16 Jul 2025 | Africa, Asia and Pacific, Denmark, DR Congo, Europe and Central Asia, India, News and features
A new survey of more than 200 environmental defenders from around the world show they are facing increasing online threats of death, sexual violence, doxxing (publishing private or identifying information about an individual online) and other cyberattacks because of their work. Worryingly, the activists say that online platforms are not doing enough to address these threats and the abuse and harassment is increasingly translating into real-world violence and intimidation. Defenders also feel that the business models employed by digital platforms are contributing to the problem.
Threats to environmental defenders are almost universal, the Global Witness survey reveals: some 92% of the land and environmental defenders who responded said they had experienced some form of online abuse or harassment as a result of their work. The threats experienced by environmental defenders are widening. The survey found that 77% of respondents had experienced attacks on their work or character, 65% had had their images shared online without their permission, 61% had experienced cyberattacks while 58% had experienced doxxing.
Facebook is the worst platform for defenders, the survey reveals, with almost two-thirds (62%) having experienced abuse on the platform, compared with 37% on X, 36% on WhatsApp and 26% on Instagram.
“Meta therefore holds a huge amount of responsibility when it comes to finding ways to address online harms to defenders,” said the report’s authors.
Defenders believe that the business models adopted by digital platforms are contributing to the harm caused to them.
“Social media companies use algorithms that can reinforce biases and reaffirm beliefs to keep users engaged and maximise time on the platform. This can create echo chambers, deepen divisions and fuel extremism,” the report said.
One defender told the survey’s authors, “Hateful comments get more traction.”
The report features testimonies from a number of environmental defenders who have received online threats because of their activism. They have asked not to have their full names published.
Warom has been working with environmental defenders in the Congo basin for nearly three years to help defend Indigenous land rights and enforce environmental protections. He also works at a radio station raising awareness of local environmental and human rights issues. He has been targeted for his activism.
“As part of our work, we sometimes document and expose abuses related to land grabbing and resource exploitation,” he said. “Already we have seen that Indigenous lands have been grabbed, and communities have been displaced and evicted, without proper consent or compensation. As a result, we believe we have been subjected to surveillance, which has included phone tapping, monitoring of our online communications, and other kinds of digital spying.”
He added, “Digital platforms have been used to spread disinformation about us. We have been falsely accused of being terrorists, and of having taken illegal payments by foreign organisations in return for our work. Our attackers use many different platforms to spread these lies – sometimes they use WhatsApp, other times they use YouTube, other times they text us directly or speak about us on the radio.
“In 2022, there was a group of people who decided they wanted to ban our radio station because we were spreading information to help local communities hold on to their land title. They spread lies – saying we wanted to grab the land for ourselves. They issued threats on Twitter and on WhatsApp – telling me they were planning to kill me and two of my colleagues.”
Sharanya has been working with NGOs in the Odisha region of India for more than 20 years.
“This region is very rich in bauxite, so there are many mining projects there that have been forcefully pushed by the government sometimes using military power. Along with a few others, I have stood alongside Indigenous communities who oppose these mining projects. These communities are fighting for their land rights, against evictions, and against harassment by the police. This resistance has been met by violence. We use social media to document this violence as well as the environmental destruction these projects cause. For example, we have posted videos on our Facebook page showing the beating of protesters, and videos showing how mining companies are releasing their wastewaters into rivers which local communities are using.”
Sharanya said, “We have been attacked online and offline for doing this. For example, when we helped stage a protest against one mining project, people took our photos and circulated them on WhatsApp, accusing us of brainwashing indigenous communities and identifying our personal information like our home addresses. After these online attacks, the police showed up at our door and accused us of being criminals and served us trespassing notices.”
Fanø from Denmark manages social media, logistics and outreach for Extinction Rebellion.
He said, “I often managed the live-streams that we did during our protests. On more than one occasion, people have sent threats to us during these livestreams. Some of them were so concerning I took a screenshot so I could report them. They have said things like ‘If I were there, I would run you over with my car’ or ‘this is why I have a shotgun.’”
“I reported these threats to Facebook, who said they would investigate, but nothing seems to have happened,” said Fanø. “Facebook should stop people from sending these types of threats, but right now it seems like they are going the other way. It looks like now people are pretty much free to say anything to us, even death threats.”
The research reveals a growing link between online and offline harm.
Speaking to Index, Hannah Sharpe, a senior campaigner at Global Witness and co-author of the report, said, “We already knew that environmental defenders experienced a lot of offline harms. Our London environmental defenders team publish a report every year, and that tries to get a sense of the offline harm that they experience. This is the first time that we’ve really looked at the relationship between online and offline, and for a lot of them, they felt that online was laying the groundwork, and it was this sort of warning sign that offline attacks could be imminent.”
Some 45% of respondents had faced offline threats of physical violence while 28% had received threats to their family, friends and coworkers. These threats often materialised: 22% had experienced physical violence, 10% had had their homes attacked and 3% had been subject to sexual violence. Thirty percent of respondents had been unjustly accused of behaving illegally regardless of the actual legality of their actions.
Many of the threats appear to be coming from anonymous trolls and bots.
“Defenders who responded to our survey also report that some bots and trolls operate behind anonymous profiles, allowing them to harass with impunity. While most digital platforms have policies prohibiting inauthentic accounts and spam, they sometimes fail to effectively enforce these policies, giving abusers license to escalate harms unchecked,” the report said.
One respondent told the organisation, “Troll farms are rampant. Pages with big followings are bought and used by troll farms to reach even bigger audiences.”
Sharpe said that the trolls are being empowered in the new world being architected by climate change denier and oil fan President Donald Trump.
“I think maybe that shift has given other people licence to speak out more online. I think it’s really hard for activists to have a voice at this time. A lot of defenders were using online platforms for organising as part of their work, especially in Covid. We had a lot of people talking about that: they couldn’t be on the ground and they turned to social media platforms instead. As a result of the abuse and harassment, a lot of them have gone quiet online, it’s really silencing the movement.“
The rise of “free speech” online under Trump and the decline in content moderation at social media platforms is having a particularly worrying effect. Earlier this year, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced significant changes to its community guidelines, admitting that their content moderation efforts would “catch less bad stuff”.
Sharpe said, “Environmental defenders see social media as essential for their work, it is really important for organising, raising awareness, finding an audience and engaging with other activists. All the defenders we spoke to were unsatisfied when they’ve reported issues and the platforms haven’t responded in a satisfactory manner. The platforms should be doing more.”
25 Feb 2025 | Asia and Pacific, Australia, News and features
Petrina Harley likens direct action to giving birth.
“My body knew it had a job to do, so I got on and focused on my inner strength,” the 53-year-old mother of two told Index via phone from Perth. “I find it really empowering.”
Harley is a climate activist of eight years facing trial in June for repeatedly blocking entry to Australia’s biggest gas hub to be built in a decade, a AU$16.5 billion ($10.35 billion) project in the Pilbara on the Burrup Peninsula of Western Australia (WA) by sector giant Woodside.
It may come as a surprise to some, but not to Harley, that new research from the University of Bristol released in December showed that Australia is now the world’s top country for arresting climate and environmental protesters.
“I’ve been arrested four times now,” said Harley. Alarmingly, arrest is now a common response in 20% of all climate and environmental protests in Australia, with the international average being 6.3%.
This is also part of a broader crackdown in the country, where new measures in the state of Victoria purportedly aimed at tackling recent cases of anti-Semitism could be used to target climate protesters, human rights lawyers have now warned.
There’s particular concern that a potential ban on “lock on” devices such as glue, chains or locks, could be used to take aim at environmental campaigners. Similar laws have been announced in New South Wales (NSW).
“The arrests [in Australia] are one dimension of criminalisation,” said Oscar Berglund, senior lecturer in International Public and Social Policy in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol.
“There have also been multiple new anti-protest laws passed. What we are seeing currently is an intensifying criminalisation of protest in both democratic countries and less democratic countries.”
Harley, who began protesting after she had children, said that she had tried “everything under the sun” including running for the Senate in the lower house with the Socialist Alliance party, holding weekly stalls in town and gathering petitions, before she took part in two blockades in WA.
In the first one, in November 2021, Harley and another Scarborough Gas Action Alliance activist, Elizabeth Burrow, used a caravan to obstruct entry to the Woodside project. The activists bonded their arms into a concrete drum inside the vehicle. Harley was “locked on” for 16 hours. When she refused to move, she was arrested in the caravan and after being taken to hospital for injuries locked up overnight and charged. Harley said it was “complete overreach” by police.
The pair pleaded not guilty and used an emergency defence – normally reserved for cases like murder – arguing that the activities of Woodside are directly putting lives at risk. In 2023 they were found guilty by a magistrate’s court in Karratha in the Pilbara region of failing to obey an order given by an officer, obstructing public officers, and unreasonably obstructing or preventing the free passage on a path or carriageway.
They received a six-month community-based order, with a requirement to complete 100 hours of community service and were also handed a $600 fine each. Police initially sought more than $33,000 in compensation from the activists for removing them from the caravan, but this application was later dismissed.
Last July, Harley and another activist, Emma, a high school student, used a car and a boat to block the only access road to the same project, in a bid to stop its operations. Harley was “locked on” for 12 hours. She is now facing three obstruction charges over this.
At her trial in Perth in June, she will again plead not guilty using the extraordinary emergency defence.
“I’m very excited, I’ve got a really ethical lawyer who’s keen to test the case because it would be a precedent,” Harley said. “People have tried it before, but no one’s actually won. I’ve got some very high-profile witnesses to testify.”
David Mejia-Canales is a Sydney-based senior human rights lawyer at Australian group Human Rights Law Centre (HRLC). He said that an analysis of two decades’ worth of anti-protest legislation in Australia from 2003 onwards found that out of 49 pieces of legislation introduced, most target environmental protesters in the streets, at mines or logging sites. But laws are broad and vague despite peaceful protest being protected under international law.
“In Australia you just have to look out the window to notice that the climate crisis is getting worse and the thing that our governments are appearing to do is to jail climate protesters instead of actually doing anything that is meaningful and quick and long lasting about this,” said Mejia-Canales.
He said HRLC wasn’t aware of any activists in Australia who have been acquitted on an emergency defence. But framing the necessity defence (breaking the law to prevent greater harm) as an “extraordinary emergency defence” could allow protesters to use the growing acceptance of climate change as an emergency that requires urgent attention, he said.
However, just last week a climate activist in Melbourne was told that he cannot rely on evidence from climate experts following charges relating to an Extinction Rebellion protest.
Mejia-Canales said that Australia urgently needs a Human Rights Act, which could be crucial for climate activists, reinforcing arguments that their actions seek to uphold fundamental rights rather than merely disrupt public order.
A WA government spokesperson told Index: “Everyone is entitled to protest peacefully in WA, however police will respond to violent or threatening behaviour.”
Index approached the minister for climate change and energy for comment, but did not receive a reply.
Woodside said that it supported respectful debate. But it said acts intended to threaten, harm, intimidate or disrupt employees, their families or any other member of the community going about their daily lives “should be met with the full force of the law”.
Read more: UK journalists fall victim to new police tactics
11 Oct 2024 | Brazil, Israel, Mexico, News and features, Newsletters, Palestine, United States
Hello, readers. This is Sarah Dawood here, the new editor of Index on Censorship. Every week, we bring the most pertinent global free speech stories to your inbox.
This week, headlines have been dominated by the ongoing devastation of the war in the Middle East, where the death toll is now more than 42,000 in Gaza, and more than 2,100 in Lebanon. Monday also marked a painful milestone for Israelis and Jewish people everywhere, as the first anniversary of Hamas’s attacks, which killed 1,200 people. You can read Jerusalem correspondent Ben Lynfield’s forensic analysis on the region’s risks to journalists and press freedom below.
Attention has also been on the destructive Hurricane Milton in Florida, which has killed at least 16 people. The climate event has resulted in human tragedy, physical damage and the distortion of truth, with false information and AI-generated images accumulating millions of views on social media, including a fabricated flooding of Disney World in Orlando. Such imagery has been seized upon by hostile states, far-right groups, and even US politicians to advance their own aims: Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti reposted the fake Disney World photos to its Telegram channel, whilst Republican members of Congress have proclaimed conspiracy theories of government-led “storm manufacturing”. This emphasises how crises can be manipulated and monopolised to stir up division.
But while disinformation can undermine democracy, so too can information blockades. This brings us to some important stories coming out of Latin America. In Brazil, the social media platform X is now back online after a shutdown in September. The platform was banned by a top judge during the country’s presidential election campaign, in an attempt to prevent the spread of misinformation. But as Mateus Netzel, the executive director of Brazil-based digital news platform Poder360 told Reuters, social media bans not only restrict public access to information, but can undermine journalists’ ability to gather and report on news. Elon Musk himself was using X to post about the development of the ban, but this was inaccessible to Brazilian journalists. “In theory, there are journalists and outlets who do not have access to that right now and this is a very important restriction because they need to report on this issue and they will have to rely on indirect sources,” said Netzel.
We also heard frightening news from Mexico, where a local politician was murdered and beheaded just days after being sworn in as city mayor of Chilpancingo. Whilst we don’t yet know the reason that Alejandro Arcos Catalán was killed, his murder is yet another example of journalists, politicians, and other public figures being routinely targeted by criminal gangs. Bar active war zones, Mexico has consistently been the most dangerous country in the world for journalists, topping Reporters Without Borders’ list in 2022.
Meanwhile, in El Salvador, climate activists are being silenced through false imprisonment. Five protesters, who fronted a 13-year grassroots campaign to ban metal mining due to its devastating environmental impacts are now facing life in prison for the alleged killing of an army informant in 1989. The charge has been condemned by the UN and international lawyers as baseless and politically motivated, and echoes heavy-handed prison sentences being handed to climate protesters globally, including in democratic countries. As Index’s Mackenzie Argent reported last month, human rights lawyers have called out the UK’s hypocrisy in claiming egalitarianism whilst disproportionately punishing environmental activists, pointing specifically to the sentencing of Just Stop Oil’s Roger Hallam to five years in prison in July. These two stories, although taking place 5,000 miles away from each other, underline how climate defenders are currently on the front line of attempts to be silenced.
22 Feb 2024 | News and features, United Kingdom, United States
After passing the Public Order Bill last year in the UK, which increased the powers of the police to restrict people’s fundamental rights to peaceful protest, the government is looking to restrict protest rights further. The new Criminal Justice Bill is currently being considered by parliament and contains measures designed to clamp down on protesters climbing on national monuments, hiding their face or carrying flares.
In their announcement of the new measures, the Home Office declared that the right to protest is “no longer an excuse for certain public order offences”. Additionally, attorney general Victoria Prentis KC is leading an attempt to outlaw the ‘consent’ defence for climate protesters, which argues that defendants have a lawful excuse for their actions due to their honest belief that those affected by their actions would consent to the damage had they understood the dangers of the climate emergency. This attack on what is one of the last remaining lawful defences available to climate activists has been described by environmental protest group Extinction Rebellion as “concerning”.
“The government would rather curtail our right to protest, and waste valuable court time and public money, than do what everyone agrees is necessary to protect us from the worst climate impacts and cut people’s energy bills,” a spokesperson for the group told Index.
“When political parties keep prioritising narrow private interests ahead of the lives, homes and security of its citizens the solution is to put people in charge through an emergency citizens’ assembly on the climate and nature emergencies.”
This is particularly alarming given the rise in environmental activists facing potential legal action. Hundreds of such campaigners in the UK have received legal threats, leading to claims that states and private companies are using the threat of costly legal action to silence critics.
Michel Forst, the UN special rapporteur on environmental defenders, has previously expressed concerns over the UK’s increasing intolerance of environmental protests, calling the new laws “regressive” and warning of the “chilling effect” they will have on free expression. This statement came in the aftermath of the infamous case of Just Stop Oil campaigners Morgan Trowland and Marcus Decker, who made history last year when they were handed the longest sentences for a peaceful climate protest in living memory. Both have been jailed for more than two and a half years after scaling a bridge on the Dartford Crossing, forcing its closure and causing gridlock for the traffic below.
The current ongoing conflict in the Middle East has increased concerns over protester safety. Since the outbreak of the Israel-Gaza war, weekly marches have taken place in the UK and have become a source of contention in the free expression world. Suella Braverman, for example, stated that waving a Palestinian flag “may not be legitimate” and encouraged a “strong police presence” in response. There have been hundreds of arrests during pro-Palestine protests since the conflict broke out, raising questions over the line between incitement and free speech. In December, nine people were arrested in London after displaying a pro-Palestine banner. Five people were arrested the month before for taking part in a peaceful sit-in at King’s Cross station after refusing to comply with an order to disperse.
This pattern of increasing police powers to clamp down on peaceful protest demonstrates a worrying break from usual democratic principles, which could have serious consequences for free expression in the state.
Anti-protest laws are not just gaining traction in the UK. Similar incidents have occurred in the USA, marking a worrying trend. Earlier this month, freelance journalist Reed Dunlea was arrested while covering pro-Palestine protests in New York. He was officially charged, confusingly, with resisting arrest, but no reason has been given as to why he was being arrested in the first place, particularly as his press pass and media equipment was on full display.
Freelance photographer Stephanie Keith told Index that she saw Dunlea’s arrest in progress as she was covering the protests, but that it wasn’t clear what he was arrested for.
“I was across the street documenting an earlier arrest when I saw a number of NYPD [officers] slamming a fairly large man onto the ground,” she said.
Keith has been covering the recent pro-Palestine protests in the USA and said she has noticed attitudes towards protesters changing in the last few months.
“The NYPD have been much more intolerant of the Palestinian protest in the last two months,” she said. “Protesters used to be able to march in the streets and now if anyone sets foot in the streets, they are arrested.
“The police have a very different attitude towards the protesters now than they did at the end of last year.”
This incident was one of many to have occurred under New York Mayor Eric Adams, a pro-police candidate. During his term, misconduct complaints against the NYPD have risen to their highest levels in more than a decade.
Outside of New York, the police forces of other US cities have also displayed an increasingly hostile attitude towards protesters. Following the racial justice protests of 2020 that broke out after the murder of George Floyd, at least 19 US cities were made to pay settlements totalling more than $80m to protesters who sustained injuries as a result of law enforcement action.
If such a trend continues, the UK and US will have serious questions to answer over their treatment of protesters. One of the most fundamental concepts of any functioning democracy is the right to peacefully protest. The charge sheet of both the UK and the US is not looking good and we must make sure we don’t look the other way.
