July, 13 2020, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Global: Health Workers Silenced, Exposed and Attacked
Governments must be held accountable for the deaths of health and essential workers who they have failed to protect from COVID-19, Amnesty International said today, as it released a new report documenting the experiences of health workers around the world.
The organization's analysis of available data has revealed that more than 3000 health workers are known to have died from COVID-19 worldwide - a figure which is likely to be a significant underestimate.
WASHINGTON
Governments must be held accountable for the deaths of health and essential workers who they have failed to protect from COVID-19, Amnesty International said today, as it released a new report documenting the experiences of health workers around the world.
The organization's analysis of available data has revealed that more than 3000 health workers are known to have died from COVID-19 worldwide - a figure which is likely to be a significant underestimate.
Alarmingly, Amnesty International documented cases where health workers who raise safety concerns in the context of the COVID-19 response have faced retaliation, ranging from arrest and detention to threats and dismissal.
"With the COVID-19 pandemic still accelerating around the world, we are urging governments to start taking health and essential workers' lives seriously. Countries yet to see the worst of the pandemic must not repeat the mistakes of governments whose failure to protect workers' rights has had devastating consequences," said Sanhita Ambast, Amnesty International's Researcher and Advisor on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
"It is especially disturbing to see that some governments are punishing workers who voice their concerns about working conditions that may threaten their lives. Health workers on the frontline are the first to know if government policy is not working, and authorities who silence them cannot seriously claim to be prioritising public health."
Thousands have lost their lives
There is currently no systematic global tracking of how many health and essential workers have died after contracting COVID-19.
However, Amnesty International has collated and analysed a wide range of available data that shows that over 3000 health workers are known to have died after contracting COVID-19 in 79 countries around the world.
According to Amnesty International's monitoring, the countries with the highest numbers of health worker deaths thus far include the USA (507), Russia (545), UK (540, including 262 social care workers), Brazil (351), Mexico (248), Italy (188), Egypt (111), Iran (91), Ecuador (82) and Spain (63).
The overall figure is likely to be a significant underestimate due to under-reporting, while accurate comparisons across countries are difficult due to differences in counting. For example, France has collected data from just some of its hospitals and health centres, while figures of deceased health workers provided by health associations in Egypt and Russia have been contested by their governments.
Shortages of life saving protective equipment
Health workers reported serious shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) in nearly all of the 63 countries and territories surveyed by Amnesty International.
This includes countries which may yet see the worst of the pandemic, such as India and Brazil and several countries across Africa. A doctor working in Mexico City told Amnesty International that doctors were spending about 12% of their monthly salaries buying their own PPE.
In addition to a global shortage of supply, trade restrictions may have aggravated this problem. In June 2020, 56 countries and two trade blocs (the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union) had put in place measures to either ban or restrict the export of some, or all, forms of PPE or its components.
"While states must ensure there is sufficient PPE for workers within their territories, trade restrictions risk exacerbating shortages in countries that are dependent on imports," said Sanhita Ambast.
"The COVID-19 pandemic is a global problem that requires global cooperation."
Reprisals
In at least 31 of the countries surveyed by Amnesty International, researchers recorded reports of strikes, threatened strikes, or protests, by health and essential workers as a result of unsafe working conditions. In many countries, such actions were met with reprisals from authorities.
In Egypt, for example, Amnesty documented the cases of nine health care workers who were arbitrarily detained between March and June on vague and overly broad charges of "spreading false news" and "terrorism". All those detained had expressed safety concerns or criticized the government's handling of the pandemic.
Another Egyptian doctor told Amnesty International that doctors who speak out are subjected to threats, interrogations by the National Security Agency (NSA), administrative questioning, and penalties. He said:
"Many [doctors] are preferring to pay for their own personal equipment to avoid this exhausting back and forth. [The authorities] are forcing doctors to choose between death and jail."
In some cases, strike action and protests have been met with heavy-handed responses.
In Malaysia for example, police dispersed a peaceful picket against a hospital cleaning services company. The picketers' complaints centred around what they said was the unfair treatment of union members by the company as well as a lack of sufficient protection for hospital cleaners. Police arrested, detained and charged five health care workers for "unauthorized gathering" in violation of their rights to freedom of association and assembly.
"Health and essential workers have a right to raise their voices against unfair treatment," said Sanhita Ambast.
"Health workers can help governments improve their response to the pandemic and keep everyone safe - but they can't do this if they are in prison, and they can't do it if they are afraid to speak up."
There have also been reports in several countries of health and essential workers being fired or facing disciplinary action for speaking out about their concerns.
In the USA for example, certified nursing assistant Tainika Somerville was fired after posting a video on Facebook where she read out a petition calling for more PPE. Tainika says staff at the nursing home in Illinois where she works were not informed that they were working with COVID-19 patients and found out through the media. The nursing home had reported 34 infections and 15 COVID-19 related deaths as of May 29.
In Russia, Amnesty International highlighted the cases of two doctors, Yulia Volkova and Tatyana Reva, who are facing retaliation after complaining about a lack of PPE. Yulia Volkova has been charged under Russia's fake news laws and faces a fine of up to RUB 100,000 (USD 1,443), while Tatyana Reva is facing disciplinary proceedings that may result in her dismissal.
Unfair pay and lack of benefits
In addition to unsafe working conditions, Amnesty International has documented how some health and essential workers are being unfairly paid or in some cases not paid at all.
In South Sudan for example, doctors on the government's payroll have not received their salaries since February and do not receive welfare packages or medical cover. In Guatemala, at least 46 facilities staff were not paid for the two-and-a-half months they spent working at a COVID-19 hospital.
In some countries, there are no additional benefits for health and essential workers in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, and in other countries benefits exclude certain categories of workers.
Amnesty International is calling on states to consider COVID-19 an occupational illness.
As part of this they must ensure that health and essential workers have access to compensation and other support in case they contract the infection. They must also be included in priority groups for COVID-19 testing.
Stigma and Violence
Amnesty International documented several cases where health and essential workers experienced stigma and violence because of their jobs. For example, a nurse in Mexico was reportedly drenched with chlorine while walking on the street, and in the Philippines, attackers poured bleach in the face of a hospital utility worker.
These incidents point to a climate of misinformation and stigma and underscore the importance of governments providing accurate and accessible information on the spread of COVID-19.
In Pakistan, Amnesty International has recorded several instances of violence against health workers since April. Hospitals have been vandalized, doctors have been attacked, and one was even shot by a member of the Counter Terrorism Force.
There have been several statements from ministers in Pakistan claiming that hospitals have the necessary resources, despite reports that hospitals have been forced to turn away even critical patients, due to the shortage of beds, ventilators and other life-saving equipment. This puts health workers in danger as people don't believe them when they say they do not have room for more patients.
Recommendations
"We call on all states affected by COVID-19 to carry out independent public reviews into their preparedness for and responses to the pandemic, with a view to better protecting human rights and lives in the event of a future mass disease outbreak," said Sanhita Ambast.
This should include a review into whether the rights of health and essential workers - including the right to just and favourable conditions of work, and the right to freedom of expression - were adequately protected.
States must ensure adequate compensation for all health and essential workers who have contracted COVID-19 as a result of work-related activities. They must also investigate cases where workers have faced reprisals for raising health and safety concerns, and provide effective remedy to those who have been unjustly treated including by reinstating workers who have lost their jobs for speaking out.
Background
For the purpose of this briefing, "health workers" refers to everyone involved in the delivery of health and social care in any capacity, including but not limited to doctors, nurses, social care workers, cleaners, ambulance drivers and facilities staff. While the briefing largely focuses on health workers, given available information, the same issues apply to a broader range of 'essential workers' who have been exposed to COVID-19 in a range of frontline jobs during the pandemic.
*Figures were correct as of 6 July 2020.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
ICE's 'Frightening' Facial Recognition App is Scanning US Citizens Without Their Consent
"An ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," said the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
Nov 01, 2025
Immigration agents are using facial recognition software as "definitive" evidence to determine immigration status and is collecting data from US citizens without their consent. In some cases, agents may detain US citizens, including ones who can provide their birth certificates, if the app says they are in the country illegally.
These are a few of the findings from a series of articles published this past week by 404 Media, which has obtained documents and video evidence showing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are using a smartphone app in the field during immigration stops, scanning the faces of people on the street to verify their citizenship.
The report found that agents frequently conduct stops that "seem to have little justification beyond the color of someone’s skin... then look up more information on that person, including their identity and potentially their immigration status."
While it is not clear what application the agencies are using, 404 previously reported that ICE is using an app called Mobile Fortify that allows ICE to simply point a camera at a person on the street. The photos are then compared with a bank of more than 200 million images and dozens of government databases to determine info about the person, including their name, date of birth, nationality, and information about their immigration status.
On Friday, 404 published an internal document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which stated that "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection." The document also states that the image of any face that agents scan, including those of US citizens, will be stored for 15 years.
The outlet identified several videos that have been posted to social media of immigration officials using the technology.
In one, taken in Chicago, armed agents in sunglasses and face coverings are shown accosting a pair of Hispanic teenagers on bicycles, asking where they are from. The 16-year-old boy who filmed the encounter said he is "from here"—an American citizen—but that he only has a school ID on him. The officer tells the boy he'll be allowed to leave if he'll "do a facial." The other officer then snaps a photo of him with a phone camera and asks his name.
In another video, also in Chicago, agents are shown surrounding a driver, who declines to show his ID. Without asking, one officer points his phone at the man. "I’m an American citizen, so leave me alone,” the driver says. "Alright, we just got to verify that,” the officer responds.
Even if the people approached in these videos had produced identification proving their citizenship, there's no guarantee that agents would have accepted it, especially if the app gave them information to the contrary.
On Wednesday, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), told 404 that ICE agents will even trust the app's results over a person's government documents.
“ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” he said.
This is despite the fact that, as Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404, “face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country."
Thompson said: "ICE using a mobile biometrics app in ways its developers at CBP never intended or tested is a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”
According to an investigation published in October by ProPublica, more than 170 US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, often in squalid conditions, since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. In many of these cases, these individuals have been detained because agents wrongly claimed the documents proving their citizenship are false.
During a press conference this week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied this reality, stating that "no American citizens have been arrested or detained" as part of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade.
"We focus on those who are here illegally," she said.
But as DHS's internal document explains, facial recognition software is necessary in the first place because "ICE agents do not know an individual's citizenship at the time of the initial encounter."
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explains that the use of such technology suggests that ICE's operations are not "highly targeted raids," as it likes to portray, but instead "random fishing expeditions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Despite Court Rulings, Trump Refuses to Pay Out Food Stamp Benefits to Tens of Millions
"The administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations," says one Georgetown law professor.
Nov 01, 2025
Two federal judges have said the Trump administration cannot use the government shutdown to suspend food assistance for 42 million Americans. But hours into Saturday, when payments were due to be disbursed, President Donald Trump appears to be defying the ruling, potentially leaving millions unable to afford this month's grocery bills.
A pair of federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled Friday that the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) freeze on benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, was unlawful and that the department must use money from a contingency fund of $6 billion to pay for at least a portion of the roughly $8 billion meant to be disbursed this month.
“There is no doubt that the six billion dollars in contingency funds are appropriated funds that are without a doubt necessary to carry out the program’s operation,” said US District Judge McConnell of Rhode Island in his oral ruling. “The shutdown of the government through funding doesn’t do away with SNAP. It just does away with the funding of it. There could be no greater necessity than the prohibition across the board of funds for the program’s operations.”
McConnell added: “There is no doubt, and it is beyond argument, that irreparable harm will begin to occur if it hasn’t already occurred in the terror it has caused some people about the availability of funding for food for their family."
SNAP benefits are available to people whose monthly incomes fall below 130% of the federal poverty line. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children. According to USDA research, cited by the Washington Post, those who receive SNAP benefits rely on it for 63% of their groceries, with the poorest, who make below 50% of the poverty line, relying on it for as much as 80%.
McConnell shot down the administration's contention that the contingency funds may be needed for some other hypothetical emergency in the future, saying "It’s clear that when compared to the millions of people that will go without funds for food versus the agency’s desire not to use contingency funds in case there’s a hurricane need, the balances of those equities clearly goes on the side of ensuring that people are fed."
While the judge in Massachusetts, Indira Talwani, ruled that Trump merely had to use the contingency funds to fund as much of the program as possible, McConnell went further, saying that in addition, they had to tap other sources of funding to disburse benefits in full, and do so "as soon as possible." Both judges gave the administration until Monday to provide updates on how it planned to follow the ruling.
However, after the ruling on Friday, Trump insisted on social media that "government lawyers do not think we have the legal authority to pay SNAP with certain monies we have available, and now two courts have issued conflicting opinions on what we can and cannot do."
He added: "I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT. Therefore, I have instructed our lawyers to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible."
Attorney and activist Miles Mogulescu pointed out in Common Dreams that, "until a few days ago, even the Trump administration agreed that these funds should be used to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown."
On September 30, the day before the shutdown began, the USDA posted a 55-page "Lapse of Funding" plan to its website, which plainly stated that if the government were to shut down, "the department will continue operations related to... core nutrition safety net programs.”
But this week, USDA abruptly deleted the file and posted a new memo that concocted a new legal reality out of whole cloth, stating that “due to Congressional Democrats’ refusal to pass a clean continuing resolution (CR), approximately 42 million individuals will not receive SNAP benefits come November 1st.”
As Mogulescu notes: "The new memo cited absolutely no law supporting its position. Instead, it made up a rule claiming that the 'contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exist.'"
Sharon Parrott, the president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, who previously served as an official in the White House Office of Management, said last week that it's "unequivocally false" that the administration's hands are tied.
"I know from experience that the federal government has the authority and the tools it needs during a shutdown to get these SNAP funds to families," Parrott said. "Even at this late date, the professionals at the Department of Agriculture and in states can make this happen. And, to state the obvious, benefits that are a couple of days delayed are far more help to families than going without any help at all."
She added: "The administration itself admits these reserves are available for use. It could have, and should have, taken steps weeks ago to be ready to use these funds. Instead, it may choose not to use them in an effort to gain political advantage."
In hopes of pressuring Democrats to abandon their demands that Congress extend a critical Affordable Care Act tax credit and prevent health insurance premiums from skyrocketing for more than 20 million Americans, Republicans have sought to use the shutdown to inflict maximum pain on voters.
Trump has attempted to carry out mass layoffs of government workers, which have been halted by a federal judge. Meanwhile, his director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, has stripped funding from energy and transportation infrastructure projects aimed at blue states and cities.
"Terminating SNAP is a choice, and an overtly unlawful one at that," says David Super, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University. "The administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Blocks Trump From Requiring Proof of Citizenship on Federal Voting Form
"Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," said one plaintiff in the case.
Oct 31, 2025
A federal judge on Friday permanently blocked part of President Donald Trump's executive order requiring proof of US citizenship on federal voter registration forms, a ruling hailed by one plaintiff in the case as "a clear victory for our democracy."
Siding with Democratic and civil liberties groups that sued the administration over Trump's March edict mandating a US passport, REAL ID-compliant document, military identification, or similar proof in order to register to vote in federal elections, Senior US District Judge for the District of Columbia Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found the directive to be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.
“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the states and to Congress, this court holds that the president lacks the authority to direct such changes," Kollar-Kotelly, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in her 81-page ruling.
"The Constitution addresses two types of power over federal elections: First, the power to determine who is qualified to vote, and second, the power to regulate federal election procedures," she continued. "In both spheres, the Constitution vests authority first in the states. In matters of election procedures, the Constitution assigns Congress the power to preempt State regulations."
"By contrast," Kollar-Kotelly added, "the Constitution assigns no direct role to the president in either domain."
This is the second time Kollar-Kotelly has ruled against Trump's proof-of-citizenship order. In April, she issued a temporary injunction blocking key portions of the directive.
"The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to."
"The court upheld what we've long known: The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to," the ACLU said on social media.
Sophia Lin Lakin of the ACLU, a plaintiff in the case, welcomed the decision as “a clear victory for our democracy."
"President Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," she added.
Campaign Legal Center president Trevor Potter said in a statement: "This federal court ruling reaffirms that no president has the authority to control our election systems and processes. The Constitution gives the states and Congress—not the president—the responsibility and authority to regulate our elections."
"We are glad that this core principle of separation of powers has been upheld and celebrate this decision, which will ensure that the president cannot singlehandedly impose barriers on voter registration that would prevent millions of Americans from making their voices heard in our elections," Potter added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


