Burma
On 3 June 2026, the scholar Min Zin, a U.S. citizen, traveled to Kunming in the Chinese province of Yunnan, to participate in an academic workshop but was detained upon arrival. On August 27, the Scholars at Risk Network published a joint statement of concern signed by more than a hundred international scholars to urge the U.S. government to prioritize Min Zin’s immediate and unconditional release. Excerpts appear below.
We are scholars of Asia and international affairs who support academic freedom, including the freedom to carry out research and disseminate and publish the results thereof, and who believe academic institutions in both the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the United States benefit from the free and open exchange of ideas, high quality scholarly research, and critical analysis. We are, therefore, gravely concerned by the wrongful detention of our colleague Min Zin, who was detained upon arrival in Kunming, Yunnan Province (PRC), on June 3. Min Zin traveled to Kunming to participate in an academic workshop.
Min Zin is a scholar of international regard who is widely respected for his depth of knowledge, his analytical abilities, and his eagerness to engage in dialogue.
As a teenager, Min Zin spent years in hiding from Myanmar’s military regime for his pro-democracy activism before fleeing to Thailand and from there, to the U.S. In 2001, he attended the School of Journalism at the University of California (UC), Berkeley as a Visiting Scholar. In 2008, Min Zin returned to Berkeley as a Carnegie Teaching Fellow. He so deeply impressed faculty with his writings and intellectual gifts, that the university granted him a special admissions waiver into the Master’s Program in Asian Studies, a rare distinction for an applicant without traditional preparatory degrees.
Min Zin proved to be an exemplary student. After completing his master’s studies, he won a highly competitive place in UC Berkeley’s Department of Political Science, where he held the Chancellor’s Graduate Fellowship. In 2013, Min Zin was awarded an Institute of East Asian Studies Fellowship to support his dissertation research in Myanmar.
Inspired by the intellectual freedom he had experienced at Berkeley and motivated by a desire to advance critical thinking in Myanmar, Min Zin co-founded the Institute for Strategy and Policy–Myanmar (ISP–Myanmar) as an independent think tank in Yangon in 2016. Its flagship publication, Myanmar Quarterly, rapidly became a definitive resource for regional experts and the public alike. Under Min Zin’s leadership, ISP–Myanmar earned an international reputation for rigorous, independent, and non-partisan research and analysis.
Following the February 2021 military coup, Min Zin and his research team relocated to Thailand where ISP–Myanmar continued to produce data-driven, open-source research and balanced, evidence-based analysis on Myanmar’s political, socioeconomic, and security landscape, and its relations within the region. In keeping with the institute’s commitment to public engagement, all of ISP–Myanmar’s publications are freely accessible on its website.
We believe it is vital that independent, open-source researchers, such as Min Zin and those at ISP–Myanmar, be able to conduct their work without fear of intimidation or arbitrary detention.
We are grateful that Secretary of State Rubio has formally designated Min Zin as wrongfully detained. We call on the U.S. government to continue to make Min Zin’s case an urgent priority. We also call on the relevant authorities to facilitate Min Zin’s immediate and unconditional release, and for his safety to be guaranteed, so that he may return to his family and to his team at the Institute for Strategy and Policy-Myanmar.
We stand with Min Zin, his family, and the principles of academic freedom. . . .
Nicaragua
On 19 July 2026, Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega declared an end to elections in Nicaragua. On July 22, the Colectivo de Derechos Humanos Nicaragua Nunca Más (Nicaragua Never Again Human Rights Collective) released a statement condemning the abolition of elections in Nicaragua. Translated and excerpted below.
The Nicaragua Never Again Collective, from exile, expresses its most emphatic condemnation of the statements made on July 19, 2026, by the dictator Daniel Ortega Saavedra, who announced that in Nicaragua “there will be no more elections.”
Ortega added that he will work with the National Assembly and other institutions to pass laws that build “a wall” against those he identifies as opponents, consolidating the definitive abolition of the rule of law and the irreversible intention to remain in power as what they are: the dynasty of the Ortega-Murillos, through force, fear, and persecution—a self-perpetuation reminiscent of the darkest periods in Nicaragua’s history.
The National Assembly’s response on July 21 confirms that we are facing a dictatorial decision currently being put into effect. They announced plans to begin the necessary analysis to draft a work plan complying with “presidential directives” and to hold special sessions with the Supreme Electoral Council to provide a constitutional and legal basis for the announced reforms.
For the Nicaraguan people, eliminating elections will not merely mean losing the possibility of voting; it will mean closing off every peaceful avenue for changing those who govern, demanding accountability, denouncing corruption, changing unjust policies, and demanding justice for the crimes against humanity that have been committed. It means that one family intends to decide who may govern, for how long, and who will inherit power, for this elimination opens the door to a discretionary dynastic succession beyond any control.
Although free elections have not been held in Nicaragua since 2011, what has now been announced does not mark the beginning of electoral suppression; rather, it eliminates the fiction that the regime maintained for the past fifteen years—organizing controlled votes, excluding candidacies, persecuting opponents, eliminating political parties, and awarding itself results without democratic guarantees. . . .
In Nicaragua there are no longer any independent branches of government. The reforms replaced the branches of government with state “organs” coordinated with and subordinated to the co-presidency. The National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, the Supreme Electoral Council, and the remaining institutions no longer function as checks on power.
Although Nicaragua formally retains a text called a Constitution, it has ceased to fulfill its essential function: to limit power and protect citizens from the abuses of those who govern. The Constitution no longer contains power; rather, it has served to lend an appearance of legality to the crimes against humanity committed by the regime and to the reconfiguration of the State into the mold of a dictatorship becoming a dynasty.
The definitive suppression of elections pursues two objectives that are profoundly dangerous for the democratic stability of the region. The first is to perpetuate impunity for the grave human-rights violations and crimes against humanity committed by the regime. Without alternation in power, judicial independence, or institutional checks, those who ordered and carried out the repression also control those who should investigate and judge them.
The second is to pave the way for dynastic succession. The co-presidency has already converted state power into a domain shared by the Ortega-Murillo couple. The elimination of elections would allow the regime’s continuity and the designation of future rulers to be decided within the family, and not by the will of the Nicaraguan people.
These decisions have concrete human consequences: They deepen fear and censorship; they separate families; they force thousands of people to abandon the country; and they leave victims without institutions to which they can appeal for justice. They increase the risk of further detentions, disappearances, banishments, deprivations of nationality, and acts of transnational repression—acts that have already been characterized as crimes against humanity.
This advance toward a family-based, one-party regime does not affect Nicaragua alone. It threatens the democratic stability of Central America, deepens forced displacement, and creates a regional precedent under which a dictatorship may abolish elections, subjugate every institution, and secure its own permanence without facing proportionate international consequences. . . .
For this reason, we call upon the democratic states, parliaments, international organizations, and human-rights protection mechanisms to:
- Condemn, publicly, in a coordinated manner, and unequivocally, the announcement abolishing elections and the endorsement given to it by the National Assembly.
- Refuse to recognize any reform that eliminates elections or seeks to perpetuate the Ortega-Murillo family in power, and to demand the repeal of the repressive laws. Restoring democracy in Nicaragua entails recovering the independence of the branches of government and guaranteeing free, transparent, and plural elections with international observation.
- Promote urgent action at the United Nations and in other multilateral forums, strengthening the mechanisms of investigation, documentation, and accountability with respect to Nicaragua.
- Adopt individual sanctions and other diplomatic measures against those who design, approve, or carry out the elimination of elections and the new repressive provisions, while avoiding general economic measures that would harm the Nicaraguan people.
- Demand the release of all persons imprisoned for political reasons; the restoration of public liberties; the restitution of nationality and political rights to those who have been stripped of citizenship; and guarantees for the safe return of those in exile.
- Strengthen protection, refuge, and migration regularization for persecuted Nicaraguans, as well as support for the victims, human-rights organizations, and independent media.
- Demand the return of all property arbitrarily confiscated from individuals, media outlets, civil society organizations, universities, religious communities, and all other affected sectors.
- And let the international community declare itself profoundly offended at the violation of democratic principles and the international order, as the Nicaraguan people are stripped of their right to elect and to be elected.
The international community should not wait for this announcement to be formalized before reacting. Should the regime nonetheless carry out the abolition of elections and enact into law the indefinite permanence of the Ortega-Murillo family, the democratic states must then proceed to the full denial of its legitimacy, undertake a comprehensive review of their diplomatic relations, and refuse recognition to the authorities and structures that emerge from that new antidemocratic order.
Sovereignty does not belong to a family, to a party, or to those who control the institutions and the weapons. It belongs exclusively to the Nicaraguan people—the people from whom they intend today to definitively wrest the right to decide, seeking to close the doors of Nicaragua on all of us who wish to return to our homeland. . . .
India
Throughout the summer of 2026, young Indians poured into the streets of New Delhi and beyond, first to demand accountability for an exam leak and then to seek broader educational and democratic reforms. The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)—formed as a joke after India’s Chief Justice likened unemployed youth activists to the insect—has been at the forefront of the demonstrations, which led the country’s education minister to step down. Despite the movement’s success and continued activism, on August 5, founder Abhijeet Dipke rejected the notion that the CJP should become an official political party. Excerpts from his statement appear below.
Whether it’s the political system, the judiciary, the media, or the Election Commission, public trust in all these institutions has eroded completely. The support our movement received wasn’t limited to education only. As the movement grew, the public’s anger at the diminished trust in these institutions was visible.
Anger was visible, it was visible at Jantar Mantar, in Mumbai, in Bengal, in Chennai, and across the country. Therefore, we believe that a public movement is needed to restore accountability to these institutions and to restore neutrality. Public pressure is needed, and I believe that the current political system is in dire straits.
People elect someone in the morning, and by evening, someone else forms the government. People elect MLAs [Members of the Legislative Assembly] and MPs [Members of Parliament] from one party, and by evening, they are in another party . . . . Whatever party comes to power, it is dismantled. By sending the ED [Enforcement Directorate] and CBI [Central Bureau of Investigations], the public is distressed in such a situation.
Because of all these things, our public movement gained support because everyone rose above their ideologies and political parties and came together to show their anger against all the wrong things happening in the country, against those who are weakening democracy. Now, in India, a public movement has taken off. . . . I believe that what India needs right now is a public movement. . . .
Belarus
On August 9, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the exiled former presidential candidate, spoke to mark the sixth anniversary of Belarus’s rigged 2020 election and the historic mass protests that followed. When faced with real opposition from Tsikhanouskaya’s husband, President Alyaksandr Lukashenka threw him in prison. Tsikhanouskaya herself then assumed the mantle. After the autocrat declared victory, mass protests erupted in cities across Belarus. Decrying Russia’s interference in her country and its war in Ukraine, Tsikhanouskaya urged support for Ukraine and voiced hope for the future of both countries. Following are excerpts from her remarks.
Six years is a very long time. In those years, some people had children, while others spent months waiting for letters from prison. Some learned to hide their anxiety from their parents and children, to work, to smile, to say, “everything is fine”—when in fact, nothing was fine.
Almost every Belarusian family now has its own “before” and “after.” Arrests, searches, a hurried departure with one suitcase. Everyday life itself has changed.
Every year, the country loses some of its most important professionals. Doctors, teachers, and IT specialists are leaving. . . . This is what the consequences of repression look like today.
It still hurts. And six years is long enough to become tired and to start wondering whether any of this is worth it. But with every year, one thing becomes clearer: 2020 changed Belarus forever.
They are trying to silence us, but that does not mean we have agreed. They scattered us across different cities and countries, but we did not become strangers to one another. They are trying to convince us that it was all in vain, but we already know what Belarus can be—and what we ourselves can be.
For me, August 9 is a promise not to forget. Not to forget that we are one nation. . . . And all we wanted was one thing: to be free and to be called human beings.
Perhaps today that feeling looks different. It means not demanding heroism from those who live every day in fear for themselves and their loved ones. . . . Not allowing these difficult years to turn us into strangers who no longer trust one another.
We do not know what events lie ahead or when an opportunity to change the fate of our country will arise. But one day, Belarus will once again need our ability to trust one another, act together, and take responsibility. And when that moment comes, we need to reach it not broken and not estranged from one another, but as people who still remember why we took to the streets six years ago.
Tunisia
On 1 May 2026, the Tunisian National Bar Association (ONAT) held a general assembly to address threats to judicial independence and announce a nationwide mobilization plan, which the prosecutor sought to nullify in court. On June 5, Lawyers for Lawyers (L4L) published a statement signed by 39 civil society organizations condemning escalating attacks on lawyers, judges, and civil society in Tunisia. Excerpts appear below.
L4L, together with 38 international legal and human rights organisations, condemns the Tunisian authorities’ systematic and escalating campaign of intimidation, prosecution and retaliation against the legal profession, the judiciary and independent civil society. . . .
The undersigned organisations express particular concern at the authorities’ efforts to obstruct and delegitimise the Tunisian National Bar Association (ONAT). Following an extraordinary general assembly on 1 May 2026—convened to address deteriorating conditions in the courts and threats to judicial independence—ONAT announced a mobilisation plan including regional strikes and a nationwide general strike planned for 18 June 2026. Rather than engaging with these demands, the Tunis prosecutor sought to nullify the assembly’s decisions in court. The undersigned organisations consider this a direct attack on the legal profession’s institutional role in defending judicial independence, fair trial guarantees and the rule of law. . . .
Eight lawyers are currently deprived of their liberty in Tunisia, including a former Bar President. A further five have been forced into exile and twelve are subject to ongoing judicial harassment. The case of Ayachi Hammami, currently serving a five-year sentence following his conviction for representing defendants in the so-called “conspiracy against state security” case, illustrates the broader pattern. UN experts have described his prosecution as a direct threat to the integrity and fairness of legal proceedings in Tunisia. Sonia Dahmani received a further two-year conviction on 25 May 2026, following eighteen months of pre-trial detention and a prior conviction on appeal—all in connection with public statements made on television and radio. Chawki Tabib, former President of the Tunis Bar Association and former head of the National Anti-Corruption Authority, was convicted on 21 May 2026 to ten years in prison, with his assets frozen in April 2026. Dalila Msaddak faces seven separate investigations under Decree-Law No. 54, all arising from her work as defence counsel in the conspiracy case. . . .
The statement also documents the prosecution of Judge Anas Hmedi, President of the Association of Tunisian Magistrates, convicted to one year in prison for actions taken in his capacity as head of the association. The UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers has described the proceedings against him as an “evident reprisal.” Over the past year, suspension orders have been issued against at least 25 civil society organisations, including Avocats Sans Fronti`eres, the International Commission of Jurists, OMCT, and the Tunisian League for the Defence of Human Rights. . . .
The undersigned organisations call on the Tunisian authorities to immediately end all harassment and arbitrary detention of lawyers, judges and civil society actors; drop all proceedings brought solely for the exercise of professional duties or human rights; quash the conviction of Judge Hmedi; release Ayachi Hammami, Chawki Tabib and all others arbitrarily detained; lift suspension orders against civil society organisations; and bring Tunisian law and practice into conformity with its international human rights obligations. . . .