SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
human rights
At Least 146 Killed or Disappeared for 'Defending Life Itself' Last Year
"It is critical that governments and companies turn the tide to uphold defenders’ rights and protect them rather than persecute them," said the lead author of the new Global Witness report.
Sep 17, 2025
At least 142 people were killed and four were confirmed missing last year for "bravely speaking out or taking action to defend their rights to land and a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment," according to an annual Global Witness report published Wednesday.
"Year after year, land and environmental defenders—those protecting our forests, rivers, and lands across the world—continue to be met with unspeakable violence," said Laura Furones, the report's lead author, in a statement. "They are being hunted, harassed, and killed—not for breaking laws, but for defending life itself."
"Standing up to injustice should never be a death sentence," Furones declared. "It is critical that governments and companies turn the tide to uphold defenders' rights and protect them rather than persecute them. We desperately need defenders to keep our planet safe. If we turn our backs on them, we forfeit our future."
The report, Roots of Resistance, begins by listing the activists who were murdered or disappeared for six months or more in 2024. It also says: "We acknowledge that the names of many defenders who were killed or disappeared last year may be missing, and we may never know how many more gave their lives to protect our planet. We honor their work too."
The most dangerous country for environmental defenders, by far, was Colombia, with 48 deaths. Jani Silva, a defender there living under state protection, said that "as this report shows, the vast majority of defenders under attack are not defenders by choice—including myself. We are defenders because our homes, land, communities, and lives are under threat. So much more must be done to ensure communities have rights and that those who stand up for them are protected."
Colombia was followed by Guatemala (20), Mexico (18), Brazil (12), the Philippines (7), Honduras (5), Indonesia (5), Nicaragua (4), Peru (4), the Democratic Republic of Congo (4), Ecuador (3), and Liberia (3). There was one confirmed killing each in Russia, India, Venezuela, Argentina, Madagascar, Turkey, Cameroon, Cambodia, and the Dominican Republic. The four disappearances were in Chile, Honduras, Mexico, and the Philippines.
"This brings the total figure to 2,253 since we started reporting on attacks in 2012. This appalling statistic illustrates the persistent nature of violence against defenders," the report states. It stresses that while the new figure is lower than the 196 cases in 2023, "this does not indicate that the situation for defenders is improving."
The report notes that "120 (82%) of all the cases we documented in 2024 took place in Latin America," while 16 killings occurred in Asia and nine were in Africa. It emphasizes that "underreporting remains an issue globally, particularly across Asia and Africa. Obstacles to verify suspected violations also present a problem, particularly documenting cases in active conflict zones."
A third of all land and environmental defenders killed or disappeared last year were Indigenous. The deadliest industry was mining and extractives, at 29, followed by logging (8), agribusiness (4), roads and infrastructure (2), hydropower (1), and poaching.
In addition to detailing who was killed or disappeared, what they fought for, and how "the current system is failing defenders," the report offers recommendations for "how states and businesses can better protect defenders."
Currently, said Global Witness project lead Rachel Cox, "states across the world are weaponizing their legal systems to silence those speaking out in defense of our planet."
"Amid rampant resource use, escalating environmental pressure, and a rapidly closing window to limit warming to 1.5°C, they are treating land and environmental defenders like they are a major inconvenience instead of canaries in a coal mine about to explode," she continued.
"Meanwhile, governments are failing to hold those responsible for defender attacks to account—spurring the cycle of killings with little consequence," she added. "World leaders must acknowledge the role they must play in ending this once and for all."
The recommendation section specifically points to the upcoming United Nations climate summit, COP30, in Belém, Brazil, "a city amid one of the world's most biodiverse regions—and one of the most dangerous countries to be a land and the environment defender."
"The protection and meaningful participation of land and environmental defenders at COP30 and beyond is an essential element of the fight against climate change," the document says. "It must become a core principle of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity process."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ben & Jerry's Co-Founder Steps Down in Protest of Corporate Owner's Attempts to 'Silence' Duo's Gaza Activism
"Ben & Jerry's has been silenced, sidelined for fear of upsetting those in power," said co-founder Jerry Greenfield.
Sep 17, 2025
Jerry Greenfield, the lifelong political activist and co-founder of the ice cream brand Ben & Jerry's, is quitting the company in protest against what he says are efforts by parent company Unilever to "silence" his advocacy for progressive causes, particularly for Palestinians amid Israel's genocidal war in Gaza.
"I can no longer, in good conscience, and after 47 years, remain an employee of Ben & Jerry's," Greenfield said in a statement posted Tuesday by his longtime partner Ben Cohen. "This is one of the hardest and most painful decisions I've ever made."
The Vermont-based ice cream company was acquired by Unilever, a British conglomerate, in 2000, at which time Greenfield says the company "guaranteed" him and his partner the "independence to pursue our values." Though the pair no longer had a financial stake in the company, which they founded in 1978, they remained on as board members and brand ambassadors.
"For more than twenty years under their ownership, Ben & Jerry's stood up and spoke out in support of peace, justice, and human rights, not as abstract concepts, but in relation to real events happening in our world," Greenfield said. "That independence existed in no small part because of the unique merger agreement Ben and I negotiated with Unilever, one that enshrined our social mission and values in the company's governance structure in perpetuity."
The relationship between Ben & Jerry's and its parent company began to fracture as Cohen and Greenfield became increasingly outspoken advocates against Israel's human rights abuses in Palestine.
In 2021, the duo announced that it would stop selling its ice cream in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in protest of Israel's occupation of those territories, which is widely recognized as illegal under international law. Several US states with laws punishing boycotts of Israel began to pull their investments in Unilever, which rushed to reaffirm that it was “firmly committed” to Israel.
In order to bypass the pair's boycott, Unilever sold the Israeli portion of Ben & Jerry's to a distributor in the country, which promptly resumed distribution in the Occupied Territories. The duo launched a lawsuit against their parent company in hopes of stopping the deal.
The rift would intensify further after October 7, 2023, when, following Hamas' attack against Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government responded with a crushing military onslaught against the Gaza Strip that has now resulted in at least 220,000 casualties according to one former Israeli general.
Ben & Jerry's would file another lawsuit in 2024 alleging that Unilever, on several occasions, used threats and intimidation to stop them from speaking out on the conflict, which they referred to as a "genocide."
They said Unilever threatened to dismantle the company's board if it issued statements calling for "peace" and a "ceasefire," imposed restrictions on their statements in support of pro-Palestine student demonstrators, and stopped them from donating company funds to human rights organizations. Ben & Jerry's would later claim that Unilever fired its CEO, David Stever in March 2025 in retaliation for the brand's activism.
This past May, Cohen was arrested, along with six others, for disrupting a US Senate hearing in protest of Washington's continued sale of weapons to Israel, which at that point had begun outlining plans to fully remove Palestinians from Gaza with support from President Donald Trump.
Unilever distanced itself from Cohen's actions, saying they were "on his own as an individual and not on behalf of Ben & Jerry's or Unilever."
Greenfield's departure comes as Unilever plans to fold Ben & Jerry's into a new entity known as the Magnum Ice Cream Company, which is set to be listed on the stock market in November. In response to the merger, Ben & Jerry's called for its brand to be "freed" from the conglomerate.
"They're ripping the heart out of Ben & Jerry's," Cohen said last week while brandishing a picket sign. "All we're asking is for them to sell the company to a group of people who support the values of Ben & Jerry's."
Magnum rejected this request, saying, "Ben & Jerry’s is a proud part of the Magnum Ice Cream Company and is not for sale."
"It's profoundly disappointing to come to the conclusion that that independence, the very basis of our sale to Unilever, is gone," Greenfield said in his resignation note. "And it's happening at a time when our country's current administration is attacking civil rights, voting rights, the rights of immigrants, women, and the LGBTQ community."
"Standing up for the values of justice, equity, and our shared humanity has never been more important," he continued, "and yet Ben & Jerry's has been silenced, sidelined for fear of upsetting those in power. It's easy to stand up and speak out when there's nothing at risk."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Without Free Speech, Democracy Dies
To avoid past failures, we must remember freedom of expression is for everyone, including those who we disagree with.
Sep 16, 2025
Democracy is hanging precariously in a world tilted upside down in the face of today’s endless crises. Our rights and freedoms are dwindling. Free speech, an essential precursor to all human rights, is faltering.
Less than 4% of the world’s citizens enjoy a wide range of civic freedoms, and nearly three-quarters live in countries with little. With 1,100 violations and 45% of all violations, freedom of expression topped the CIVICUS Monitor list of global attacks on rights.
States that once set an example as bastions of free speech are also faltering.
United States ‘Leads’ Western Democracies’ Backslide
United States first amendment to the Constitution once stood out as a north star for freedom of expression. Creative freedom, critical journalism, dissent, and mockery of leaders were all a go.
When attacks against journalists and activists took place around the world, the US and Western democracies stood up. They helped protect journalists, activists, and groups persecuted by strongmen leaders.
But today, that legacy is fading. Freedom of expression and free press are struggling in the West. Political commitment to defend free speech both at home and abroad is waning.
The current administration has hurt free expression and journalism more than any modern American government.
Leaders and influencers from the left and right distorted public narratives to win elections or push through their agenda. Big tech, media, and corporations too have played similar games to build traction and profit.
Leading up to last election, US President Donald Trump and allies cried foul at the left’s attacks at free speech. Democrats’ use of the Espionage Act on whistleblowers and influencing of tech and media to promote narrative compliance and political correctness were called out, albeit exaggerated.
Despite that rhetoric, the current administration has hurt free expression and journalism more than any modern American government.
The president himself has sued major media outlets that criticized him. Two outlets, ABC and CBS, settled, putting profits ahead of defending truth and integrity. Days after comedian Stephen Colbert called the settlement “a big fat bribe,” CBS announced cancellation of the "Late Show," the most popular nightly show in the US.
The list of recent attacks is worryingly long. The Federal Communications Commission threatened broadcast licenses. The White House banned journalists and cut funds to public service broadcasters. A bill to protect journalists from state surveillance stalled, and the executive blacklisted law firms defending critics.
While the US’ butchering of free speech stands out, it’s not alone. The United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, Spain, and other Western democracies are seeing free expression dwindling, though at a slower pace.
The hits come diguised as national security, surveillance, anti-extremism and hate speech, anti-defamation, and protest restrictions. These are the same excuses used in countries with fewer civic freedoms. It is the playbook of extreme authoritarian states China, Iran, Afghanistan, and Russia.
Global Failure to Protect Free Speech
The world is failing miserably at protecting free speech. From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe journalists have faced bloody clampdowns or arrests in attempts to expose the truth. Two hundred journalists have been reportedly killed in Gaza. That the international community took no action shows its gross incompetence or a complete lack of will.
Many governments around the world use censorship to silence truth, block criticism, and deny access to information. Public information and narratives are also perverted by political, business, military, or other interests.
Where there is a lack of transparency of ownership and capture, vested influence stalls open and democratic public conversation. This is particularly the case where civic and democratic freedoms are limited.
Authoritarian regimes like China and Russia continue to use technology, social media, and artificial intelligence to destabilize global democracies. As we speak, the Kremlin is flooding social media with false information and using artificial intelligence tools to influence Moldova’s elections. China has used similar tactics to create anti-democratic narratives in Taiwan.
Effective counter measures seem non-existent on a global scale today. When and where they existed, countering disinformation and fact-checking efforts often were flawed or exclusive. Even the sincere efforts have been seen as partisan by masses owing to more visible and large-scale efforts excluding voices that didn’t fit convenient political and profit motivations.
Only Citizen Demand Can Save Free Speech
Given failures to defend free speech and acceleration attacks, a silver lining seems illusive. While governments, global organizations, and civil society have proposed plenty of solutions, they often end up as mere rhetoric or at best half-baked projects.
Promoting constitutional freedoms, free speech laws, media transparency, journalistic independence, platform accountability, and such only ever get discussed in technocratic forums. In action, they reach only select groups of society, without ever being inclusive.
Bold action is needed but by movements of citizens. We must start by exercising our free speech to demand the same rights and protections be afforded to all. People’s power standing up and demanding change may just tilt the needle beyond rhetoric. Citizens can force significant action by governments, media houses, or tech platforms.
To avoid past failures, we must remember freedom of expression is for everyone, including those who we disagree with. Pope Leo XIV’s wisdom comes handy here, “We have to know how to listen—not to judge, not to shut doors as if we hold all the truth and no one else has anything to offer.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular