

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The Rwandan government should honor its international obligations by enacting legislation to abolish life imprisonment in solitary confinement, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to the presidents of the Senate and Chamber of Deputies.
In December 2008, the Rwanda Parliament prohibited life in solitary confinement for genocide suspects transferred from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) or extradited from other countries and found guilty by Rwandan courts. However, the penalty remains on the books for other persons tried and convicted of genocide-related crimes in Rwanda. In its letter, Human Rights Watch outlined its concerns about the December legislation and called on Parliament to bar such a punishment from Rwandan law.
"Prolonged solitary confinement is cruel and inhuman treatment," said Alison Des Forges, senior advisor to the Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "Parliament needs to ban this penalty across the board to comply with its international obligations and to show a genuine commitment to human rights."
The recent legislative move is part of Rwanda's effort to prosecute in Rwanda persons suspected of involvement in the country's 1994 genocide. Until now, its efforts to have suspects sent back to Rwanda for prosecution have been largely unsuccessful. The ICTR, located in Tanzania, denied transfer in five cases this year, and France denied extradition in three cases. Another case involving genocide suspects is on appeal in the United Kingdom.
"Rwanda's decision to eliminate solitary confinement only for suspects transferred from other jurisdictions, including those alleged to have played a leading role in the 1994 genocide, also gives Rwandans the impression that different rules apply to different people," said Des Forges. "All suspects tried and convicted in Rwanda should be treated equally and none should be subjected to this punishment."
Rwanda's criminal sentencing scheme came under scrutiny after Rwanda expressed its willingness to receive cases from the ICTR nearly two years ago. At that time, with its trial completion date of 2008 looming, the ICTR undertook to find other jurisdictions to hear remaining cases. Rwanda was among the potential candidates, except that the ICTR cannot transfer cases to a jurisdiction where the death penalty may be imposed.
Rwanda passed a March 2007 law precluding the death penalty for any suspects transferred from the ICTR to Rwandan courts. In July 2007, the legislature adopted legislation definitively abolishing the death penalty. However, the law replaced it with life imprisonment in solitary confinement in certain cases, a sentence that cannot be reviewed or commuted for a period of at least 20 years.
A constitutional challenge was mounted against the lifetime solitary confinement penalty, but the Rwandan Supreme Court found it constitutional in August 2008. The government has announced plans to issue instructions on how the punishment should be implemented, but has not done so.
The solitary confinement provision impeded the transfer of cases from the ICTR to Rwanda, despite assurances by Rwandan government officials that transfer suspects would not be subject to lifetime solitary confinement if convicted by Rwandan courts. The ICTR denied transfer of five suspects, with appeals by the prosecutor rejected on the same grounds in several of the cases. The ICTR also expressed concern over whether suspects would be able to secure witnesses to testify in their defense in order to ensure a fair trial.
Solitary confinement for prolonged periods of time violates the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. Rwanda ratified the African Charter in 1983 and acceded to the ICCPR in 1975 and to the Convention against Torture on December 15, 2008.
"The new law sends the wrong signal to both Rwandans and the international community," said Des Forges. "It suggests that the country is more concerned with securing the transfer of cases from the tribunal than with respecting human rights for all of its citizens."
Life imprisonment in solitary confinement can be imposed by Rwandan conventional courts and community-based gacaca courts. In May 2008, the Rwandan legislature transferred most of the remaining genocide cases to gacaca courts and requires the mandatory punishment of lifetime solitary confinement for cases in which a suspect is convicted and has not previously confessed or pled guilty.
"In providing justice for the genocide, Rwanda needs to abide by its international human rights obligations and to respect the dignity and rights of all persons," Des Forges said. "Life imprisonment in solitary confinement should be definitively abolished."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"Every day the Pentagon makes a video of cool explosions from Iran for the president of the United States to watch, so he can bounce up and down in his high chair, clap his little hands, and cry 'Yay! Make it go boom again!'"
A Wednesday report from NBC News is raising concerns that President Donald Trump may be getting a rose-colored view of the unprovoked and unconstitutional war he started with Iran.
According to NBC News, US military officials show Trump a daily two-minute video montage of operations conducted in the Iran war, featuring "the biggest, most successful strikes on Iranian targets," with one official telling NBC that the video essentially consists of "stuff blowing up."
Two sources in the administration told NBC that "the video briefing is fueling concerns among some of Trump’s allies that he may not be receiving—or absorbing—the complete picture of the war," and one official told the network that "the information Trump gets about the war tends to emphasize US successes, with comparatively little detail about Iranian actions."
The video montages are also leaving the president confused about why the media is covering negative ramifications of the war, which he believes to be an unqualified success, NBC reported.
Critics of the president were quick to slam him and his administration over the reported war highlights montage.
"Sounds like Trump is getting a Centcom propaganda video briefing of things blowing up every day," commented foreign policy journalist Laura Rozen, "but not being briefed when things go wrong."
Anthony Zurcher, North America correspondent for BBC, wrote that it appears Trump is "getting an overly rosy picture from his generals of how an unpopular war is going."
MS NOW columnist Paul Waldman contended that the president's behavior as depicted in the NBC report was positively childlike.
"Every day the Pentagon makes a video of cool explosions from Iran for the president of the United States to watch," wrote Waldman, "so he can bounce up and down in his high chair, clap his little hands, and cry 'Yay! Make it go boom again!'"
National security attorney Bradley Moss summarized the NBC report with a single five-word sentence: "The emperor has no brains."
Even Trump's mail-in ballot was not enough to keep Democrat Emily Gregory from winning the seat over Republican Jon Maples in a district swing of more than 13 points.
A Democrat in Florida running to win a state house seat in the Palm Beach district that includes US President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate was declared the winner in a special election on Tuesday night, defeating the Trump-endorsed Republican in yet another powerful rebuke to the running of the country by the president and his party.
Emily Gregory flipped Florida's House District 87, defeating Republican Jon Maples, who Trump loudly endorsed and cast his vote for personally via mail-in ballot—something he wants to bar other voters nationwide from being able to do. Trump said on Monday that Maples, a financial planner who previously held office at the municipal level, was the choice of "so many of my Palm Beach County friends.”
But with almost all votes counted late Tuesday night, the Associated Press reported Gregory led by 2.4 percentage points, or 797 votes. In 2024, the district went to Republicans by 11 points.
"Republicans are vulnerable everywhere.”
Political strategist Sawyer Hackett named the obvious implication by saying, at least through November of 2026, "Trump will be represented by a Democrat in the Florida legislature."
“I think it demonstrates where the Florida voter is,” Gregory, who runs a fitness center for postpartum mothers, told Politico in an interview following her victory. “They want someone who is focused on solutions and the issues and not focused on the noise.”
“If Mar-a-Lago is vulnerable, imagine what’s possible this November,” said Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, in response to the victory. Williams noted that Gregory's win was the 29th seat that Democrats have flipped from GOP control since Trump returned to office last year.
“Gas prices are spiking, grocery costs are up, and families can’t get by," she said. "It’s clear voters at the polls are fed up with Republicans. A Trump +11 district in his own backyard shouldn’t be in play for Democrats, but tonight proves Republicans are vulnerable everywhere.”
"These massive facilities are sucking up precious water resources, paving over farmland, driving climate change, and disrupting the fabric of communities," said one supporter of the new legislation.
Two of the leading progressives in the US Congress, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, announced legislation on Wednesday that would impose a nationwide moratorium on the construction of new artificial intelligence data centers amid mounting concerns over their insatiable consumption of power and water resources, impacts on the climate, and other harms.
Sanders' (I-Vt.) office said in a press release announcing the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act that the construction pause would remain in effect "until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment."
Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) are set to formally introduce their legislation at a press conference on Wednesday at 4 pm ET.
Food & Water Watch (FWW), which last year became the first national organization in the US to call for a total moratorium on the approval of new AI data centers, celebrated the first-of-its-kind bill and called on other members of Congress to "move quickly to sponsor, champion, and pass" it. FWW's groundbreaking call for a national AI data center moratorium was later echoed by hundreds of advocacy organizations at the state and national levels.
“We need a halt to the explosive growth of new AI data center construction now, because political and community leaders across the country have been caught completely off guard by this aggressive, profit-hungry industry," Mitch Jones, FWW's managing director of policy and litigation, said in a statement Wednesday. "It has yet to be determined if—not how—the industry can ever operate in a manner that sufficiently protects people and society from the profusion of inherent hazards and harms that data centers bring wherever they appear."
“Long before the recent spike in global oil prices, Americans throughout the country were dealing with skyrocketing electricity rates due to the egregious consumption and jolting grid impacts levied by Big Tech’s AI data centers," Jones added. "Meanwhile, these massive facilities are sucking up precious water resources, paving over farmland, driving climate change, and disrupting the fabric of communities. We mustn’t allow another unchecked Silicon Valley scheme to profit off our backs while sticking us with the bill."
In a detailed report released last week, titled The Urgent Case Against Data Centers, FWW pointed to some of the "documented harms caused by AI and data centers," including:
Those harms have fueled massive grassroots opposition to AI data centers, with communities organizing to prevent construction in their backyards. One report estimates that between May 2024 and March 2025, local opposition helped tank or delay $64 billion worth of data center projects across the US.
That opposition has pushed local lawmakers to act. According to a tracker maintained by Good Jobs First, "at least 63 local data-center moratorium actions have been introduced, considered, or adopted across dozens of towns and counties," and "some 54 have already passed."
At the state level, Good Jobs First counted "at least 12 in-session states with filed data center moratorium bills this cycle," and noted that some governors have taken or floated executive action to slow or pause AI data center build-outs.
But the Trump administration is trying to move in the opposite direction.
In a national policy framework document unveiled last week, the White House urged Congress to "streamline federal permitting for AI infrastructure construction and operation" and called for a prohibition on state regulation of AI.
Jim Walsh, FWW's policy director, slammed the White House framework as "more of the same nonsense we’ve been hearing for months" and warned that "more data centers mean more climate-killing fracked gas power plants poisoning our air and water, and more stress placed on local communities’ precious water resources."
"The only prudent course of action when it comes to AI," said Walsh, "is to halt the explosive growth of new data center construction now, so that states and communities have the time needed to properly consider their own futures."