9 Sep 2025 | Africa, News and features, Newsletters, Tanzania
Social media activist Edgar Mwakabela, better known as Sativa, shouldn’t be alive today. In an interview with the BBC this week he spoke about how he was abducted last June in Tanzania’s main city Dar es Salaam and later taken to a remote area. His captors interrogated him about his activism and his criticism of the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party. He was tortured and shot in the head. The bullet went through his skull and shattered his jaw. He was meant to die. Somehow he didn’t. That he still has a voice is the only positive part of this grim story.
It’s made all the grimmer by the fact that it stands out because of Sativa’s survival. It’s unlike the story of Ali Mohamed Kibao, whose body was found beaten and doused with acid last September. It’s unlike Modestus Timbisimilwa, who was shot dead by police last November as he tried to stop interference at polling stations. It’s unlike George Juma Mohamed and Steven Chalamila, both killed in their own homes the night before. All were part of the opposition.
Tanzania goes to the polls next month but as these examples show it’s insulting to suggest the elections will be remotely free or fair.
The CCM have been in power for decades, ever since colonial rule ended in Tanzania in the 1960s. They are currently led by Samia Suluhu Hassan, who proceeded the increasingly autocratic John Magufuli, a regular on the pages of Index (see here, here and here). When Hassan first took office as Tanzania’s president, there was cautious optimism that the rights landscape would improve – and it did for a bit. Gains were made in the realms of media freedom and protest rights. A ban on opposition gatherings was lifted. The tide has however turned.
The main opposition party, Chadema, has been barred from participating in the election. Chadema’s leader, Tundu Lissu, is currently in jail charged with treason, after he called for electoral reforms.
In addition to those who’ve been killed or jailed are the many disappeared. Posters of the missing have become a pre-election fixture. One high-profile case is that of artist Shadrack Chaula, who last July was imprisoned for an online video in which he allegedly “insulted” Hassan. He paid a hefty fine in exchange for his freedom only to disappear a month later. Another is Deusdedith Soka, a 30-year-old Chadema youth leader who disappeared last August after calling for a demonstration precisely against disappearances.
Hassan has condemned many of these brutal acts, denied any involvement and called for investigations. But they’re still happening under her watch in a country she leads. Last year Lissu said that Hassan “has done with a smile what Magufuli did with a snarl.” Compared to the execrable Magufuli, who was nicknamed the “bulldozer”, we’ve paid little attention to her. It’s clear that needs to change.
5 Sep 2025 | Americas, Asia and Pacific, Canada, Europe and Central Asia, Georgia, Nepal, News and features
Bombarded with news from all angles every day, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at the Alberta school library book ban, and the sentencing of twenty protesters in Georgia.
Alberta pauses controversial book ban amid backlash
The government of Alberta has paused a proposed book ban, which aimed to take out books from school libraries which contained what the authorities called “explicit sexual content”
Books such as Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World were included in a list of more than 200 that would be removed under the new measures.
There was a public outcry and Atwood released a short story on social media, stating: “Here’s a piece of literature by me, suitable for 17-year-olds in Alberta schools, unlike — we are told — The Handmaid’s Tale.”
Now, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says she has pressed pause in order to review the policy and “preserve access to classic literature.”
The Christian parents group Action4Canada had previously hailed the book ban as a “great victory” following a meeting with the state’s education minister.
Byline Times Journalists denied access to Conservative Party annual conference.
The UK Conservative Party has banned Byline Times from attending its annual conference, refusing to give an explanation as to why.
It has been normal practice for political parties to allow journalists from established outlets to cover their annual gatherings which take place in the autumn. However in recent years that convention has been eroded.
The Labour Party was criticised in 2024 by Reporters without Borders for refusing to accredit critical journalist John McEvoy from Declassified.
And in 2023 the Conservative party faced an accusation of discrimination, when some journalists were forced to pay for entry whilst others were not. In the same year 2023 the Scottish Tory Party tried to restrict a q&a session with then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to only six carefully chosen outlets.
Nigel Farage’s Reform Party last year also banned Byline Times from attending their conference as well as Carole Cadwalladr from the Observer.
Anti-Government protestors sentenced in Georgia amid torture allegations
Georgian courts have sentenced 20 protesters including actor Andro Chichinadze and activist Saba Skhvitardze to prison in connection with anti-government rallies.
Skhvitaridze, who was arrested on 5 December, alleges that he faced torture whilst in prison, a claim that according to Amnesty has not been properly investigated. He was jailed for two years after being found guilty of causing “intentional bodily harm” to a police officer during a protest.
Chichinadze, who was also sentenced to two years following charges of disruption of public order said: “I want to address the prosecutors and you from my side, I forgive what you have been doing to me for so long.”
Georgia has faced widespread demonstrations following the 2024 parliamentary elections, which saw the ruling Georgian Dream party secure victory. Claims of electoral fraud triggered the protests as well as the arrest of opposition leader Zurab Japaridze who has not only now been jailed for seven months but barred from holding public office for two years.
Social media platforms banned in Nepal
Nepal’s Ministry of Communications has issued a ban on all social media platforms that failed to register with the government following a 25 August directive.
The ban comes following a Supreme Court ruling from 17 August that required the registration of online platforms in order to “monitor disinformation”.
Multiple large platforms, including Facebook, YouTube and Reddit failed to register before the deadline. Japanese social media Viber and Chinese owned TikTok remain accessible.
The Committee to Protect Journalists has warned that the ban severely undermines press freedom and the public access to information, urging the government to reverse its decision.
CPJ Regional Director Beh Lih Yi said: “Blocking online news platforms vital to journalists will undermine reporting and the public’s right to information. The government must immediately rescind this order and restore access to social media platforms, which are essential tools for exercising press freedom.”
5 Sep 2025 | Israel, News and features, Opinion, Palestine, United Kingdom
We run this piece the week five spokespeople, who were due to give a press conference about protests against a ban on Palestine Action, were arrested by the Metropolitan Police on suspicion of encouraging support for a proscribed organisation
The right to protest is under unprecedented attack in the UK. I should know. l’ve been campaigning for 58 years and participated in more than 3,000 protests, witnessing first-hand the way protesters’ rights have been progressively eroded.
The recent restrictions are merely an escalation of repressive legislation that has long existed and has often been used to stifle peaceful protest.
In the 1990s, under the ancient “breach of the peace” statutes I was arrested simply for holding placards urging LGBT+ equality. The police said that such a “controversial” demand could cause a violent reaction by members of the public, so I had to be arrested to prevent the possibility of violence. In other words, I was held liable for the potential criminal behaviour of others.
The public order laws against behaviour likely to cause “harassment, alarm and distress” were introduced in 1986, supposedly to combat football hooliganism and violent street disorder. But they have since been used overwhelmingly to suppress peaceful protesters. I was arrested under this law in 1994 for publicly condemning the sexism, homophobia and antisemitism of the Islamist extremist group Hizb-u-Tahrir. The group called for the execution of LGBT people as well as women who have sex outside of marriage. No police action was taken against Hizb-u-Tahrir[1]. But when I cited and criticised what they said, I was arrested for behaviour likely to cause “harassment, alarm or distress.”
In recent years, the criminalisation of peaceful protesters has been further expanded to include mere disruption and nuisance. Disruption? Isn’t that one of the objectives of a protest? To disrupt business as usual. Nuisance? Most people would associate nuisance with a noisy dog or a late train. But a peaceful protest?
The new legislation has given the police a green light to crackdown even more harshly, as my two recent brushes with the law illustrate.
I was arrested at the Palestine solidarity protest in London, on 17 May 2025. The police claimed I had committed a ”racially and religiously aggravated breach of the peace” by marching with my placard: “STOP Israel genocide! STOP Hamas executions! Odai Al-Rubai, aged 22, executed by Hamas! RIP!”
The police claim is nonsense. My placard made no mention of anyone’s race or religion. Detained by the police for nearly six hours, I was finger-printed, DNA-sampled, photographed and denied the right to speak to a solicitor. The police have since admitted I was arrested in “error” but only after adverse publicity and my production of video evidence of the police’s behaviour. It was the 103rd time I have been detained or arrested by the police during my nearly six decades of campaigning – in all cases for peaceful protests.
A week later I was forcibly and unlawfully ejected by police from the Birmingham Pride parade. My crime? The police objected to me holding a placard that read: “West Midlands police refuse to apologise for anti-LGBT+ witch-hunts. SHAME! #ApologiseNow”
When I challenged the police’s bid to remove me from the parade, officers said the Pride organisers told them I was not authorised to be on the march and they had requested the police to remove me. That was a fabrication. I was wearing a march wristband. The Pride CEO approved me to march in the parade and has since confirmed that he never gave the police any instructions to remove me. It looks like police ejected me in revenge for my exposure of their refusal to say “sorry”.
What’s happened to me is small fry compared to government and police sledgehammer tactics against the climate campaigners like Just Stop Oil: sentences of three to five years jail for merely discussing motorway protests. Over two years in prison for climbing on the Dartford Crossing.
The crackdown on protest has culminated in the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. This draconian measure is what we expect in Putin’s Russia, not in Britain.
And it only gets worse. Over 500 people were arrested outside parliament on 9 August 2025 for holding placards “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” They were expressing their opposition to the designation of the organisation as a terrorist group and supporting its efforts to stop what they regard as Israel’s genocide. What kind of country have we become when freedom of expression is a crime?
Breaking the law to non-violently challenge injustice has an honourable tradition, as espoused by Martin Luther King and the US black civil rights movement in the 1960s.
It can be ethically justified in three circumstances: when governments ignore the wishes of the majority, break their election promises or violate human rights. If these principles clash, the protection of human rights should always trump majority opinion and election promises. No government has the right to oppress people or deny freedoms and, if it does, people have a right to resist with non-violent civil disobedience.
And that is what I have done on many occasions. Until the 1990s, there had been a long-standing ban on protests within a mile of parliament, under ancient “sessional orders.” Myself and members of the LGBT+ group OutRage! were determined to challenge this unjustified restriction on the right to protest. We were repeatedly arrested in the 1990s for “unlawfully” standing opposite the House of Commons with placards demanding the repeal of anti-LGBT+ laws. Our ethical law breaking, to assert the right to protest outside parliament, which had imposed these laws, eventually changed the way the law was interpreted and enforced, thereby allowing protests where they were once banned.
Critics say that breaking the law is never justified in a democracy because elections give people the option of changing the government. But Britain is not a fully formed democracy with a fair voting system. No political party has won a majority of the popular vote since 1931.
We’ve had decades of unrepresentative parliaments, and governments ruling with minority public support. Labour won only 34% of the vote in the 2024 general election but bagged 63% of the seats and 100% of the power. That is not democracy. Keir Starmer has no majority mandate for his crackdown on the right to protest.
* For more information about Peter Tatchell’s human rights work: www.PeterTatchellFoundation.org
[Editor’s note: After taking legal advice, Index removed a section of this article pertaining to Palestine Action, because of draconian terror legislation and the lack of a defence of free speech.]
[1] Hizb-u-Tahrir were proscribed in 2024 as a terrorist group
4 Sep 2025 | Africa, Mali, News and features
The acclaimed Malian professor and author Étienne Fakaba Sissoko, who was released from prison in March this year, has fled Mali with his wife and young children following abduction threats. He was one of the few voices left criticising the military government.
Sissoko spent a year in jail in the country’s Kéniéroba Central Prison for “harming the reputation of the state” and “dissemination of false news disturbing the public peace” as a result of the publication of his 2023 book, Propagande, Agitation, Harcèlement: La communication gouvernementale pendant la transition au Mali (Propaganda, Agitation, Harassment: Government Communication During Mali’s Transition).
Speaking to Index, Sissoko said after announcing that he was going to publish three books written while in prison – an essay on the resurgence of authoritarian regimes in West Africa, an economic analysis applied to Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, as well as a biography of persecuted public figure Djimé Kanté – attempts to silence him intensified.
Sissoko said there were two attempted abductions at his workplace, the University of Social Sciences and Management of Bamako (USSGB), one of the institutions created after the breakup of the former University of Bamako. He also faced constant surveillance by plainclothes agents and threatening visits to his home, anonymous calls, and social media messages such as ‘We know where you live’”.
The military regime running Mali has long shown its intolerance to Sissoko’s books, many of which have made uncomfortable reading for the junta.
He has written that the security situation in the country has worsened despite “help” from Russian mercenary group Wagner which the author says has committed human rights violations.
In 2020, violence was concentrated in the centre and north of the country, he said, but it now affects every region, including the capital, Bamako.
“Wagner has not brought lasting improvements to security,” he told Index. “It has been involved in serious human rights violations. Its presence serves to consolidate authoritarian power rather than protect civilians. Public opinion is divided: some view Wagner as a symbol of sovereignty, others as a foreign force with no popular legitimacy.”
Sissoko said relations with Russia now extend beyond the military sphere to media relations and diplomacy. Pro-Russian outlets and disinformation campaigns are promoted and Mali is aligned with Moscow positions at the UN.
These relations are being expanded in the higher education sector: 290 scholarships were granted for 2024–2025 to Malian students at Saint Petersburg University, and Bambara, Mali’s national language, is now being taught in some Russian institutions.
“In practice, Mali has become more dependent on Russia than it ever was on its Western partners,” he added.
“The break with France and several Western countries has had three main consequences: including the withdrawal of aid and the collapse of foreign investment and market isolation.
Mali once enjoyed a genuine democratic culture where freedom of expression was a core value, says Sissoko. The 2000s and 2010s saw the emergence of a pluralistic media landscape: the creation of new radio and television stations, the rise of social media, and vibrant citizen mobilisation.
Since the military coups of 2020 and 2021, this progress has been reversed.
Mali is ruled by military leader General Assimi Goïta who overthrew the government of then president Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta in August 2020 following anti-government protests.
The cross-border Economic Community of West African States forced Goïta to hand over power to an interim government that was supposed to organise elections but the general staged another coup in May 2021.
Sissoko says repression has become systematic: arbitrary arrests of opponents and journalists, closure of media outlets that include RFI, France 24, TV5, Joliba TV) and dissolution of some movements such as student organisations.
“Today, Mali’s media environment falls into three categories: pro-regime outlets, financed or directly controlled by the military authorities; cautious media, practising systematic self-censorship to avoid reprisals; and independent voices, rare and often forced into exile or marginalised,” said Sissoko.
Opinions contrary to those of the government have also been criminalised by the country’s cybercrime unit, he added. Sissoko said as a result of heightened repression, Malians engage in digital self-censorship and modify their communication even in private as fear has become a method of governance.
Sissoko said in Mali researchers face severe political risks for any research deemed critical. He said there is an absence of independent, forward-looking research to inform public policy; lack of dialogue between academia and political decision-makers; chronic underfunding and lack of infrastructure for independent research.
He founded the Centre for Research and Political, Economic and Social Analysis (CRAPES) in Bamako to aim to fill that gap.
“Before 2020, university lecturers could address almost any topic freely. My own arrest in 2022 — the first time in Mali’s history an academic was imprisoned for research work — marked a turning point,” he told Index.
Since then: academics decline invitations to speak publicly on political topics, even in their own areas of expertise. Scholarly work linking political developments with current events has become rare; self-censorship is widespread,” he added.
“Students, too, avoid taking political positions in class. Fear has replaced critical thinking, eroding the university’s mission.”
The professor argued that these alternatives cannot replace the diversity and quality of former partnerships with western countries.
Sissoko’s coverage of the worsening state of freedom of expression in his books, Libertés en exil, pouvoir en treillis: Chronicle of an Authoritarian Drift in Mali (2020–2025) and De la transition à la régression: The Dissolution of Political Parties in Mali as a Symptom of Legal Authoritarianism has made him a target for the government.
He feels he was left with no choice but to leave the country with his family.
Sissoko told Index, “These systematic and organised threats aimed to prevent me from speaking out again. My family had to be evacuated for their safety. Even in exile, I remain under a suspended sentence, which illustrates the regime’s determination to maintain permanent judicial pressure.”
