Category: Human rights,

UK Human Rights Report: key issues in June 2026


Our monthly report on human rights in the UK

June 2026

UK Political Prisoners

Research by Queen Mary University of London and the protest group Defend our Juries says that custodial sentences for acts of direct action or civil disobedience were once rare. They are now being imposed with increasing length and frequency in the UK, creating ‘a new breed of political prisoners’ through the systemic incarceration of people acting to prevent climate breakdown and the annihilation of Gaza.

Rules on Transgender

The ECHR has offered clarification on  the application of the law on transgender status, confirming that since the legal definition of sex is based on sex at birth, single sex toilets must exclude transgender people for whom the provision of separate facilities is recommended.

Palantir Challenge

The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has blocked the use of Palantir platforms for the Metropolitan Police Force.  Despite its record for assisting anti-immigration police in the US and aiding Israeli surveillance in Gaza, it is alleged that the police failed seriously to consider any other company for the contract.  The lack of process is seriously concerning, since Palantir has been allowed to gain a foothold in public services to the extent that it has now amassed more than 30 contracts with the UK state.  Critics also dispute its superior performance.

A cross party group of MPs have now challenged the Government on this.  Amnesty and other concerned organisations such as the Good Law Project are coordinating local protests against the use of Palantir in NHS Trusts. see our previous post on this firm and the danger it poses.

Equality Act: Public Sector Equality Duty

Discussion around the murder of Henry Nowak has centred around whether the Public Sector Equality Duty section of the Equality Act 2010 led the police in question to mistakenly prioritise a false allegation of racism over an actual stabbing attack, as Tory leader Kemi Badenoch argued.  However, critics say the case was a failure of police procedure rather than a pointer to review the section on institutional guidance on racism. The murder has generated a great deal of political heat.

The Public Sector Equality Duty states that public authorities should ‘advance equality of opportunity between people who share and people who do not share a relevant protected characteristic’.  Protected characteristics include age, disability, pregnancy, sex and sexual orientation.  Government guidance says the duty should ‘always be applied in a proportionate way’ depending on the circumstances of the case.

The duty was introduced in 2010 as part of the Equality Act which merged previous anti-discrimination laws such as the Equal Pay Act and the Disability Discrimination Act.

Since its introduction, organisations and individuals have been able to take public bodies to court for failing to abide by the duty, for example when councils withdrew library funding, set unequal fees for council funding to private care homes, or when the Home Office had not complied with the duty in relation to how its ‘hostile environment ‘ policies would impact members of the Windrush generation.

While Reform would abolish the entire act, the Conservatives criticise only the public sector section.  The Labour Government, however, is promising further anti-discriminatory legislation, a new equality and diversity strategy, with a primary focus on getting working class people joining and progressing in the Civil Service.

Recent posts:

0

A most terrible prison


Channel 5 is allowed into CECOT – a prison from hell

June 2026

Richard Madeley was allowed to film inside the most awful prison called CECOT – Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo – in San Salvador and the results were transmitted last week. Despite the restrictions placed on the programme makers, it showed a prison that might have come straight out of some dystopian horror film (movie). The prison is vast and to get about it, he had to travel on a shuttle bus. It has a capacity for 40,000.

Words cannot fully describe the state in which the men are held. Think battery farm for chickens and you get close. Men are effectively warehoused in cells of 100 which contain steel racks three tiers high on which they spend their days. They are not allowed any reading materials and there is no TV. The lights stay on 24 hours a day every day. They have no contact with relatives or lawyers. Trials such as they are, take place on screen with up to 100 defendants at a time. The men will never leave the prison. Further insight is by Human Rights Watch who reported on American nationals held there. They eat the same food each day.

Madeley makes it clear that the men are members of various gangs and have committed a vast number of murders. Some inmates are alleged to have murdered 30 people. San Salvador had a high murder rate with around 16 a day. The drastic measures taken by the president Nayib Bukele has seen this rate drop dramatically. This poses a profound question: that in a state where gangs operate and murder is at a very high level, can the drastic measures and the methods used in CECOT be justified?

Madeley admitted feeling ‘shaken’ by the experience and film of some of the terrible murders could not be shown on British TV. He continued: “It’s obvious that CECOT breaches human rights as we currently understand. It’s a shocking, extreme corner of humanity, but El Salvadorians were writhing under the thumb of psychotic, psychopathic sadists. I wonder if sacrificing civil liberties for the common good is something others would ever be prepared to embrace”. The approach by the President is popular among many in El Salvador who are free of the threat posed by the murderous gang members.

The prison has proved to be controversial in the US and a CBS film was pulled before transmission because allegedly, political pressure was applied. President Trump is reported to be keen on the prison and USA Today revealed a financial deal in which prisoners were sent there.

It is a dilemma. Human rights groups condemn the regime but it has delivered a measure of normality for Salvadorians. Richard Madeley poses this question at the end of his programme. Can such inhumane methods ever be justified?

Sources: The Sun, Cornwall Live, Guardian, Independent, USA Today, CBS

Pic: AFP

0

Government signs trade deal


Sir Keir says deal with Gulf States a ‘huge win’ for British business but …

May 2026

The government proudly announced a trade deal with the Gulf States this week which will increase trade with UK firms by many millions. The fly in the ointment however is the human and worker’s rights in those countries which are dire. Take UAE as an example. The country commits a wide range of abuses against its citizens. There is little freedom of expression with a number of individuals given long sentences following mass trials which are transparently unfair.

Women have few rights and experience inequality in education, employment and legal rights. The kefala system is widely employed which ties foreign workers to one employer and effectively denies them any meaningful employment rights.

Torture and other abusive actions are frequent with prisoners kept for long periods in solitary confinement. Human rights defenders are harassed.

The country is accused of providing military equipment to the RSF in Sudan who have committed a range of atrocities. A similar range of failures could be listed among the other countries included in the agreement, Saudi Arabia for example.

Values free

None of this seems to matter. Any mention of human rights has been omitted from the agreement and the government claims these matters are best pursued outside it. The TUC has criticised it arguing that we should ‘not be doing deals with countries which abuse human rights and worker’s rights‘. It is claimed to be a ‘values free agreement’.

Any notion of limiting trade with oppressive regimes which practise a range of abuses against its citizens seems a distant prospect. We are sufficiently desperate for trade that such matters are no longer part of the political landscape. Yet ministers will often claim their belief in human rights. Sir Keir himself told his biographer “There is no version of my life that does not largely revolve around me being a human rights lawyer”. Being a lawyer is not the same as having principles and acting on them. Wouldn’t it be more honest simply to admit we will trade with anyone? There is a podcast of this and other recent posts – see below:

Sources: Amnesty, HRW, American Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrein

1

People in the Park


Salisbury group attends this event with its focus on sustainability

May 2026

This event, organised by Salisbury Transition City each year with 75 exhibitors present this year. The theme is sustainability and with this in mind the Salisbury group focused on the abuse behind the manufacture an everyday item such as a pair of jeans. Billions are made every year and millions are employed in making them. This followed the publication by Amnesty International of a report Stitched Up which details the multiple abuses of this massive industry. From health hazards, physical and sexual abuse of the mainly female workforce, wage theft and the denial of union and collective bargaining rights are all described. The failure of high street retailers to control adequately what is going on is also noted.

The results were muted and only a few of the handouts were taken (see below). It is disappointing to report the Mayor of Salisbury and her party quickly walked past our stall without stopping. Perhaps it was because people view sustainability mainly as an environmental problem. The idea that globalisation and the abuses that flow from it is perhaps not so well appreciated. Massive amounts of water are consumed in their production and of course the fuel needed to move the items from country to country during the course of their manufacture.

Clearly the idea that abuses taking place on the far side of the globe are both a human rights and a sustainable issue is not well recognised. Around a quarter of the cotton used comes from the Xinjiang region of China where the abuse of Uyghurs is taking place and their culture being systematically destroyed. Thousands are engaged in forced labour to produce the cotton. The region is closed to outsiders for obvious reasons.

There is work to do to convince people that sustainability is not just about trees – important though that is – but about the clothes we wear, where they come from and how they’re made. Retailers can continue to sell goods made with the exploitation of millions of mostly female workers, some in near slave like conditions, while claiming their humanitarian credentials on their web sites.

Jeans handoutDownload
0

Risks to our rights steadily increasing


Our monthly report on trends in the UK is worrying

May 2026

Government appeal against Palestine Action ban

Good Law Project warns that if the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmoud wins her appeal against the lifting of the ban on Palestine Action th the combination of the Online Safety Act 2023 and the Terrorism Act 2000 could be used to silence support for anti-genocide campaigners.

The problem lies in the very broadly drafted offences which even the police have found hard to apply. Online platforms might share this difficulty and fear heavy fines if they don’t remove references to action for Palestine. The Online Safety Act obliges platforms to remove “priority illegal content” from the internet in the UK. At the top of this list is “terrorism content” which includes posts that relate to section 12 of the Terrorism Act, such as “inviting support” for a terrorist organisation or “expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation” while being “reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation”. See also a previous post on this site pointing out the risks inherent in using this firm.

Palantir Data Privacy Concerns continue

The Good Law Project is supporting Democracy for Sale to raise a challenge about the information commissioner’s decision to keep secret documents sent to Wes Streeting Health Secretary and Health and Social Care Minister Karin Smyth that will reveal truths about the risks of Palantir’s data platform. The British Medical Association has expressed concern about handing sensitive health data to the company which has ties with the Israeli Military and ICE. See our previous post about the threats to our rights from this firm. Statements by the firm’s chief executive are illuminating.

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Following the Good Law challenge in the Supreme Court, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has been obliged by Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson to revise its guidance on the application of the Sex definition in order to provide ‘legally accurate, practical guidance’ and ensure ‘all service users are treated with dignity and respect’. Parliamentary approval will be sought in May. Recent testimonies from trans patients suggest that their health concerns are sidelined by some doctors.

Democratic decline

Amnesty International warns the UK is increasingly reflecting, rather than resisting, global trends towards weakening of democratic norms. The 2026 report can be accessed here and download the full report which is divided into countries.

In 2025 – 2026 the UK has:

– used counterterrorism powers to restrict peaceful protest

– overseen the mass arrest of peaceful protesters, with courts ruling aspects unlawful

– intensified hostile policies towards migrants and people seeking asylum

– increased surveillance and policing powers

– continued arms transfers to Israel despite clear risks of use in serious violations of international law

– cut international aid amid escalating global humanitarian need

– defended the use of national security vetoes in legacy Troubles cases, undermining truth, accountability and justice for victims and families

– pursued economic and social policies that risk pushing more people into poverty, weakening protections for economic and social rights.

As we have noted on several occasions before, successive governments have got themselves ensnared with various unpleasant regimes because of their desire to maintain arms exports. We continue to arm UAE despite their support for the rebels in Sudan and other destabilising actions in Libya and Yemen for example, and as noted, we continue to arm and support Israel despite the genocide in Gaza.

1

Clothing and the abuse of rights


We will be at the People in the Park event this Saturday to highlight this issue

Past event – report soon 16/05

At this event in Salisbury on Saturday 16th May, we shall be focusing on the human rights abuses involved in the manufacture of a pair of jeans. An everyday item of clothing, no less than 5 billion pairs are made every year mostly in factories in Far East countries. From the production of the cotton to the manufacture of the jeans themselves, millions of – mostly women – are subject to massive levels of abuse. Amnesty has produced a report called Stitched Up which provides background to this industry.

The numbers involved are quite staggering. There are something like 100 million garment workers worldwide the vast majority of whom suffer various kinds of abuse to enable us to buy cheap clothes (not just jeans).

The abuses

The abuses take place at every stage in the manufacture:

  • Around a quarter of the cotton comes from the Xinjiang region of China where the abuse of the Uyghurs is a massive issue. The treatment by the Chinese of these people is a story of itself and involves mass arbitrary detention and so-called ‘re-education’, unjust imprisonment, intrusive surveillance and forced labour. The treatment of the Uyghurs has been described as genocide.
  • To produce the faded look a dangerous process is used and the workers are in danger of contracting silicosis. Numbers die of this each year.
  • Low wages and levels below even minimum wage levels in their own country. This is linked to ‘wage theft‘. Workers are allegedly paid the minimum wage but do not if fact receive them. So inspectors carrying out cursory checks for the retailers see appropriate wages being paid.
  • Overwork. Overtime is compulsory if a big order arrives and workers may work very long shifts with no choice.
  • No collective bargaining and trade unions largely banned. It can involve working 99 hour weeks. Only 5 unions exist among Marks and Spencer’s 172 suppliers for example.
  • Abuses, physical and sexual, is widespread. With a mostly female workforce this is a serious problem.
The brands

The major brands on our high streets and on line are complicit in these abuses. It is important to stress the massive scale of the abuse involving millions of people. Virtually all the major brands are complicit in whole or in part, in these abuses largely due to inaction. If you read the Amnesty Stitched Up report linked above, you will see nearly all the familiar high street names mentioned. The supply chains are long so factories may be largely invisible to any inspection activity.

This post is to raise your awareness. It is almost certain that among the clothes you are wearing are garments produced which are the product of abuse, violence, forced labour about which the retailer you bought them from has likely done little to tackle. Cheap clothing comes at a cost. It is not costless because making clothes in the UK is extremely difficult if retailers are freely able to source from countries where regulations are ignored, wages are not always paid in full and there are no trade unions.

Previous year’s stall. Photo Salisbury Amnesty

Latest posts:

0

Foreign Office to close monitoring unit

Office desk with multiple labeled stacks of documents, computer monitors, and office chair near window showing cityscape

Unit responsible for collecting information on conflict incidents is to close

April 2026

The news is variously described as ‘unbelievable’ or ‘incredible’ but is reported to be true: the Labour government is to close the Conflict and Security Monitoring Unit which collects, verifies and analyses human rights incidents in Israel and in the occupied territories. It hardly needs saying that the necessity for such a unit is essential at the present time with significant human rights violations taking place in Gaza, the West Bank and now in south Lebanon.

But it is to close. One of the Unit’s functions was to advise on the supply of arms to Israel so one wonders where that advice is to come from in future. The decision is reported to have been taken by Sir Oliver Robbins who was sacked by the prime minister last week over the Peter Mandelson affair.

Only on 9th of this month, the Foreign Secretary was delivering a speech in the Mansion House extolling her and her government’s belief in the rule of law and human rights. Part of her speech is:

“But for a Labour government it is a fundamental part of our moral purpose to stand up against global disease and hunger, and help those trapped in crises caused by conflict or climate breakdown. We know that supporting development is not just about our party’s values but about our national interests: tackling insecurity and building partnerships abroad helps our security and economy back home.

“The role that rules-based frameworks play is vital, and respect for the rule of law is a core British value that supports our national interest, underpins our economic stability, makes us a reliable place for international investment, while the whole world spins around us and underpins our security and prosperity.” (our italics)

Pious words. Yvette Copper is another MP who is a member of Labour Friends of Israel.

It is vital that the FCDO has accurate information both for any future war crimes and to advise on the sale of arms to the IDF. The decision has been criticised by Human Rights Watch and by the Campaign Against the Arms Trade. Katie Fallon, the advocacy manager at CAAT said:

“Closing the IHL cell would protect ministers and senior Foreign Office officials “who know that they have been manipulating the data on potential violations of International Human Rights Law, beyond any logical interpretation, to obscure unimaginable violations and crimes committed against the most vulnerable people in conflict and sustain arms sales at any cost.

“The timing of this closure is notable. As Olly Robbins explained to a parliamentary committee this week, the civil service is under pressure to give the government the answers that they want. Nowhere is this more clear than on ensuring arms sales to ‘allies’ continue, despite the risks of war crimes.”

Sources: Guardian, Middle East Eye, Human Rights Watch, FCDO, Wales Herald

0

Palantir and the threats to our rights


Palantir’s increasing penetration a real concern

March 2026

During a presentation on increasing authoritarianism at the Exeter conference, the firm Palantir was mentioned and its potential, and part in, the worrying trend of authoritarianism on both sides of the Atlantic. The first question is what does the firm do? This is normally a straightforward enough question to answer by looking at the firm’s website and other sources. But in this case there seem to be doubts even from people who work there.

Essentially they handle information and data – colossal amounts of it. They are able to meld a wide range of data sets to provide answers to customers who include commercial firms, the military and a variety of government agencies. One of their senior employees chillingly said ‘we help with killing people and saving lives’. In this essay we want to explain why we should be concerned about the firm and its likely effects on our rights and freedoms. Information is power. As we are seeing in the current wars in Ukraine, the Middle East and Iran, information is crucial to the successful targeting of munitions and to military operations generally.

The firm is in the news again with a contract with the Financial Conduct Authority which gives it access to sensitive financial information. The Guardian reports (23 March) it will enable the firm to monitor case intelligence files, financial ombudsman complaints, problem firms, emails and social media posts. There are concerns from within the FCA that the firm will gain access to their methods and how trustworthy are they with that information. Will Palantir ‘tip off’ its friends they ask? The owner of Palantir, Peter Thiel frequently featured in the Epstein files.

As the quote above illustrates, information is not neutral. It can be used to analyse the masses of information held by the NHS to make improvements in clinical outcomes and in improving efficiency. It has been used to help in crime detection by matching large and disparate quantities of information on international criminal networks. But it has been used by ICE in its activities in the US which have drawn a lot of criticism. The essential point therefore is being able effectively to control the data and the companies like Palantir who have it. It is this which is the root of concerns.

Concerns

1. The first concern is that it is a profit based corporation. Its prime focus is on returns to shareholders and making a profit. There is no crime in that but when it comes to data and millions of files of information about individuals, moral issues and matters of security and confidentiality are crucially important. In common with all corporations these days, it has a series of reassuring policy statements about human rights for example. History doesn’t support these statements. When it is profit v. morals, which will win out?

2. The lack of security of the data it collects. In the case of the NHS, the government is desperate to secure savings and no doubt Palantir will offer them which could be genuine enough. The company is American based and as we have experienced with other tech giants, transparency and attention to the welfare of the people using their platforms is very low down on their list of concerns. Will the desire to save money outweigh the security of the data?

3. The government has shown itself to be inept in a wide variety of IT catastrophes and have chosen to outsource to Palantir because they have a system that works. In doing so, they will lose control to a corporation outside its jurisdiction. Like several other ‘tech bros’ its owner, Peter Thiel, has been happy enough to cosy up to President Trump. Thiel in his writings is keen on monopolies which is also a worry when we are talking about a public organisation like the NHS.

4. The organisation’s links to the military and help offered to the IDF. It developed a technology called Maven which dramatically speeds up what is termed the ‘kill chain’ and has been used in Gaza and Iran. It identifies, using AI technology, where a target is likely to be and enables rapid attacks and assassinations to take place. Palantir is not involved in the decision to allow killing of 15 or more innocent individuals by the IDF for one Hamas fighter but is nevertheless supplying the IT to enable it to take place.

No scruples

It all adds up to a fundamental concern about being associated with such a firm. It appears to have no scruples in terms of the uses put by its systems and technology. We have a government which has shown itself to be more and more authoritarian, keen to allow an American company over which it has almost no legal controls, access to a vast range of data about individuals.

It comes down to the sovereignty of the data, who owns it and what is done with it, its security and who has access legally or otherwise, and the ability of the UK government to protect our interests. Over all these there are big question marks. Defence experts have expressed deep concerns. When the New York Police Dept. cancelled its contract with Palantir, the company kept the insights it had gained. The Swiss army has cancelled its contract with them for the reasons set out here.

We should be deeply concerned by this firm’s penetration into our national life and be highly sceptical of promises by government ministers that they have adequate controls.

Become a subscriber, it’s free!

4

Threat to Jury Trials: MPs Debate New Court Bill


Threat to trial by jury

March 2026

MPs voted to allow the Courts and Tribunals Bill to proceed to the next stage after significant debate during its second reading.  This was over proposals to replace juries in England and Wales with a single judge in cases where a convicted defendant would be jailed for up to three years.  Justice Secretary David Lammy says changes to jury trials and other reforms can help turn around the Crown Court backlog, which has reached record levels of 80,000 cases. These delays mean some defendants charged today may not face trial until 2030.

However more than 3,200 lawyers including 300 top barristers and retired judges have called on the government to drop the plan to abolish some jury trials.  The letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, a former director of public prosecutions, says there is no evidence the “unpopular” plan will solve unprecedented delays in criminal courts.  The letter organised by the Bar Council, which represents all barristers in England and Wales, says the plan is an attempt “to force through an unpopular, untested and poorly evidenced change to our jury system”.

The bill will still have to clear the House of Lords before it can become law.  The right to jury trial – in which ordinary people decide on the guilt or innocence of defendants brought before Crown Courts – is a cornerstone of the constitution dating back more than 800 years.

Magna Carta did not specifically mention jury trials but does say ‘no free man shall be seized or imprisoned except through the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land’ (women are not mentioned). It did however plant the seed of juries and over time the idea became established in British law. The Statute of Westminster was passed in 1275 that required jury trials in certain cases, showing how these ideas from the Magna Carta were evolving into legal practice.

Recent governments have revealed a dislike of protest and have done a lot to introduce measures and restrictions making such protests more and more difficult. Police powers have been increased and thousands were arrested protesting on behalf of Palestine Action for example. Some juries have gone against judicial directions and have freed defendants. There must be a worry therefore that restricting the right to a jury trial leaves defendants at the mercy of judges alone who, some argue, can be reactionary,

1

How the New UK Bill Aims to Prevent Foreign Election Interference


New bill to tackle electoral reform

March 2026

A functioning democratic system is vital for human rights.  It is about power and how it is wielded.  Increasingly, we have witnessed powerful outside interests – whether they be states or wealthy individuals – influencing the political debate.  Electoral reform is carried out infrequently partly because political parties settle into a comfortable relationship with the status quo.  They can also be reluctant to go against the wishes of their influential patrons. 

The newly introduced Representation of the People Bill aims to keep hostile foreign states from interfering in British elections while significantly extending democratic rights to the population. As part of the biggest expansion of democratic participation in a generation it offers first the extension of the franchise to 16 and 17-year olds, which will give voice to millions of young people.

Second, the capping of donations from companies towards electoral expenses will be set at two years of revenue, ensuring that companies that have no genuine business activity or UK footprint will be prevented from making donations.  The Bill means companies will need to have shown sufficient revenue made over the previous 3 years (allowing in most cases two financial years of revenue) to justify their donation.  It means foreign actors will no longer be able to use their money to interfere in the UK’s elections,

MPs will not be allowed to accept gifts of money or in-kind donations over £2,230. Legitimate gifted hospitality valued below this thresh-hold will continue to be acceptable.

The many other proposals to ensure election fairness include automatic voter registration without voters needing to apply, extending legitimate Voter ID to include bank cards digital forms of ID, increasing the time available for postal voting, ensuring candidates offer documentary proof of their identity to avoid misleading voters, and addressing issues of harassment at polling stations

It marks the beginning of a process that may reshape the practical workings of the UK’s democracy. Few governments have attempted to reform our democratic system quite so comprehensively in a single legislative package.  For once, the over-used ‘once in a generation’ tag may actually be justified.

But it does little to protect democracy from misinformation and disinformation in elections, despite the government recognising the risks.  It is this ability to ‘control the narrative’ which is a big factor in our political process.

Image: Electoral Reform Society

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑