UN experts warn of grave abuses against Persons with Disabilities in North Korea by UN Human Rights Office, agencies Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)   Sep. 2025   DPRK: UN report finds 10 years of increased suffering, repression and fear. (OHCHR)   The human rights situation in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has not improved over the past decade and, in many instances, has degraded, bringing even more suffering to the population.   Covering the period following the 2014 UN Commission of Inquiry, the latest findings point to the introduction of more laws, policies and practices that are subjecting citizens to increased surveillance and control in all parts of life.   “No other population is under such restrictions in today’s world,” the report concludes, pointing to the remarks of one escapee who recounted, ‘to block the people’s eyes and ears, they strengthened the crackdowns. It was a form of control aimed at eliminating even the smallest signs of dissatisfaction or complaint’.   In 2025, the country remains more closed than at almost any other time in its history, it reads, adding: “The human rights landscape cannot be divorced from the broader isolation that the State is currently pursuing.”   A significant aspect of the report is the link between the degrading human rights situation in the DPRK, the country’s increasing self-imposed isolation and the peace and security situation on the Korean Peninsula.   “What we have witnessed is a lost decade,” UN Human Rights Chief Volker Turk said. “And it pains me to say that if DPRK continues on its current trajectory, the population will be subjected to more of the suffering, brutal repression and fear that they have endured for so long.”   The report says political prison camps continue to operate. The fate of the hundreds of thousands of disappeared people, including abducted foreign nationals of the Republic of Korea, Japan and elsewhere, remains unknown.   Citizens continue to be subjected to unremitting propaganda by the State for their entire lives. The right to food continues to be violated, with some State policies exacerbating hunger.   Today, the death penalty is more widely allowed by law and implemented in practice. Enjoyment of freedom of expression and access to information have significantly regressed, with the implementation of severe new punishments, including the death penalty, for a range of acts including the sharing of foreign media such as TV dramas. The surveillance of the population has become even more pervasive, aided by advances in technology.   The report, which is based on hundreds of interviews by the Office along with supporting materials, points to the increased use of forced labour in many forms, particularly so-called “shock brigades”, usually deployed to take on physically demanding and hazardous sectors such as mining and construction. They often come from poorer families and in recent years, the Government has used thousands of orphans and street children in coal mines and at other hazardous sites and for extensive hours.   The UN Human Rights Office continues to document human rights violations, some of which may amount to international crimes, while the State has no independent institutions or processes to ensure accountability and provide victims with effective remedies..   http://news.un.org/en/story/2025/09/1165837 http://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2025/09/blocking-peoples-eyes-and-ears-human-rights-violations-democratic-peoples-republic http://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/country-reports/ahrc6058-situation-human-rights-democratic-peoples-republic-korea-report   UN experts warn of grave abuses against Persons with Disabilities in North Korea   On 3 September the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) issued its findings on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), following the country’s review during the Committee’s latest session.   The CRPD expressed grave concern over credible reports of systematic abuses against persons with disabilities. These include accounts of infanticide of children with disabilities, sometimes carried out in medical facilities with official consent, forced abortions and sterilizations and medical experimentation.   The CRPD condemned the DPRK’s eugenic and discriminatory medical policies, which under the guise of “disability prevention,” infringe on the right to life of persons with disabilities.   The risks faced by persons with disabilities in the DPRK are further compounded by gender and age. Women and children with disabilities are subjected to gender-based and sexual violence, including coerced marriage, abduction, trafficking and rape. The CRPD noted the absence of legal protections, adequate investigative mechanisms, support services and prevention efforts, leaving survivors without access to justice or redress.   Although DPRK authorities have taken some formal steps toward protecting disability rights since 2016, including ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, hosting the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and accepting relevant recommendations during its third and fourth Universal Periodic Reviews, a significant gap remains between its international commitments and domestic implementation.   For instance, national legislation does not explicitly guarantee the right to life for persons with disabilities, including those in detention and healthcare settings, where they face heightened risks of medical neglect, starvation and abuse without independent oversight.   Human rights abuses and restrictions on fundamental freedoms targeting persons with disabilities are inseparable from the DPRK’s broader system of discrimination and persecution.   Julia Saltzman, DPRK expert at the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, said, “The systematic enforcement of discriminatory and exclusionary policies affecting persons with disabilities in the DPRK is not incidental but a tool of state repression, embedded within broader patterns of indoctrination, discrimination and persecution. These policies and practices occur within a pervasive climate of gross human rights violations and impunity that often amount to crimes against humanity.”   The DPRK should amend its constitution and domestic legislation to guarantee equality and non-discrimination for persons with disabilities, as well as adopt a comprehensive anti-discrimination law that includes effective remedies and protections. The government must take a gender-sensitive approach, including measures to prevent gender-based and sexual violence, and expand access to support services for women with disabilities. It should also permit independent monitoring and grant full access to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and relevant UN Special Procedures.   http://www.globalr2p.org/publications/atrocity-alert-no-449/ http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/SessionDetails1.aspx?SessionID=2795&Lang=en http://www.ohchr.org/en/treaty-bodies/crpd Visit the related web page
	As the climate crisis worsens, it is concerning to see powerful governments censor scientific data by Pallavi Sethi Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environement   Aug. 2025   At a time when the global climate crisis is escalating, some governments are choosing to distort and conceal the evidence of its impacts.   In the seven months since taking office, the Trump administration has been steadily erasing the evidence of climate science. This is no longer just a matter of denying science or delaying action, it is about controlling who gets to create, share, and access knowledge.   It is an epistemic assault, one that we have seen happen before. In Canada, nearly a decade ago, Stephen Harper’s government silenced climate scientists and destroyed data. In 2012, the Venezuelan government removed environmental statistics from public view.   And in Brazil in 2020, the Bolsonaro administration tried to discredit data related to deforestation and fired the officer behind it. These cases point to a disturbing pattern of governments trying to conceal facts, a phenomenon becoming increasingly blatant in the US.   Even as climate disasters become more frequent and extreme, such as the recent Texas floods that claimed 135 lives, the Trump administration is gutting the very systems needed to understand and respond to the crisis.   Proposed budget cuts to federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), are undermining their ability to monitor climate risks, develop solutions and protect communities.   However, there is a growing movement where scientists and grassroot organisations have come together to protect crucial climate data.   The Trump administration is aggressively rolling back climate action, including erasing scientific data, slashing research funding, and removing terms like “climate change” from federal websites.   In the proposed fiscal budget for 2026, the administration plans to cut NOAA’s budget by 27 per cent, which would end its Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). This could impact the country’s ability to accurately predict extreme weather.   In the latest blow, the administration has proposed to repeal the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding, the legal basis for nearly all federal climate regulations. The scientific finding, under the Clean Air Act, based on extensive evidence, concluded that greenhouse gases threaten public health and safety.   The repeal would strip the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases from new vehicles, power plants, and other sources of pollution. If the rollback is carried out, it will be one of the most damaging environmental actions by a US government.   Another concerning target of the Trump administration has been the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, the longest-running station for measuring atmospheric carbon dioxide. The facility, which was launched in 1956, produced the Keeling Curve (a daily record of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration), and brought global attention to the rapid increase in greenhouse gas levels.   Now, President Trump wants to shut this laboratory despite expert warnings that this move would impact the understanding of “how climate is changing, at what pace, and where.”   Beyond gutting regulations, the administration is also erasing scientific evidence.   It has removed the online website that hosted the National Climate Assessment (NCA) reports, published every four years, and dismissed hundreds of staff working on the next edition. Without the NCA reports, cities could struggle to prepare for climate disasters.   These actions represent a deliberate effort not just to discredit climate evidence but to suppress it entirely. It is also a rejection of evidence-based governance where both the scientific findings and the institutions responsible for producing them are systematically undermined.   Institutional censorship not only undermines scientific integrity but also erodes public trust in democratic institutions. This type of censorship can also affect international cooperation and slow progress, especially since the US is the second largest carbon emitter.   The suppression of climate data by the US government has global implications. The international scientific community depends on the US for critical data which helps in responding to climate disasters.   Agencies such as NOAA, EPA and NASA have long been providers of free and publicly accessible information to experts all over the world. Since agencies like NOAA monitor vast areas, including entire oceans, researchers in the Global South, for instance, rely heavily on them to monitor and respond to environmental challenges.   The Centre for Sustainable Development at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in India uses NOAA’s climate datasets to track weather and ocean conditions in the Indian Ocean. The Institute uses this information to advise government agencies on how to best prepare and recover from natural disasters. Similarly, scientists at Singapore’s Earth Observatory rely on NOAA data to model and predict rising sea levels, which is critical for strengthening Singapore’s coastal resilience.   Disruptions to such data also risk deepening existing scientific and geopolitical inequalities. Many scientific institutions in wealthier nations may have the ability to develop robust data sources. However, many in the Global South lack the technical infrastructure and financial resources to do the same.   Therefore, limiting access to US climate datasets can especially impact the ability of vulnerable nations to address climate change effectively. In addition, when a powerful country like the US withdraws from climate leadership, it risks sending a dangerous message to other nations that climate inaction is acceptable. This can embolden governments to scale back on their own efforts and undermine collective progress.   Despite efforts to suppress climate data, scientists and grassroots organisations are working together to protect this vital information. For instance, the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative archives data that affects the communities most at risk from Trump’s proposed policies. The Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science in Germany, the European Space Agency, and the National Centre for Scientific Research in France have archived data from US agencies like NOAA and EPA.   As the climate crisis worsens, it is concerning to see powerful governments censor scientific data. But the growing resistance from scientists, civil society and academic institutions proves that knowledge cannot be easily erased. It is also an important reminder that governments cannot be the sole custodians of scientific knowledge. Instead, we should view science as a shared and transnational public resource that we must protect and defend.   http://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/inside-trumps-campaign-to-censor-climate-science/ http://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02868-1 http://climate.law.columbia.edu/Silencing-Science-Tracker   Sep. 2025   Medical groups must stand up for science and the truth - former directors of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (NYT)   We have each had the honor and privilege of serving as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, either in a permanent or an acting capacity, dating back to 1977. Collectively, we spent more than 100 years working at the C.D.C., one of the world’s pre-eminent public health agencies. We served under multiple Republican and Democratic administrations — every president from Jimmy Carter to Donald Trump — alongside thousands of dedicated staff members who shared our commitment to saving lives and improving health.   What the health and human services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has done to the C.D.C. and to our nation’s public health system over the past several months — culminating in his decision to fire Dr. Susan Monarez as C.D.C. director days ago — is unlike anything we had ever seen at the agency and unlike anything our country had ever experienced.   Mr. Kennedy has fired thousands of federal health workers and severely weakened programs designed to protect Americans from cancer, heart attacks, strokes, lead poisoning, injury, violence and more. Amid the largest measles outbreak in the United States in a generation, he’s focused on unproven treatments while downplaying vaccines.   He canceled investments in promising medical research that will leave us ill prepared for future health emergencies. He replaced experts on federal health advisory committees with unqualified individuals who share his dangerous and unscientific views.   He announced the end of U.S. support for global vaccination programs that protect millions of children and keep Americans safe, citing flawed research and making inaccurate statements. And he championed federal legislation that will cause millions of people with health insurance through Medicaid to lose their coverage. Firing Dr. Monarez — which led to the resignations of top C.D.C. officials — adds considerable fuel to this raging fire.   We are worried about the wide-ranging impact that all these decisions will have on America's health security. Residents of rural communities and people with disabilities will have even more limited access to health care. Families with low incomes who rely most heavily on community health clinics and support from state and local health departments will have fewer resources available to them. Children risk losing access to lifesaving vaccines because of the cost. This is unacceptable, and it should alarm every American, regardless of political leanings.   The C.D.C. is an agency under Health and Human Services. During our C.D.C. tenures, we did not always agree with our leaders, but they never gave us reason to doubt that they would rely on data-driven insights for our protection or that they would support public health workers. We need only look to Operation Warp Speed during the first Trump administration — which produced highly effective and safe vaccines that saved millions of lives during the Covid-19 pandemic — as a shining example of what Health and Human Services can accomplish when health and science are at the forefront of its mission.   The current department leadership, however, operates under a very different set of rules. When Mr. Kennedy administered the oath of office to Dr. Monarez on July 31, he called her “a public health expert with unimpeachable scientific credentials.” But when she refused weeks later to rubber-stamp his dangerous and unfounded vaccine recommendations or heed his demand to fire senior C.D.C. staff members, he decided she was expendable.   These are not typical requests from a health secretary to a C.D.C. director. Not even close. None of us would have agreed to the secretary’s demands, and we applaud Dr. Monarez for standing up for the agency and the health of our communities.   When the C.D.C. was created in 1946, the average life expectancy in the United States was around 66 years. Today it is more than 78 years. While medical advances have helped, it is public health that has played the biggest role in improving both the length and the quality of life in our nation. The C.D.C. has led efforts to eradicate smallpox, increase access to lifesaving vaccinations and significantly reduce smoking rates.   The agency is also on the front lines in communities across the country, delivering crucial but often less visible wins — such as containing an outbreak of H.I.V. cases in Scott County, Ind., and protecting residents in East Palestine, Ohio, from toxic chemical exposure.   The C.D.C. is not perfect. What institution is? But over its history, regardless of which party has controlled the White House or Congress, the agency has not wavered from its mission. To those on the C.D.C. staff who continue to perform their jobs heroically in the face of the excruciating circumstances, we offer our sincere thanks and appreciation. Their ongoing dedication is a model for all of us. But it’s clear that the agency is hurting badly. The loss of Dr. Monarez and other top leaders will make it far more difficult for the C.D.C. to do what it has done for about 80 years: work around the clock to protect Americans from threats to their lives and health.   We have a message for the rest of the nation as well. This is a time to rally to protect the health of every American. Congress must exercise its oversight authority over Health and Human Services. State and local governments must fill funding gaps where they can. Philanthropy and the private sector must step up their community investments. Medical groups must continue to stand up for science and truth. Physicians must continue to support their patients with sound guidance and empathy. And each of us must do what public health does best: look out for one another.   The men and women who have joined the C.D.C. across generations have done so not for prestige or power but because they believe deeply in the call to service. They deserve a health and human services secretary who stands up for health, supports science and has their back. So, too, does our country.   * Dr. William Foege served as director of the C.D.C. from 1977 to 1983. Dr. William Roper served as director of the C.D.C. from 1990 to 1993. Dr. David Satcher served as director of the C.D.C. from 1993 to 1998. Dr. Jeffrey Koplan served as director of the C.D.C. from 1998 to 2002. Dr. Richard Besser served as acting director of the C.D.C. in 2009. Dr. Tom Frieden served as director of the C.D.C. from 2009 to 2017. Dr. Anne Schuchat served as acting director of the C.D.C. in 2017 and 2018. Dr. Rochelle Walensky served as director of the C.D.C. from 2021 to 2023. Dr. Mandy Cohen served as director of the C.D.C. from 2023 to 2025.   http://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/01/opinion/cdc-leaders-kennedy.html http://www.acponline.org/acp-newsroom/leading-medical-professional-societies-patient-sue-hhs-robert-f-kennedy-jr-for-unlawful-unilateral http://www.savehhs.org http://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/ama-press-releases/ama-statement-florida-ending-all-vaccine-mandates http://www.defendpublichealth.org/resource/talking-points-sounding-alarm-about-cdc-budget-cuts-fy2026 Visit the related web page
	View more stories