The week in free expression: 10–16 May 2025

16 May 2025 | Afghanistan, Africa, Asia and Pacific, Azerbaijan, Europe and Central Asia, Mali, Middle East and North Africa, New Zealand, News and features, Palestine, United Kingdom

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 publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at the potential suspension of three Māori MPs, and the dissolution of political parties in Mali.

Cultural suspension: Māori MPs face suspension for performing the Haka in parliament

In November 2024, an act of protest in New Zealand’s parliament went viral on social media when opposition MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke initiated a traditional Haka dance during session to demonstrate against a controversial bill concerning Māori people’s rights. Opposition party members joined in the ceremonial group dance, leading to a striking scene in which a copy of the bill was ripped in two.

The bill aimed to drastically change the way that the Treaty of Waitangi, a founding document of New Zealand that has been crucial in upholding Māori rights, was interpreted. Critics and Māori rights activists claimed that this bill undermined New Zealand’s founding document – and following a nine-day hīkoi (peaceful protest) last year, the bill was voted down in April. But the MPs that spoke out against the bill in parliament haven’t escaped unscathed.

Three members of opposition party Te Pāti Māori (The Māori Party) are expected to be suspended for performing the Haka, in what has been described as the harshest punishment ever proposed on MPs in the country. A parliamentary committee recommended the suspensions, arguing that the Haka could have “intimidated” fellow MPs, while a Te Pāti Māori spokesperson described the punishment as a “warning shot to all of us to fall in line”. Maipi-Clarke is due to be suspended for a week, while the party’s co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer will be banned for 21 days.

The party’s over: Political parties in Mali dissolved in latest crackdown on democracy 

Since a military junta took control of Mali in 2021 via a coup led by Colonel Assimi Goita, democracy has all but disappeared in the Sahel nation. Goita promised to hold elections in the year following his ascendancy to head of state, but has backed out of this commitment, instead holding onto power and recently gained backing to be declared president until at least 2030 – a move denounced by opposition parties. 

But now, these parties won’t be able to denounce any further decisions made by the junta, as Goita has announced that all political parties were dissolved as of 13 May. Members of these parties have been banned from organising or holding any meetings.

This move is the latest escalation from a nation becoming increasingly repressive. Opposition leader Mamadou Traoré was arrested and imprisoned in April, and two further opposition leaders went missing last week and are feared forcibly disappeared. Protests took place in the capital Bamako last week, marking the first major pro-democracy demonstration since the military originally took control of Mali in 2020. These protests have not been tolerated, with the junta attempting to ban future demonstrations “for reasons of public order”. 

 A crackdown on journalists: Azerbaijan detains two independent journalists

Ilham Aliyev has been president of Azerbaijan since 2003, and his tenure has been marred by repeated attacks on the media. The nation ranks 167 out of 180 nations in Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index, and in recent years has ramped up its efforts to smother independent reporting and detain journalists on trumped up charges. In the latest continuation of these efforts, two of the country’s few remaining independent journalists – Ulviyya Ali and Ahmad Mammadli – were detained on 6 and 7 May.

Ali was seemingly expecting her imminent detention. Having seen many of her contemporaries detained for their work, she preemptively wrote a letter to be published online in the case of her arrest. According to reporting by Le Monde, upon her arrest, Ali was allegedly beaten and threatened with rape by a police officer. Some have posited that Ali, who frequently worked for Voice of America, became more vulnerable following the forced closure of the US-funded media outlet’s operations by the Donald Trump administration. 

Mammadli, who documented labour rights violations and political repression online, was arrested over an alleged stabbing – a charge his colleagues claim is politically motivated – and according to his wife, was beaten and tortured with electroshocks by police after refusing to unlock his phone. These two arrests bring the total number of journalists jailed in Azerbaijan to 25 since late 2023.

Social media shutdown: The Taliban targets content creators

The Taliban is implementing a large-scale crackdown on social media influencers in the country, particularly on platforms such as TikTok.

Two teenage influencers have been detained by the Taliban’s Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice for taking part in TikTok live broadcasts with women content creators from abroad, a practice denounced by the Taliban for being “un-Islamic”. Ministry spokesperson Saif Khyber has issued a warning that the ministry is surveilling public profiles for activity it deems to be immoral, and released two videos in which the TikTokers expressed regret and remorse for their content. Some have speculated that these videos may have been recorded under duress.

One of the TikTokers, Haroon Pakora, had been vocal about living in poverty before he gained fame on TikTok through street interviews in Kabul, but it is unlikely that he will continue posting on the platform.

A documentary withheld: BBC under fire for delaying release of Gaza documentary

Over 600 film industry professionals and members, including notable figures such as Miriam Margolyes, Susan Sarandon and Frankie Boyle, have accused the BBC of censoring Palestinian voices and have signed an open letter urging the organisation to release a Gaza documentary that has been withheld from broadcast.

Gaza: Medics Under Fire includes accounts from frontline health workers in Gaza and documents attacks on hospitals and medical clinics. According to the signatories, it has been ready to air for months, having undergone extensive fact checks and reviews. The BBC has claimed that the delay to Medics Under Fire has been extended due to its investigation into another documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone, which began after the narrator was revealed to be the son of a Hamas agriculture minister. The documentary was initially broadcast, then swiftly withdrawn.

The hold-up of the Medics Under Fire documentary, which was originally due to be broadcast in January, has drawn ire towards the BBC, with the open letter stating that “this is not editorial caution. It’s political suppression”, and suggesting the delay is “rooted in racism”. Some of the signatories were BBC employees, and a BBC spokesperson has stated that the film will be released “as soon as possible”. As of yet, there is no timeline for broadcast.

Modi’s India: The age of intolerance in the world’s biggest democracy

14 Apr 2023 | India, News and features, Volume 52.01 Spring 2023, Volume 52.01 Spring 2023 Extras

Recent estimates suggest that India has now overtaken China in population size, but where the world’s most populated country should be a beacon of democracy, the opposite may be true.

Under Narendra Modi, the press is being strangled; the judiciary is no longer independent; and protesters are thrown in jail. You can read more about this in our forthcoming Spring 2023 issue, where our Special Report focuses on the state of free expression in Modi’s India.

In the meantime, here is a quiz to get a flavour of what to expect.

[streamquiz id=”9″]

Repeat after me: the BBC is a public sector broadcaster

17 Mar 2023 | Opinion, Ruth's blog, United Kingdom

BBC Broadcasting House. Photo: James Cridland

There are some new stories that expose people’s lack of understanding of what media freedom is in a democratic society and in the midst of an apparent scandal words can get heated and people can speak out of turn without realising that they are ignorant of what they speak. We’ve all done it but in the last ten days the words of more than one British politician or commentator have made me want to throw things at the TV.

Since last week the United Kingdom has been embroiled in a row about whether or not a sports presenter – namely one Gary Lineker – had the right to challenge the actions of his government on a social media platform when not at work. The issue was actually not his words (not really), but the responsibility he had to his employer – the UK’s public sector broadcaster, the BBC.

When last Friday evening BBC management opted to remove Lineker from air over the weekend, I think it’s fair to suggest that they were ill prepared for the response from the rest of their on-air talent and many of their sports journalists and support staff who, in solidarity with Lineker, refused to work. Shows were cancelled, football commentary was unavailable and many of the most influential footballers in the UK refused to give post-match interviews to the BBC. In other words Lineker received complete support from his colleagues and the BBC reinstated him.

While this was a freedom of expression issue – once Lineker had been removed from air for sharing his views – it isn’t that element of the issue that is the focus of my blog. Although, for the record, I think that employees of the BBC who aren’t involved in news production or editorial decisions should probably be able to outline their personal views, on their personal social media pages, when not at work without it becoming a national drama.

However, it was the political pontifications that followed the internal BBC drama that I wish to write about. British parliament had a discussion on the impartiality of the BBC following on from the drama. Language is important and definitions even more so when you’re talking about issues of such importance.  And both in the House of Commons and in certain media outlets the BBC suddenly was no longer a public sector broadcaster – it had become a state broadcaster.

These are two very different beasts and it’s vital that we don’t seek to conflate the two. A state broadcaster operates at the direction of the state – they promote the interests of their government and are not considered by anyone to be impartial. State broadcasters include Iran’s Press TV, Russia’s RT and China’s CGTV. This is not a model that the UK would want to or should ever seek to emulate.

The BBC is an impartial public sector broadcaster, funded by a form of hypothecated tax. The government gets to appoint the governance structure and every decade negotiate the Royal Charter – which determines the broadcasting rights of the BBC – but they have no editorial control. No programming control. No employment responsibilities. And long may that be.

We are incredibly lucky to have an impartial public sector broadcaster that can speak truth to power and they should be able to act without fear or favour within the UK. Politicians and commentators who wish to engage in discussions about the future of the BBC and any perceived impropriety or political bias should as a basic requirement be able to articulate the difference between a public sector broadcaster and a state broadcaster.

The value of public service journalism

21 Oct 2022 | China, Opinion, Russia, Ruth's blog, United Kingdom

BBC Broadcasting House. Photo: Peter Hastings, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

This week I had planned to write about the importance of public service broadcasting. To focus on and celebrate 100 years of the world’s oldest national broadcaster, the BBC. I wanted to talk about my favourite programmes and highlight their successes and importantly their failures – because we should always have an honest appraisal of even those entities which we rely upon. But there is a bigger issue at play – in a world of disinformation and misinformation, where conspiracy feels like it’s becoming the norm we have never needed independent and publicly funded news outlets more.

Call me biased but the BBC is the best in the world and needs to be cherished and protected. Its journalists have been on the frontline of every new story for a century. They have documented every joy and every horror, without fear or favour. Because of them we have historical evidence of war crimes, of the Holocaust, of protests, of the rise and fall of governments in every corner of the world and of course the moments of global jubilation and joy.

I, for one, will always defend the institution of the BBC – it’s central to my daily life and I trust their output. I make no apologies for loving the BBC – but it’s not just the institution – it’s the promise of independent journalism, of being able to hold the powerful to account and of documenting events for posterity.

This week we have seen the value of public service journalism. In Manchester the BBC documented a democracy protester being dragged into the Chinese consulate by CCP officials. He was beaten. His story is now known and the subject of a diplomatic incident because the BBC covered the news. Bob Chen will have justice, or at least be protected because his story was told by independent journalists.

Contrast that with events in Russia. Protest is banned. Independent journalism all but crushed. Dissidents are arrested every day. Challenge is not tolerated. Their leaders never questioned.

I am so lucky to live in a democracy. To be blessed with a free press. To be able to hold my politicians to account.

Public broadcasting is integral to that – so Happy Centenary BBC – we’re lucky to have you.

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK