15 Aug 2025 | Americas, Asia and Pacific, Bangladesh, China, Colombia, Israel, Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Palestine, Thailand
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 targeted killing of four Al Jazeera journalists in Gaza, and the arrest of hundreds of protesters in the UK.
A targeted strike: Five Palestinian journalists killed by Israeli missile in Gaza
Four Palestinian journalists working for Al Jazeera, as three other media workers, were killed in a targeted Israeli strike on 10 August, bringing the total number killed in Gaza to at least 184 journalists since 2023 according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Anas al-Sharif, one of Al Jazeera’s most prominent reporters on the conflict in Gaza, was one of those killed in the strike. Having consistently reported on the ground since 7 October 2023, al-Sharif was subject to numerous death threats online. Israeli officials have repeatedly made unverified claims that al-Sharif was the leader of a Hamas terrorist cell, claims vigorously denied by Al Jazeera, the CPJ and others. The IDF gave this as justification for the targeted strike on al-Sharif’s location, however no such justification was given regarding the lives of the others killed.
With foreign journalists banned from entering the Gaza strip, the only reporting from the ground is coming from Palestinian journalists.
Spare no protestor: More than 500 demonstrators arrested in one day for supporting Palestine Action
A demonstration in London’s Parliament Square in support of proscribed group Palestine Action saw 522 arrested on suspicion of breaking terrorism laws in one day – more than doubling the amount arrested on these terms in the entirety of 2024.
Taking place on Saturday 10 August, the demonstration organised by Defend Our Juries asked participants to hold up signs or placards stating “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” Such a statement is a criminal offence, as the UK government banned Palestine Action under anti-terrorism laws after two members of the group broke into RAF Brize Norton airbase and defaced aircraft.
An age breakdown by the Metropolitan Police revealed that of those protesters arrested who could have their ages verified, 49.9% were over the age of 60, with nearly 100 being in their seventies. Over 700 people have been arrested for supporting Palestine Action since its proscription, bringing widespread condemnation. UN human rights chief Volker Türk, argued that the proscription was an “impermissible restriction” on freedom of expression, while former cabinet minister Lord Peter Hain said the government were “digging themselves into a hole” by proscribing Palestine Action.
Gang violence: Two journalists attacked, one killed, while investigating gang activity
Two journalists were violently attacked on consecutive days while investigating gang activity in the city of Gazipur, Bangladesh, with one of the journalists being killed in the assault.
Reporter Anwar Hossain, 35, was interviewing rickshaw drivers about allegations of extortion on 6 August when he was brutally attacked by seven to eight men in broad daylight, one of whom repeatedly beat Hossain with a brick, injuring him severely. A video of the assault went viral on social media, with police seen nearby taking no immediate action. The following day, journalist Asaduzzaman Tuhin, 38, was filming armed men chasing a young man through a market, when the men turned on him and hacked him to death with machetes.
Following the death of Tuhin, five people have been arrested in connection with his murder. Attacks against journalists for their reporting have become more common in recent months in Bangladesh – in July, journalist Khandaker Shah Alam was assaulted in retaliation for reporting on a case that landed the assailant in jail. He later died of his injuries.
Art under attack: Pieces removed from Bangkok gallery under pressure from China
An art gallery in Bangkok has been forced to remove or alter a number of works by Hong Kong, Tibetan and Uyghur artists, following a visit from Chinese embassy officials.
The exhibition, titled Constellation of Complicity: Visualising the Global Machinery of Authoritarian Solidarity, was curated by the Myanmar Peace Museum, and aimed to lay out the interconnected nature of authoritarian regimes such as China, Russia and Iran. Held at The Bangkok Art & Culture Centre, the exhibition opened on 24 July – but just three days later, Chinese embassy officials alongside Bangkok city officials “entered the exhibition and demanded its shutdown”, according to the co-curator of the exhibition.
The gallery was reportedly warned that the exhibit “may risk creating diplomatic tensions between Thailand and China”. Under this pressure, they removed a number of works, including a multimedia installation by a Tibetan artist, and censored many more – removing the words “Hong Kong”, “Uyghur” and “Tibet” from artworks, redacting artists’ names, and taking down any content featuring Chinese president Xi Jinping. They also insisted that the gallery enforce the “One China policy” that iterates that the People’s Republic of China is the only government representing all of China, including the self-governed island of Taiwan.
A long struggle: Colombian presidential hopeful dies two months after being shot
Two months after he was shot at a campaign rally in Bogotá, Colombian senator and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe has died in hospital from his injuries, his wife has confirmed.
Uribe was shot twice in the head and once in the leg at the rally on Saturday 7 June. Colombian President Gustavo Petro launched an investigation into the incident as it was revealed that Uribe’s protection team had been reduced from seven to three people on the day of the attack for unknown reasons. The alleged gunman, a 15-year-old boy, was among six individuals arrested regarding the murder – the boy reportedly stated he acted “for money, for my family”.
Uribe was a member of the right-wing Democratic Centre party. He stated his inspiration for running for public office was his mother, journalist Diana Turbay, who was herself kidnapped and killed by a gang alliance in 1991 over her reporting. Uribe’s death brings back unwanted memories of a nation that was fraught with gang violence.
19 Jun 2018 | Artistic Freedom, Music, News and features
The right to freedom of expression is considered by many to be a cornerstone of a modern democratic society. Countries that fail to adequately protect this hallowed right – routinely censoring journalists, writers and musicians whose speech challenges and offends those in power – are rightly regarded by the West to be the worst examples of dictatorial, autocratic regimes.
But right here in the UK, artists are fighting the censorship of their work by global corporations bowing to pressure from and, arguably, colluding with the state and its organs. In May of this year YouTube, the video streaming platform owned by Google, succumbed to pressure from the Metropolitan Police and took down 30 music videos made by drill artists. The Met had been trying to persuade YouTube for almost two years to take down between 50 and 60 videos, alleging the material was contributing to the increase in violent crime on London streets.
This attack on the freedom of expression of musicians who make drill music does not stop at the removal of their videos from YouTube. Defendants convicted in criminal cases may in the future be banned from making music for a period up to three years if the offender is under 18 and indefinitely for adult offenders under criminal behaviour orders[1]. Crucially, the prosecution can use evidence to support the making of an order that would not have met the strict rules of admissibility as in a criminal trial[2]. The threat to freedom of expression goes further. The Met have expressed publicly their intention to push for new legislation, similar to anti-terrorism laws, that will criminalise the making of drill videos.
Drill is not for everyone. The lyrics are violent. There is liberal use of expletives. Descriptions of acts of violence using knives and guns are common themes. The images portrayed in the accompanying videos are similarly hard-hitting. Large groups of mainly young, mainly black men can be seen inhabiting the screen wearing hoodies and tracksuit bottoms – the uniform of the young in some sections of society.
Drill DJs are not, however, pioneers of explicit lyrics and violent images in music. The genesis of what is known as drill in the UK today sprang from a trap-style rap that originated in Chicago in the early 2010s. The hip hop of the 1980s and the gangsta rap of the 1990s are all part of the same family tree of poetic verse poured over a thumping beat. Drill is a close relative.
Nor is it new to blame this type of music for inciting violence. In the 1990s C. Delores Tucker campaigned against violent lyrics aimed at women in rap music. Then, as now, there was little direct evidence of a causal link between rap music and particular acts of violence. What the critics of this music fail to grasp is that the lyrics of this genre of music are inspired by, and not the cause of, the violence that infects the lives of many of these young men.
Censorship of a form of music which affords an already marginalised minority a rare opportunity to express themselves publicly is an attack against their fundamental rights as human beings.
Looked at in its true context then, drill is less about inspiring violence and more about providing a narrative of lives defined by violence. They are telling the stories of their lives, minus the sugar-coating, just as other writers, poets and musicians have done before them.
The courtroom has often been the battleground of the clash between the values of the young minority against those of the old majority. In 1960 Penguin Books was prosecuted under the Obscenity Act 1959[3] for the publication of a book entitled Lady Chatterley’s Lover. The prosecution’s case was that the book had a tendency “to deprave and corrupt” those who read it in daring to portray the affair of a married woman with the family’s gamekeeper. Penguin Books was acquitted[4].
In 1971, the publishers of a satirical magazine were prosecuted when an issue of the magazine featured a sexualised cartoon of the children’s literary character Rupert the Bear. Known as the Oz trial, the three defendants were convicted by the Crown Court but were then acquitted on appeal[5].
Today, UK common law has arguably been strengthened by the enactment of the Human Rights Act 2000 by enshrining in law article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights[6]. One former Court of Appeal judge said this of the importance of freedom of expression: “Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.”[7]
You or I may not wish to stream drill music videos on our mobile device. Many people may find the content offensive. The videos may even be performed by individuals who are suspected of a crime or have criminal convictions[8]. None of this should confer on the state, aided and abetted by global corporations, a wide-ranging power that ultimately infringes the right of musicians to express themselves freely.
This censorship of a form of music which affords an already marginalised minority a rare opportunity to express themselves publicly is an attack against their fundamental rights as human beings.
We all need to sit up and take notice.
1. Under Part 2 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. Such an order may contain requirements for the defendant to inform the police of any activity that may be in breach of the order. The order may be varied, reviewed or discharged. Breach of the order is in itself a criminal offence.
2. An CBO was made recently against 1011 members Micah Bedeau, Jordean Bedeau, Yonas Girma, Isaac Marshall and Rhys Herbert. They are required under the CBO to inform the police 24 hours in advance of their intention to publish any videos online and are required to give a 48 hours warning of the date and locations any live performance.
3. The 1959 Act is still on the statute books.
4. R v Penguin Books Ltd. [1961] Crim LR 176.
5. R v Neville, Dennis & Anderson, The Times, 24 June 1971.
6. Article 10 (1) ECHR states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent states from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.” Article 10 (2) sets out limitations to this right.
7. Sir Stephen Sedley in Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] Crim LR 998.
8. A number of successful high-profile rap artists have criminal convictions.
