoritarian governments and addressing accusations of political bias within the UN system?

Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett

Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations, Former Foreign Minister

Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett says the next Secretary-General must be an unwavering advocate for human rights. Yet under her leadership at the United Nations, Guyana repeatedly abstained on resolutions holding Iran and Assad’s Syria accountable for some of the world’s gravest abuses.

At the same time, Rodrigues-Birkett consistently backed the UN’s most politicized campaigns, supporting every anti-Israel and anti-American resolution at the General Assembly while defending UNRWA despite its documented ties to terrorism. Speaking at the Security Council, she even condemned the Jewish state’s purported “colonialist aspirations, fueled by a racist and religious ideology of superiority.” Her record suggests she would reinforce the world body’s existing biases rather than work to restore its credibility.

Troublingly, Rodrigues-Birkett has also publicly hailed Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, stating that “to speak about Cuba, its achievements, its resilience, its focus on human development…, cannot be done without paying tribute to the visionary, determined, revolutionary behind it all, Comandante Fidel Castro.“ Her admiration for Castro raises serious questions about her judgment and commitment to human rights.

Question for Candidate: The United Nations is often criticized for applying double standards — particularly by singling out democracies while failing to hold authoritarian regimes accountable. During your tenure as Guyana’s ambassador, your voting record reflected precisely that pattern. What evidence can you offer that you would lead the United Nations according to universal principles rather than political selectivity?

María Fernanda Espinosa

Former President of the UN General Assembly, Former Foreign Minister of Ecuador, Former Permanent Representative to the United Nations

María Fernanda Espinosa campaigns on restoring the UN’s credibility. Yet while serving in government, she spent years giving a pass to the worst violators of human rights. For instance, while serving as Ecuador’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, Espinosa voted against a resolution condemning the Islamic Republic of Iran for its oppression. She also abstained on a series of resolutions condemning Syria, Belarus, Burundi, and Myanmar while openly championing anti-Israel initiatives at the United Nations.

Espinosa’s record also raises serious concerns about her judgment and neutrality, having associated herself with leaders whose legacies are defined by repression rather than democracy. Espinosa publicly praised Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez, two figures whose governments systematically suppressed political freedoms and independent voices.

Notably, Espinosa was not nominated from her home country. Instead, she’s nominated by the pro-Cuban government of Antigua and Barbuda.

Question for Candidate: In now deleted social media statements, you praised Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez, two leaders whose legacies are marked by political repression and widespread human rights abuses. Are you now prepared to publicly condemn the gross and systematic violations of human rights committed by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez, and why should the victims of authoritarian regimes trust that you would serve as an impartial defender of universal human rights?

Michelle Bachelet

Former President of Chile, Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Michelle Bachelet’s tenure as UN Human Rights Chief was marked by a troubling pattern of selective outrage. She repeatedly downplayed or refused to confront some of the world’s worst abusers, while disproportionately targeting democratic countries.

While a million Uyghurs were detained in Chinese forced labor camps, Michelle Bachelet failed her obligation as UN Human Rights Chief to speak out with the clarity and urgency the moment demanded. Bachelet looked the other way, instead choosing to single out democratic countries for criticism. During her tenure, she condemned the U.S. and Israel more than China, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Qatar, Somalia, and Zimbabwe combined.

Notably, the Chilean government has withdrawn its support of Bachelet’s candidacy which is instead backed by Brazil and Mexico.

Question for Candidate: During your tenure as High Commissioner for Human Rights, your office condemned democratic states while failing to adequately confront serial abusers such as China, Iran, and North Korea. Why should member states entrust you with leading the United Nations when many believe your leadership helped undermine the credibility of the UN human rights system?

Macky Sall

Former President of Senegal, Former Chairperson of the African Union

Under Macky Sall’s leadership, Senegal violently cracked down on protestors, jailed journalists, and detained opposition leaders, raising serious questions that he is unable or unwilling to defend fundamental freedoms if elected Secretary-General.

Sall’s candidacy was endorsed by Burundi after his own country initially refused to back him, though Senegal reversed course in July. The African Union declined to endorse his candidacy.  He is the only candidate from outside the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC), whose turn it is generally considered to be under the UN’s informal principle of regional rotation.

Question for Candidate: During your presidency, Senegal security forces killed protesters, journalists were jailed, opposition figures were imprisoned, and thousands of people were arbitrarily detained. Why should the world entrust the office of Secretary-General to someone whose own government has been accused of violating the very human rights the United Nations exists to protect?

Olara Otunnu

UN Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, Former Foreign Minister of Uganda, Former Permanent Representative to the United Nations

Olara Otunnu earned international recognition as the UN’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, where he helped elevate the protection of children in war zones as a global priority.

At the same time, legitimate questions remain about his past service under Ugandan dictator Milton Obote and his current endorsement by dictator Yoweri Museveni, whose oppressive government has committed serious human rights violations. The next UN Secretary-General must demonstrate independence and a willingness to stand up for human rights, regardless of political pressure.

Question for Candidate: The UN Secretary-General must be the world’s leading voice for human rights. Yet you have accepted the backing of dictator Yoweri Museveni, whose government has been widely accused of serious human rights violations. How do you reconcile that support with your commitment to human rights, and, if elected, would you publicly condemn abuses committed by his government?

Ivonne Baki

Former Minister of Industries and Productivity of Ecuador, Former Ambassador to the United States

Ivonne Baki presents herself as a reform candidate willing to challenge the status quo at the United Nations. Her stated commitment to impartiality and independence from any government, bloc, or ideology is welcome at a time when the UN desperately needs stronger and more principled leadership.

At the same time, Baki’s experience and proposals warrant serious scrutiny. She has campaigned for a major overhaul of the UN Security Council, including abolishing the veto and expanding permanent membership to all regional groups — proposals that could undermine the ability of democratic powers to block actions that run counter to Western principles and the protection of human rights. Baki’s limited experience within the UN system also raises questions about whether she can effectively navigate the organization’s complex political dynamics.

Baki’s candidacy was endorsed by Tonga, despite earlier indications that she would be backed by Lebanon, where she has significant ties to. In the first UN Security Council straw poll in which she was on the ballot, Baki failed to receive a single vote of encouragement, indicating that she is not a serious contender.

Question for Candidate: You have called for abolishing the Security Council veto. Given the UN’s growing influence by authoritarian regimes, how would you prevent eliminating the veto from making it easier for governments such as China and Russia to impose their will on the United Nations and undermine human rights?

Questions for the Candidates

Ahead of the UN Town Hall with the candidates for Secretary-General on July 23, UN Watch has submitted the following questions to all the nominees:

• Do you agree that the main priority of the Secretary-General is to restore moral clarity and credibility, and that if the United Nations cannot tell the difference between victims and their oppressors, it loses the very reason it exists?

• Do you believe that the UN has to stop empowering abusers inside the system, and that it is wrong for authoritarian regimes to sit on human rights bodies and shape global norms?

• Do you agree that the UN’s greatest asset is its legitimacy, that this is eroding, and that the UN needs to end the culture of false equivalence?

• Will you commit that when mass atrocities occur, the United Nations will no longer stay silent — and that no abusers will get a free pass, even if they are powerful or are part of powerful alliances?

• How would you refocus the UN to help victims, amplifying the voices of dissidents instead of regimes?

• In light of UN Watch’s detailed report into the ideological bias and financial conflicts of interest of the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteurs, will you support a complete ban on Special Rapporteurs receiving earmarked funding from governments, a prohibition on social media statements by mandate-holders, and strengthened evidentiary standards required of the Special Rapporteurs?

• Former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had publicly condemned hateful comments made by Special Rapporteur Richard Falk. As Secretary-General, will you do the same by openly condemning racist, antisemitic, and harmful statements made by Special Rapporteurs Francesca Albanese, as well as other UN experts?

• UN Watch has uncovered photographic evidence of more than 400 UNRWA employees with ties to Palestinian terrorist organizations while the U.S. Government is currently investigating 1,500 UNRWA staffers for terror ties. As Secretary-General, will you cooperate with national authorities investigating UNRWA, waive UN immunity for local and international UNRWA employees under investigation, and commit to full transparency?

Update (31 July 2026): Analysis has been added for Mr. Olara Otunnu of Uganda, whose candidacy was announced after the UN Town Hall

Update (28 August 2026): Analysis has been added for Ms. Ivonne Baki of Ecuador, whose candidacy was announced after the UN Town Hall

The post Analyzing the Candidates for UN Secretary-General appeared first on UN Watch.

Statement by United Nations Watch and Ingénieurs du Monde, delivered by intern Ariana Blumstein, before the 62nd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, 1 July 2026. Agenda Item 6, Universal Periodic Review of Oman.

Full Speech:

Thank you, Madam Vice President.

We are very concerned regarding the fundamental freedoms and the treatment of vulnerable migrant workers in Oman.

Despite recent reforms, freedom of expression in Oman remains heavily restricted. Journalists, activists, and online critics continue to face intimidation and legal consequences for peacefully expressing their views. Laws criminalizing criticism of state institutions and public officials create a climate of fear that discourages legitimate public debate and weakens civil society. 

In its 2025 evaluation, Freedom House classifies Oman as “Not Free,” noting that its government “restricts virtually all political rights and civil liberties, imposing criminal penalties for criticism and dissent.”

We are also deeply alarmed by the continued exploitation of migrant workers under the kafala system. Human rights organizations have documented cases of domestic workers facing excessive working hours, physical abuse, passport confiscation, restrictions on freedom of movement, and months of unpaid wages. 

Reports from East African domestic workers describe being trapped in abusive households with little ability to seek assistance or leave their employers. These conditions can amount to forced labor.

We urge Oman to repeal laws restricting peaceful expression, protect journalists and activists from arbitrary detention, abolish the kafala system, and extend full labor protections to all domestic workers.

Finally, we are concerned by Oman’s role in enabling illegal actions by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including in regard to restrictions on navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. 

As reported in The Guardian on June 15th, a senior U.S. administration official has described Omani officials as “almost like employees of the Iranians in the way that they maneuvered.”

We urge Oman not to enable those responsible for the January massacre of more than 30,000 peaceful protestors, and who continue to imprison journalists, beat women, torture dissidents, and systematically violate fundamental human rights.

Thank you.

The post UN Watch Urges Oman to Protect Fundamental Freedoms appeared first on UN Watch.

Statement by United Nations Watch, delivered by intern Issy Lyons, before the 62nd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, 30 June 2026. Agenda Item 6, Universal Periodic Review of Mauritania.

Full Speech:

Thank you, Mr. President.

United Nations Watch is concerned by the gap between Mauritania’s legal commitments and the reality experienced by many of its citizens.

Despite legal prohibitions and repeated government commitments, slavery remains prevalent. According to the Global Slavery Index, as of 2023, at least 149,000 people in Mauritania remained enslaved. 

This reality has been brought to international attention by Biram Dah Abeid, one of Mauritania’s most prominent anti-slavery activists and winner of our 2020 Geneva Summit Courage Award.

Mr. Abeid has been repeatedly arrested and imprisoned for his efforts to expose hereditary slavery and defend its victims. Persecution of anti-slavery activists raises serious concerns about the protection of human rights defenders and the authorities’ willingness to address slavery in practice, not only in law.

We are also concerned by severe challenges affecting children and women. According to a 2022 UNICEF report, more than half a million girls were married before the age of 18, representing roughly two in five women in Mauritania. This is particularly concerning because, despite Mauritania’s formal establishment of 18 as the minimum age of marriage, exceptions remain under national law and are justified by reference to Sharia principles.

The true measure of progress is not the number of strategies adopted, institutions created, or laws passed. It is whether those trapped in slavery are actually freed, whether women and girls enjoy equal protection under the law, and whether human rights defenders like Biram Dah Abeid can advocate for the values this council claims to strive for without fear of arrest or imprisonment.

United Nations Watch, therefore urges Mauritania to strengthen enforcement of anti-slavery laws, remove barriers to justice for victims, protect human rights defenders, and ensure that legal reforms translate into real change for all Mauritanians.

Thank you.

The post UN Watch Calls on Mauritania to Strengthen Anti-Slavery Laws appeared first on UN Watch.

On June 26, 2026, Dr. Cochav Elkayam-Levy, Founder and Chair of the Civil Commission on October 7th Crimes Against Women and Children, presented her report “Silenced No More” at UN Watch’s official side event at the 62nd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Women’s Rights Under Extremism and Conflict,” urging the international community not to turn a blind eye to the sexual violence committed against Israeli women.

Prepared Remarks:

Distinguished colleagues, friends,

For more than two years, the Civil Commission has worked to document the sexual atrocities committed on October 7 and during captivity thereafter.

For months, we immersed ourselves in the depths of human suffering. We spent hundreds of hours bearing witness to testimonies and confronting some of the most devastating acts of cruelty imaginable.

We reviewed testimonies, photographs, videos, and accounts from survivors, witnesses, and families. We identified thirteen distinct patterns of sexual violence, including rape, gang rape, sexual torture, mutilation, prolonged sexual abuse in captivity, and forms of violence that exposed the limits of both our laws and our language.

Victims were filmed as they were murdered, tortured, and abused. Families were forced to witness the suffering of their loved ones in real time and, in many cases, continue to endure the circulation of those images and videos today.

Women’s bodies became spectacles of war.

This was terror designed not only to kill, but to be seen. To be celebrated. To be glorified.

As we carried out this work, we found ourselves confronting acts for which we simply lacked adequate legal definitions. We ultimately had to coin a new concept — the concept of kinocidal sexual violence — to describe the deliberate use of sexual violence to torture families, and to maximize their pain and suffering.

Our report, Silenced No More, became one of the most extensive independent efforts ever undertaken to document these crimes.

Yet today, after completing this work, I do not wish to speak only about what we documented. I want to speak about what we learned.

When we began this work, I believed our greatest challenge would be confronting the reality of these crimes — documenting the truth and addressing the immense pain and trauma they caused. And in many ways, it was.

But what I did not anticipate was discovering how easily human suffering can become visible and invisible at the same time.

I discovered that one of the greatest challenges of sexual violence in conflict is the human capacity to bear witness — to look directly at suffering and recognize it.

This reality manifested itself in many forms.

We encountered silence. We encountered hesitation. We encountered unprecedented levels of active and often aggressive denial.

And, at the same time, among those who were willing to support our work, very few have agreed to bear witness to these crimes.

Many who believe and want to support our work struggle to engage with the evidence.

I often hear people say that the report is too painful to read. The images too difficult to confront. The testimonies too devastating to absorb.

I agree. I couldn’t agree more. But what are we left with?

If we look away because reality is unbearable, we leave the future and our children unprotected.

This report is not only about the past. It is about the future.

It reveals some of the most dangerous developments in contemporary terrorism. The truth is that Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations created a blueprint of brutality for some of the most horrific crimes of the twenty-first century — a model that others may study, imitate, and refine.

I often say that we cannot begin to address what we do not know. We cannot confront what we refuse to understand.

And therefore, I believe we have to insist that the responsibility now would shift from the victims to those with power:

To governments.

To international institutions.

To security experts.

To counterterrorism professionals.

To all those responsible for protecting human life.

You probably also think like me — I wish it was that simple.

If the past two years have taught me anything, it is that responsibility alone does not guarantee action.

Perhaps the most painful lesson was watching institutions created to protect victims struggle to recognize them.

On a personal level, I must admit that this experience has been profoundly heartbreaking.

I have devoted my professional life to human rights. I have studied them, taught them, written about them, and believed in their promise. For years now, I teach generations of students that human rights belong equally to every human being; that the international system exists to protect the vulnerable and safeguard human dignity.

Watching the response to October 7 forced me to confront a painful reality.

The softest mechanisms failed. The mechanisms that should have been the fastest to respond with — the ability to listen, to acknowledge, to express solidarity, to recognize suffering — failed when they were needed most.

I witnessed victims of unimaginable violence struggling to be believed. I watched compassion become conditional. I watched the willingness to acknowledge suffering depend on the identity of the victims and the politics surrounding them. So much politics surrounding them that it was absurd.

And there were moments when I wanted to stand before the world and say:

Shame on us.

Shame on us for debating the humanity of victims. Shame on us for allowing ideology to eclipse compassion. Shame on us for failing those whose suffering should never have been controversial.

Most concerning, I watched Israeli and Jewish victims receive neither the protection nor the solidarity that this system was created to provide. Many found themselves confronting a wave of hatred, denial, and dehumanization that continues to spread across the world.

And I wish that had been our only challenge.

Unfortunately, what the past two years have taught me is that we are witnessing something even more troubling: elements of the international system are no longer merely failing us — they are actively working against us as a people. They contribute to a climate in which reality is manipulated, terrorism is rationalized, antisemitism is normalized, and basic moral principles are steadily eroded.

This is not merely the failure to confront terrorism, but the normalization of narratives that excuse it.

There were moments when it seemed that certain parts of the international system had ceased to function as safeguards against hatred and extremism and had instead become vehicles through which they were legitimized.

We have found ourselves repeating truths that should never have required repetition — that:

The deliberate targeting of civilians is never justice.

That rape is never resistance.

And today, I genuinely fear that the worst may still lie ahead if we fail to recognize what is happening and confront it.

When human rights become contingent upon politics, identity, or ideology, the human rights system ceases to function as a universal safeguard. It begins to collapse into the very hierarchy of human worth it was created to prevent. It undermines the moral foundation upon which the entire human rights project rests.

That realization was heartbreaking.

Somewhere along the way, the international system lost sight of its most fundamental purpose: to respond with compassion.

The ability to look at another person and say:

I see you.

I believe you.

You are not alone.

I know you have been through hell.

And what happened to you matters.

And this brings me to the final, and perhaps most important, lesson of all:

If there is one thing I hope you carry with you today, it is a deeper appreciation for the extraordinary power of human courage.

Because if the past two years have taught us anything, they have taught us something profound about finding our voice and speaking our truth. About pursuing what’s right.

In many ways, this journey taught us a lot about solidarity. It was a story about individuals who showed up and refused to look away. Who refused to remain silent. Who chose empathy over indifference.

From the very beginning, we found our sisters. We found women who understood. Women who had experienced persecution, violence, captivity, extremism, and war.

Women from the Yazidi community.

Women from Iran.

Women from Ukraine.

Women from Muslim communities around the world.

Women who did not wait for permission to show compassion. Women who recognized our pain because they had carried their own.

Some of the first people to stand beside us were women who knew exactly what it meant to be doubted. Exactly what it meant to have their suffering questioned. Exactly what it meant to wait for the world to listen.

Their solidarity reminded us of something essential:

That human rights are not built in institutions. They exist in the relationships between people. In the bonds and communities that we create as we come out of trauma and pain. They are built when we refuse to look away from another person’s suffering.

That is where healing begins.

That is where justice begins.

That is where humanity begins.

And perhaps this is the most important lesson I carry with me after these two years.

The world often speaks about sexual violence in conflict as though it is merely a legal problem. Or a political problem. It is both.

But before it is either of those things, it is a question of power.

It is about what happens when the most extreme forces acquire the power to shape reality itself.

The struggle for women’s rights is ultimately a struggle over power.

The power to shape the future our children will inherit.

The power to challenge extremism.

The power to confront hatred.

The power to rebuild after devastation.

The power to choose humanity over cruelty.

And we must continue to fight for that power.

The post Dr. Elkayam-Levy Shares Report on Hamas Sexual Violence at UN Side Event appeared first on UN Watch.

On June 26, 2026, Afghan-Iranian Taekwondo champion and women’s rights advocate Marzieh Hamidi spoke at UN Watch’s official side event at the 62nd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Women’s Rights Under Extremism and Conflict,” calling on the international community to cease diplomatic normalization with the Taliban.

Prepared Remarks:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I did not come to Geneva to ask for sympathy.

I came to ask for accountability.

Europe says it is fighting extremism. So why are the representatives of one of the most extremist regimes in the world being welcomed into diplomatic spaces?

Why are the victims of extremism forced into hiding while extremists are invited to meetings?

Why are Afghan women being told to be patient while the people who erased them from public life are treated as political actors?

Afghan women deserve answers.

Because let us be honest about what the Taliban are.

The Taliban are not misunderstood politicians. They are not reformers. They are not partners for progress. They are a regime that has erased women from public life, banned girls from education, stripped women of the right to work, to travel freely, and to participate in society, and turned discrimination against women into state policy.

I want Europe to hear this clearly.

You cannot claim to defend women’s rights while legitimizing those who destroy women’s rights.

You cannot claim to fight extremism while opening the door to extremists.

You cannot speak about freedom, democracy, and human dignity while sitting across the table from those who deny all three.

I am tired of the hypocrisy.

I am tired of hearing beautiful speeches about women’s rights while Afghan women are abandoned in reality.

I am tired of politicians hiding behind soft diplomatic language while millions of women are living under one of the most brutal systems of gender oppression in the world.

What is happening in Afghanistan is not a cultural difference. It is not a misunderstanding. It is not a complicated political situation.

It is oppression. It is persecution. It is gender apartheid.

And while we are sitting in this room today, women inside Afghanistan continue to pay the price.

Recently, in the city of Herat, women protesting for their rights were reportedly beaten, threatened, and violently suppressed.

Women continue to be detained and harassed simply for appearing in public.

Women have been arrested because they were not wearing the blue burqa demanded by Taliban authorities — even when they were fully covered.

Think about that.

Not because they committed a crime. Not because they harmed anyone. But because extremists decided that even a fully covered woman was still not covered enough.

This is not culture. This is not tradition. This is not religion. This is control.

Every single day, I receive messages from inside Afghanistan.

Messages from girls. Messages from mothers. Messages from students whose dreams have been stolen.

They tell me:

“Please be our voice.”

“Tell the world what is happening.”

“Do not let them forget us.”

And perhaps the most important message of all:

“The Taliban do not represent us.”

“The Taliban are not Afghanistan.”

“We do not want terrorists speaking in our name.”

So when governments invite the Taliban, they should remember something.

They are not inviting the voice of Afghan women. They are not inviting the voice of Afghan girls. They are not inviting the voice of the Afghan people.

They are inviting the people who silenced those voices.

I am not here to ask the world to speak for Afghan women. Afghan women are already speaking.

They are speaking through fear, through resistance, and through extraordinary courage.

The problem is not that Afghan women do not have a voice.

The problem is that too many people in positions of power have chosen not to listen.

And even worse, some have chosen to listen to the oppressors instead.

I am a young woman. I am an athlete. At 23 years old, I should be worrying about my next competition.

Instead, I have to worry about surviving threats from extremists who want to kill me because I believe women deserve freedom.

Extremism is not an abstract concept to me. It affects how I live, how I move, how I work, and how I plan my future.

Terrorists do not become legitimate because they are invited to conferences.

Oppression does not become acceptable because it is discussed politely.

Every invitation matters. Every diplomatic meeting matters. Every photograph matters.

Because every time the Taliban are treated as legitimate political actors without accountability, the message sent to Afghan women is devastating.

Your freedom can be negotiated.

Your dignity can be negotiated.

Your future can be negotiated.

I reject that message.

The women of Afghanistan do not need more empty statements.

They need courage. They need solidarity.

And they need the world to stop legitimizing those who are responsible for their oppression.

History will not ask how carefully we balanced our political interests.

The post Marzieh Hamidi Speaks for Afghan Women at UN Side Event appeared first on UN Watch.

On June 26, 2026, Fawzia Amin Sido, a Yazidi survivor who endured ten years of ISIS captivity, addressed UN Watch’s official side event at the 62nd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Women’s Rights Under Extremism and Conflict,” sharing her story of enslavement, and calling on the German government to grant her sick mother and brother humanitarian entry to Germany so she can finally be reunited with her family.

Prepared Remarks (English Translation):

Ladies and Gentlemen, Distinguished Audience,

I stand before you today not to provide numbers and statistics that will be buried in reports and forgotten, but as a human being who has endured what no one on this earth should ever have to endure.

My name is Fawzia, one of the daughters of wounded Sinjar. I stand here to be the loud voice of thousands of Yazidi women and children whose lives were stolen, and to carry within my body and soul a bleeding wound born of ten years of captivity, slavery, and human degradation.

At dawn on August 3, 2014, the sun did not rise over Sinjar — we breathed death. ISIS and the tribes that supported them attacked us in al-Ba’aj, al-Khatuniyah, and defiant Sinjar. In those terrible moments, the security forces withdrew, and we were left defenseless. Our families stood their ground with little more than light weapons and their own courage against an arsenal of heavy and sophisticated arms.

Within just a few days, our families were devastated: more than 1,292 people were killed, and 6,417 women and children were abducted. The Alu Antar massacre claimed hundreds of victims, not to mention those who died of thirst and hunger while trapped on Mount Sinjar.

On that cruel night, we slept on the roof of our house to escape the summer heat. My family ran downstairs in panic, and I — a little girl who understood nothing about war — remained alone on the roof for two hours amid a hail of bullets. When we later fled, I was holding the hand of my little brother, who was only five years old at the time. In my childish innocence, I believed that the grip of my small hand meant complete safety for him. But the beasts of ISIS came and violently tore me away from him. That final touch — the moment my brother’s hand was torn from mine against my will — is the knife that tears through my heart every second that passes in my life.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I was only ten years old — a child whose childhood was stolen — sold from one man to another as if I were a piece of furniture, without feelings, without dreams, without dignity. They put me in chains. They beat me. They violated my innocence and subjected my fragile body to electric shocks.

In 2020, I was taken as a captive to the Gaza Strip, where I was sold to a jihadist and, under threat of violence, forced to marry him and bear two children. I lived there for years in slavery. I was forced to do everything — even sleep. I was so exhausted and terrified that I was forced to sleep standing up.

I was locked in a dark room without windows for three months and attempted to take my own life several times to escape that hell. But one thing kept me alive: my mother tongue, my identity, and the memory of my mother, which I refused to let fade from my mind.

Finally, with the help of a courageous woman who secretly gave me a phone, I recorded a video in my mother tongue while wearing my niqab and posted it on TikTok, sending my final cry to the world. My story was believed, and a joint international effort involving the United States, Iraq, Jordan, and other countries was launched. They coordinated their efforts until I was rescued and brought to safety.

Today, I am in Germany under humanitarian protection. After ten years of hell, freedom feels surreal. But alas, my happiness is not complete. Today, I am only a body without a soul.

For ten years in captivity, the one dream that gave me strength was to return and throw myself into my father’s arms. But he died a few months ago before I could see him again, before he could embrace me with his warmth, because of travel barriers and legal complications.

And now my mother is sick, alone, and battling for her life in Iraq alongside my brother, while I stand here helpless and unable to reach her.

I ask you, in the name of the human values under whose banner you gather: after everything I have endured — rape, torture, slavery, and ten years of hell — do I not deserve to spend the rest of my life beside my sick mother? Does all this suffering not count in my favor? Does it not entitle me, at last, to see my mother again?

That is why I am not standing here to beg for your pity. I have come to appeal to your conscience and to challenge rigid laws that lack compassion.

I call upon the international community, the German government, and human rights organizations to immediately facilitate an exceptional humanitarian family reunification with my mother and brother in Germany.

For me, family reunification is not merely a piece of paper or a bureaucratic procedure. It is the only cure and the final step in healing my broken soul. It means safety and dignity after years of loss, suffering, and displacement.

Before I conclude, I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Steve Maman and Dawood Jajju, whose tireless efforts contributed to my rescue and return to freedom.

I also beg and implore you: do not stop searching for the missing Yazidis. Behind every missing person stands an entire family that dies a thousand deaths every day from the agony of waiting. Save what remains of my family, and help me simply be a human being and a daughter who can live in peace and security.

Thank you very much.

Prepared Remarks (German Translation):

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, verehrtes Publikum,

ich stehe heute nicht vor Ihnen, um Zahlen und Statistiken zu präsentieren, die in Berichten vergraben und vergessen werden. Ich stehe hier als Mensch, der etwas ertragen musste, das niemand auf dieser Welt jemals erleben sollte. Mein Name ist Fawzia. Ich bin eine der Töchter des verwundeten Sindschar. Ich stehe hier als laute Stimme von Tausenden jesidischer Frauen und Kinder, deren Leben gestohlen wurde, und trage in meinem Körper und meiner Seele eine blutende Wunde, die aus zehn Jahren Gefangenschaft, Sklaverei und Entwürdigung des Menschen entstanden ist.

Am Morgen des 3. August 2014 ging über Sindschar nicht die Sonne auf – wir atmeten den Tod. Der IS und die Stämme, die ihn unterstützten, griffen uns in al-Ba’aj, al-Khatuniyah und dem standhaften Sindschar an. In diesen schrecklichen Momenten zogen sich die Sicherheitskräfte zurück, und wir blieben schutzlos zurück. Unsere Familien hielten mit kaum mehr als leichten Waffen und ihrem Mut gegen ein Arsenal schwerer und moderner Waffen stand. Innerhalb weniger Tage wurden unsere Familien zerstört: Mehr als 1.292 Menschen wurden getötet, und 6.417 Frauen und Kinder wurden verschleppt. Das Massaker von Alu Antar forderte Hunderte von Opfern, ganz zu schweigen von denen, die auf dem Sindschar-Gebirge an Durst und Hunger starben.

In jener grausamen Nacht schliefen wir auf dem Dach unseres Hauses, um der Sommerhitze zu entkommen. Meine Familie rannte in Panik nach unten, und ich – ein kleines Mädchen, das nichts vom Krieg verstand – blieb zwei Stunden lang allein auf dem Dach, während Kugeln um mich herum einschlugen. Als wir später flohen, hielt ich die Hand meines kleinen Bruders, der damals erst fünf Jahre alt war. In meiner kindlichen Unschuld glaubte ich, dass der Griff meiner kleinen Hand ihn vollkommen schützen würde. Doch die Bestien des IS kamen und rissen mich gewaltsam von ihm weg. Diese letzte Berührung – der Moment, in dem die Hand meines Bruders gegen meinen Willen aus meiner gerissen wurde – ist das Messer, das mein Herz in jeder Sekunde meines Lebens aufs Neue durchbohrt.

Meine Damen und Herren,

ich war erst zehn Jahre alt – ein Kind, dem die Kindheit gestohlen wurde. Ich wurde von einem Mann an den nächsten verkauft, als wäre ich ein Möbelstück, ohne Gefühle, ohne Träume, ohne Würde. Sie legten mich in Ketten. Sie schlugen mich. Sie beraubten mich meiner Unschuld und setzten meinen zerbrechlichen Körper Elektroschocks aus.

Im Jahr 2020 wurde ich als Gefangene in den Gazastreifen gebracht. Dort wurde ich an einen Dschihadisten verkauft und unter Androhung von Gewalt gezwungen, ihn zu heiraten und ihm zwei Kinder zu gebären. Jahrelang lebte ich dort in Sklaverei. Ich wurde zu allem gezwungen, sogar zum Schlafen. Ich war so erschöpft und verängstigt, dass ich gezwungen war, im Stehen zu schlafen.

Drei Monate lang wurde ich in einem dunklen Raum ohne Fenster eingesperrt. Mehrmals versuchte ich, meinem Leben ein Ende zu setzen, um diesem Inferno zu entkommen. Doch eines hielt mich am Leben: meine Muttersprache, meine Identität und die Erinnerung an meine Mutter, die ich niemals aus meinem Herzen verschwinden lassen wollte.

Schließlich half mir eine mutige Frau, die mir heimlich ein Telefon gab. Ich nahm ein Video in meiner Muttersprache auf, während ich meinen Niqab trug, und veröffentlichte es auf TikTok — meinen letzten Hilferuf an die Welt. Man glaubte meine Geschichte, und eine gemeinsame internationale Rettungsaktion unter Beteiligung der Vereinigten Staaten, des Irak, Jordaniens und weiterer Länder wurde eingeleitet. Sie koordinierten ihre Bemühungen, bis ich gerettet und in Sicherheit gebracht wurde.

Heute lebe ich in Deutschland unter humanitärem Schutz. Nach zehn Jahren Hölle fühlt sich Freiheit unwirklich an. Doch leider ist mein Glück nicht vollständig. Heute bin ich nur noch ein Körper ohne Seele.

Während meiner zehnjährigen Gefangenschaft gab es einen Traum, der mir die Kraft zum Überleben gab: zurückzukehren und mich in die Arme meines Vaters zu werfen. Doch er starb vor einigen Monaten, bevor ich ihn wiedersehen konnte, bevor er mich noch einmal in seine Arme schließen konnte, aufgrund von Reisehindernissen und rechtlichen Komplikationen.

Und nun ist meine Mutter krank, allein und kämpft im Irak gemeinsam mit meinem Bruder um ihr Leben, während ich hier stehe, hilflos und unfähig, zu ihr zu gelangen.

Ich frage Sie im Namen jener menschlichen Werte, unter deren Banner Sie sich heute versammeln: Verdiene ich nach allem, was ich ertragen habe — Vergewaltigung, Folter, Sklaverei und zehn Jahre Hölle — nicht, den Rest meines Lebens an der Seite meiner kranken Mutter zu verbringen? Zählt all dieses Leid nicht zu meinen Gunsten? Gibt es mir nicht endlich das Recht, meine Mutter wiederzusehen?

Deshalb stehe ich heute nicht hier, um Ihr Mitleid zu erbitten. Ich appelliere an Ihr Gewissen und fordere dazu auf, starre Gesetze zu überdenken, denen Mitgefühl fehlt.

Ich rufe die internationale Gemeinschaft, die deutsche Bundesregierung und Menschenrechtsorganisationen dazu auf, unverzüglich eine außergewöhnliche humanitäre Familienzusammenführung mit meiner Mutter und meinem Bruder in Deutschland zu ermöglichen.

Für mich ist Familienzusammenführung nicht nur ein Stück Papier oder ein bürokratisches Verfahren. Sie ist die einzige Heilung und der letzte Schritt zur Genesung meiner gebrochenen Seele. Sie bedeutet Sicherheit und Würde nach Jahren von Verlust, Leid und Vertreibung.

Bevor ich schließe, möchte ich auch meinen aufrichtigen Dank an Steve Maman und Dawood Jajju aussprechen, deren unermüdlicher Einsatz zu meiner Rettung und meiner Rückkehr in die Freiheit beigetragen hat.

Ich bitte und flehe Sie außerdem an: Hören Sie nicht auf, nach den vermissten Jesidinnen und Jesiden zu suchen. Hinter jedem Vermissten steht eine ganze Familie, die jeden Tag tausend Tode durch die Qual des Wartens stirbt.

Retten Sie, was von meiner Familie geblieben ist, und helfen Sie mir, einfach ein Mensch und eine Tochter zu sein, die in Frieden und Sicherheit leben kann.

Vielen Dank.

The post ISIS Sexual Slavery Survivor Fawzia Amin Sido Testifies at UN Side Event appeared first on UN Watch.