28 May 2025 | Europe and Central Asia, News and features, Newsletters, Russia
My predecessor Ruth Anderson used to joke that we weren’t working hard enough because we hadn’t been banned in Russia. Perhaps she was onto something. We’re still not banned there, as far as I know. Amnesty International though appears to have met the mark – or rather crossed a Kremlin red line. This week, Russian authorities labelled Amnesty an “undesirable organisation”, accusing it of being a “centre for the preparation of global Russophobic projects”. Any association with the group is now a criminal offence.
This is no empty label. Just ask Galina Timchenko, co-founder and CEO of the independent Russian-language news outlet Meduza. She’s now facing criminal charges for organising the activities of an “undesirable organisation” – namely, Meduza itself, which earned that designation back in January 2023 for its reporting on Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The charges stem from her publishing two videos, one in September 2024 and another in March 2025, which authorities claim were designed to “foment protest sentiment”. If convicted, she could face six years in prison.
But it’s not just human rights organisations and independent journalists in the Kremlin’s crosshairs. This week, a Russian court fined tech giant Apple 10.5 million roubles (approximately $130,900) across four administrative cases. Three related to alleged violations of the country’s anti-LGBTQ+ “propaganda” laws, which were made even more draconian in 2023. The fourth was for allegedly failing to delete content at the request of the Russian authorities.
A journalist from Mediazona, one of Russia’s last remaining independent outlets, covered the court proceedings and offered a glimpse into how such hearings operate. Here’s a telling moment: “Our reporter notes that the judge read the decision at such a rapid pace it was virtually impossible to grasp the precise details of the claims. We then approached the court’s press secretary to request that a summary of the official court record be released for clarity. The response was terse: ‘The hearing is closed.’”
In the past, Apple has received criticism for its compliance with Russian censorship demands, from removing VPNs to restricting certain apps. These are moves it has defended as the price of staying in the country. Now it’s paying a different, more literal price.
As for Index, we remain unbanned – and unbowed. We continue to report on Russia in both our magazine and online, including recently interviewing artist and musician Yaroslav Smolev, and Nadezhda Skochilenko, mother of political prisoner and Index award winner Aleksandra Skochilenko. This isn’t actually about provoking the Kremlin. It’s about doing our job: telling the truth, and shining a light on one of the most authoritarian regimes in the world.
11 Apr 2025 | Americas, Asia and Pacific, Israel, Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Pakistan, United States
In the age of online information, it can feel harder than ever to stay informed. As we get bombarded with news from all angles, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index will publish a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression from the past seven days. This week, we look at targeted families of activists in two parts of the world and how the US president is punishing those who defy him.
Activists under pressure: Human rights defenders in Balochistan face new threats
On 5 April, the father of Baloch human rights defender Sabiha Baloch was arrested by Pakistani authorities, and his whereabouts are currently unknown. This has been widely considered as an attempt to silence Sabiha Baloch, who advocates for the rights of Baloch people, in particular against the killings, enforced disappearances and arbitrary arrests that have been happening for years.
There are reports that authorities refuse to release Baloch’s father until she surrenders herself, and raids are being carried out in an attempt to arrest her. This is not the first attempt to silence her. Other family members have previously been abducted and held in detention for several months.
Two days later on 7 April, another Baloch human rights defender, Gulzadi Baloch, was arrested. It is believed that her arrest was particularly violent, and that she was beaten and dragged out onto the street. Both women are members of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee, which advocates for human rights for Baloch people. Its founder, Mahrang Baloch, was arrested on 22 March along with 17 other protesters, after they staged a sit-in to demand the release of members of their group. During the crackdown, at least three protesters were reportedly killed.
Toeing the line: Trump gets to work silencing critics
US President Donald Trump has made several attempts to silence or punish his critics this week. On 9 April, he signed an executive order placing restrictions on the law firm Susman Godfrey, including limiting attorneys from accessing government buildings and revoking security clearances. The firm represented Dominion Voting System in their defamation lawsuit against Fox, accusing the media company of lying about a plot to steal the election and claiming Dominion was involved. It ended with Dominion getting a $797.5m settlement in April 2023. This week’s move comes after Trump took similar measures to target five more law firms, connected with his political rivals.
The next day, Trump took aim at former homeland security officials, Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs, who both served in Trump’s first administration and both publicly spoke out against Trump’s election fraud narrative.
Taylor turned whistleblower in 2018, anonymously speaking out in a New York Times article and after quitting writing a book, before eventually revealing his identity. Trump has accused him of leaking classified information. Krebs, whose job it was to prevent foreign interference in elections, corrected rumours about voter fraud in the 2020 election, and was subsequently fired by Trump. Trump has ordered the Department of Justice to investigate the two men, and revoke their security clearances.
Attorney and former congresswoman Liz Cheney described the move as “Stalinesque”. As he signed the executive orders, Trump took the opportunity to repeat lies about a stolen election.
Not safe to report: Journalists killed as Israeli airstrike hits media tent
On Monday, an Israeli airstrike hit a tent in southern Gaza used by media workers, killing several journalists and injuring others. The journalists killed were Hilma al-Faqawi and Ahmed Mansour, who worked for Palestine Today, wth Mansour dying later following severe burns. Yousef al-Khozindar, who was working with NBC to provide support in Gaza, was also killed.
Reuters say they have verified one video, which shows people trying to douse the flames of the tent in the Nasser Hospital compound. The Committee to Protect Journalists and the National Union of Journalists have denounced Israel’s strike on the journalists’ tent.
The Israel Defense Forces wrote on X: “The IDF and ISA struck the Hamas terrorist Hassan Abdel Fattah Mohammed Aslih in the Khan Yunis area overnight” … “Asilh [sic], who operates under the guise of a journalist and owns a press company, is a terrorist operative in Hamas’ Khan Yunis Brigade.”
The deaths add to the growing number of journalists and media workers who have been killed in the conflict since 7 October 2023, which the International Federation of Journalists place at over 170. The journalists killed are Lebanese, Syrian, Israeli and overwhelmingly Palestinian. Journalists are protected under International Humanitarian law. This is vital not only for the safety of individuals, but so that accurate information can be broadcast locally and internationally.
Whistleblowing triumphs: Apple settles unfair labour charges
Whistleblower Ashley Gjøvik came out on top on 10 April, when Apple agreed to settle labour rights charges after she claimed their practices were illegal, including barring staff from discussing working hours, conditions and wages, and speaking to the press.
Gjøvik was a senior engineering programme manager at the tech giant, when she raised her concerns about toxic waste under her office. She was fired after engaging in activities that should be protected under labour rights laws. She was let go after supposedly violating the staff confidentiality agreement.
In a memorandum, Gjøvik highlighted that there is still plenty to be concerned about. She wrote: “The settlement’s policy revisions, while significant—do not address several categories of retaliation and coercive behavior that remain unremedied or unexamined, including: surveillance, email interception, and device monitoring in relation to protected activities; threats or internal referrals aimed at chilling protected disclosures; and retaliation based on public statements regarding working conditions.”
Circles of influence: Hong Kong family taken in for questioning
On Thursday, the Hong Kong national security police targeted the family of Frances Hui, a staff member at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong (CFHK) Foundation, and a US resident.
Hui’s parents were taken in for questioning, even though Hui cut ties with them when she left for the USA in 2020. She now fights for democracy and freedom in Hong Kong, from abroad. This week’s move comes shortly after the USA placed sanctions on six Chinese and Hong Kong officials who have enforced repressive national security policies in Hong Kong.
In December 2023, Hong Kong police put out an arrest warrant for Hui, and placed a HK$1 million bounty on her head.
The CFHK Foundation said: “By placing a bounty on her and other U.S-based Hong Kong activists, the Hong Kong authorities are encouraging people to kidnap them on U.S. soil in return for a reward.”
13 Mar 2025 | News and features, Statements
Responding to news that Apple will be before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on Friday, representatives from Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship, and Open Rights Group have written to President of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the Rt Hon Lord Justice Singh, calling for the case to be made public.
The letter states that the “case implicates the privacy rights of millions of British citizens who use Apple’s technology, as well as Apple’s international users”. The groups note the “significant public interest in knowing when and on what basis the UK government believes that it can compel a private company to undermine the privacy and security of its customers.”
According to widespread media reporting, the Home Office has served Apple with a Technical Capability Notice under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. The Technical Capability Notice would force the company to build a backdoor into their end-to-end encrypted iCloud services.
The company has previously stated it would “never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products, and we never will”. In response to the Home Office’s demands, Apple has withdrawn its end-to-end encrypted Advanced Data Protection tool from UK users.
COMMENTS
Big Brother Watch Interim Director Rebecca Vincent: “The Home Office’s shocking order to Apple to break encryption represents a huge attack on privacy rights and is unprecedented in any democracy. This Tribunal will determine whether the UK government can proceed in forcing access to all of our data – a matter of high public interest that must not take place in secret.”
Index on Censorship CEO Jemimah Steinfeld: “From the moment the Apple news broke to tomorrow’s Tribunal, everything about this story has been shrouded in secrecy. This has to end. Breaking encryption would do away with our rights to privacy, would make us far less safe and secure online and would challenge the very notion of the UK as a democracy. With such high stakes we demand to know what could possibly justify this. We need answers, not more secrecy.”
Open Rights Group Executive Director Jim Killock: “Holding this Tribunal in secret would be an affront to the global privacy and security issues that are being discussed. This is bigger than just the UK, or Apple. But most importantly, if the UK wants to claim the right to make all of Apple’s users more likely to be hacked and blackmailed, then they should argue for that in an open court.”
The full letter can be found linked here.
