© Photo by Thomas Hawk via Flickr
ICJ: Poland Files Intervention in Lithuania v. Belarus Migrant Smuggling Case
US: Supreme Court Rejects President Trump’s Executive Order to Restrict Birthright Citizenship
Germany: Prosecutors Arrest Suspect in 1994 Rwanda Genocide Case
Germany: Indicts Ukrainian in Nord Stream Pipeline Case
KSC: Trial Judgment Against Former KLA Leaders Postponed Until September
ECtHR: Finds Italy Failed to Protect Domestic Violence Victims
ECtHR: Finds Poland Violated Child’s Right to Private Life in Birth Registration Case
France: Criminal Complaint Filed for Alleged War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in Lebanon
UN: Experts Urge Stronger Global Cooperation as Terrorism Threats Evolve
UN: Commission Warns of Severe Rights Crisis in Eastern DRC
UN: Warns of Deteriorating Humanitarian Situation Following Venezuelan Earthquakes
HRW: Investigation Reveals “War on Drugs” Abuses Continue in the Philippines
ICC: Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger Initiate Withdrawal from the Rome Statute
China: New Ethnic Unity Law Comes into Force Amid Concerns over Assimilation of Minority Groups
Sudan: UN Human Rights Council Holds Urgent Debate on El Obeid
EU: Imposes Sanctions on Six Russian Individuals for Navalny Poisoning
Lebanon-Israel: Framework Agreement Welcomed by EU Amid Concerns from Human Rights Groups
On 30 June 2026, Poland filed a declaration of intervention before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case of Alleged Smuggling of Migrants (Lithuania v. Belarus) under Article 63 of the Court’s Statute. Poland argued that, as a party to the UN Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants, it has a legal interest in the Court’s interpretation of several provisions of the treaty, including obligations relating to preventing migrant smuggling, border controls, information sharing, and migrant protection. Lithuania and Belarus have been invited to submit written observations on Poland’s request. The underlying case, instituted by Lithuania in May 2025, alleges that Belarus breached the Protocol by facilitating and enabling the large-scale smuggling of irregular migrants into Lithuania and by failing to cooperate in preventing the practice. Belarus disputes the allegations.
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/200/200-20260630-pre-01-00-en.pdf
On 30 June 2026, the United States Supreme Court ruled by a 6–3 majority that the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship to all persons born in the US who are subject to its jurisdiction. This decision effectively struck down an executive order issued by President Donald Trump, which sought to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are neither US citizens nor lawful permanent residents. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, held that the executive order was at odds with the Citizenship Clause of the Constitution and reaffirmed the Court’s longstanding interpretation established in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The Court determined that any modification to birthright citizenship would necessitate a constitutional amendment rather than executive action. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented, contending that the Citizenship Clause did not extend to the children of undocumented migrants.
On 1 July 2026, German prosecutors announced the arrest of a German-Rwandan national suspected of aiding the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi population in Rwanda. The suspect, identified as Innocent S. under German privacy rules, is accused of complicity in genocide and 25 counts of murder allegedly committed while serving as an assistant to the mayor of Kayove in northwestern Rwanda. According to prosecutors, the suspect ordered the killing of 25 Tutsis on five occasions, helped compile lists of targeted individuals, and used his official position to incite violence against Tutsis. He is also alleged to have personally participated in one killing by stabbing a victim. The case is being pursued under Germany’s universal jurisdiction framework, which permits domestic courts to prosecute certain international crimes regardless of where they were committed.
On 1 July 2026, German federal prosecutors indicted a Ukrainian national in connection with the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline explosions in the Baltic Sea. The suspect, identified under German privacy rules as Serhii K., is accused of coordinating a team that placed explosive devices on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines near Denmark’s Bornholm island, causing major damage to critical energy infrastructure. According to prosecutors, the alleged operation involved a sailing yacht, Andromeda, and a small crew including divers and explosives specialists. Serhii K. is alleged to have acted as the on-board coordinator and team leader. He was arrested in Italy in 2025 and transferred to Germany later that year. The indictment includes charges related to attacking civilian infrastructure and causing explosions. The suspect denies involvement. The Nord Stream blasts, which occurred in September 2022, severed key Russian gas supply routes to Europe and intensified Europe’s energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. German authorities have asserted jurisdiction on the basis that the pipelines terminate in Germany and their destruction affected national energy security.
On 1 July 2026, the Kosovo Specialist Chambers (KSC) announced that the trial judgment in the case of The Specialist Prosecutor v. Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli, Rexhep Selimi, and Jakup Krasniqi will be delivered on September 16, 2026, marking the second extension of the deadline. The four former leaders of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) face charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including persecution, unlawful detention, torture, enforced disappearances, and the murder of at least 102 individuals during the 1998–1999 Kosovo conflict. All four defendants have pleaded not guilty. The Trial Panel explained that the deadline for delivering the judgement was extended due to the complexity of proceedings and the volume of evidence, stating that the additional time was necessary to ensure a fair, comprehensive, and reasoned assessment of the evidentiary record.
https://www.scp-ks.org/en/thaci-et-al-trial-judgment-scheduled-16-september-2026
On 2 July 2026, The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Italy violated the rights of a mother and her two children by failing to respond effectively to allegations of domestic violence and by leaving the family in a shelter for more than three years. In Ubeda and Others v Italy, the Court found violations of Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The applicant reported in April 2021 that her former partner had subjected her and their children to physical and psychological abuse. Although the authorities placed the family in a shelter, the Court found that criminal proceedings were neither prompt nor effective. It also criticised sexist and stereotypical remarks by a prosecutor, who had dismissed one alleged assault as a “bad joke” and relied on gender stereotypes when assessing an allegation of sexual violence. The Court further held that the authorities failed to reassess whether the family’s prolonged stay in the shelter remained necessary or to consider less restrictive alternatives. It also found that the Juvenile Court took more than three years to resolve custody issues while failing to properly address the domestic violence allegations, to the detriment of the children’s welfare.
On 2 July 2026, The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Poland violated the rights of a Polish child by refusing to register a foreign birth certificate recognising the child’s birth mother and her same-sex partner as parents. In A.P. and R.P. v Poland, the Court found violations of Article 8 and Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in respect of the child’s private life. The applicants, a Polish mother and her son, lived in the UK, where the child’s birth certificate listed the mother and her female partner as parents. Polish authorities refused to register the certificate on public policy grounds, relying on domestic rules recognising only a mother and a father. The Court held that, although the refusal did not violate the family’s right to respect for family life, it placed the child in legal uncertainty by preventing him from obtaining Polish identity documents despite his Polish citizenship. The authorities had failed to properly assess the child’s best interests and had drawn an unjustified distinction based on the fact that he was born into a same-sex family. In a related case, A.D.-K. and Others v Poland, the Court declared the application inadmissible because the family had not shown any practical impact on their private or family life.
On 2 July 2026, it was reported that a criminal complaint had been filed before the French judicial authorities alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity tied to Israeli military operations in Lebanon. The complaint, filed on behalf of a Franco-Lebanese national whose family members perished in an airstrike in Tyre in April 2026, was submitted by attorney Emmanuel Daoud under France’s universal jurisdiction framework. It claims that the airstrike was part of a broader pattern of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, including the destruction of residential areas, hospitals, religious sites, and civilian infrastructure. It further argues that the actions in question constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity under international law, referencing reports from international human rights organisations that document widespread assaults on civilian populations and the use of white phosphorus. The filing represents the second criminal complaint in France regarding Israeli military actions in Lebanon and reflects growing efforts to use domestic courts to seek accountability for alleged international crimes, especially when international judicial options remain limited.
On 29 June 2026, the UN officials spotlighted emerging terrorism threats during the UN’s Fourth Counter-Terrorism Week. The conference was attended by over 1,000 participants from governments, civil society, international organisations, academia, and the private sector globally. Speaking before the General Assembly Hall, UN Acting Under-Secretary-General for Counter-Terrorism, Alexandre Zouev, spoke of an evolving terrorism landscape in which terrorist groups are using geopolitical instability, socioeconomic inequality, and technological developments such as artificial intelligence to their advantage. UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, called on the international community to work together to meet this challenge. Although member states hold primary responsibility for countering terrorism, experts also stressed the significance of including groups like victims, women, and young people in these efforts. Representative from the Victims of Terrorism Associations Network, Dr. Fatima Ali Haider, pressed for women’s inclusion and leadership in strategic discussions and policymaking. Other participants highlighted the critical importance of having trained first responders, as well as young people’s involvement as a driver towards positive change. Participants also heard from people impacted by radicalisation, who highlighted the need for governments and organisations to provide psychosocial support and reintegration opportunities to offer people a second chance after being radicalised.
On 29 June 2026, the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Human Rights Situation in the South and North Kivu Provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) warned of an exceptionally serious human rights emergency in the eastern DRC. In its first formal update to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the Commission highlighted grave threats to civilians amid a worsening security situation. Abuses include sexual violence, sexual slavery, unlawful killings, forced recruitment, arbitrary arrests, and attacks on schools and medical facilities. Disease, displacement, and continued fighting have left communities exposed and unprotected, a crisis which has been compounded by the recent Ebola outbreak. The Commission was established by the Human Rights Council to investigate alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in North and South Kivu. Its update is based on more than 80 online and in-person consultations with a range of stakeholders, including victims, survivor-support groups, civil society organisations, human rights activists, UN officials, government representatives, among others. The Commission did not yet make final conclusions, given the preliminary nature of the investigations, but urged for all parties to enable swift, safe, and unobstructed access to humanitarian aid, especially for at-risk populations. It also reiterated its commitment to a victim-centred approach to establish the facts and promote accountability efforts.
On 30 June 2026, the UN warned of a worsening humanitarian situation in Venezuela six days after two earthquakes devastated the central-northern part of the country. The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) reported food shortages across the worst-hit state of La Guaira, with communications largely cut off and people struggling to access basic services. Following the UNHCR’s rapid needs assessment in the aftermath of the earthquakes, the agency found that roughly half of survivors across the states of La Guaira, the Capital District, Miranda, Aragua, and Carabobo are staying with neighbours and relatives. Meanwhile, 40% are sleeping in streets, public spaces, churches, schools, and improvised facilities in unsafe and unhygienic conditions that fall short of basic standards. The agency also raised concern about unaccompanied and separated children. The UN World Health Organization (WHO) stressed that health services in affected states are under severe pressure. Overcrowding, backlogs, and a breakdown in forensic and morgue services have exposed people to heightened risk of disease outbreaks, including measles, diphtheria, dengue, and malaria. A 47-tonne UNICEF humanitarian aid shipment arrived from its Copenhagen hub on 30 June, with more expected to come. However, even combined with a previous shipment from Panama, UNICEF predicts an estimated 680,000 children are in need of aid and is calling for US$52 million to scale up the crisis response.
On 30 June 2026, Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that Philippine authorities continue to carry out extrajudicial killings and arbitrary arrests with impunity as part of the government’s anti-drug campaign. The “war on drugs” began 10 years ago under former President Rodrigo Duterte and involved abusive police raids and the arrest and execution of suspects, often without reliable evidence. Duterte was arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in March 2025 for crimes against humanity charges for his murderous anti-drugs operations, during which human rights groups estimate up to 30,000 people were killed. Current president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., initially pledged to address drug issues through “rehabilitation and socioeconomic development” when he won elections in 2022. However, in 2025 he relaunched anti-drug operations and has never revoked Duterte-era orders and policies. Independent monitoring by the Dahas Project has recorded 1,273 drug-war-related killings since Marcos took office in June 2022, with only five cases resulting in convictions since 2016. HRW reported that although extrajudicial killings during police operations have fallen under Marcos, illegal arrests have risen. Police also continue to intimidate and terrorise communities, masked under a facade of professionalism which makes abuses harder to document. HRW urged the Marcos government to end the country’s “war on drugs” once and for all, support accountability efforts, and protect the rights of all Filipinos.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/06/30/philippines-drug-war-abuses-persist-10-years-on
On 1 July 2026, Amnesty International released a new report finding that Rapid Support Forces (RSF) committed crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing in North Darfur state, Sudan. The organisation identified three senior RSF commanders who oversaw war crimes between early 2024 and October 2025 during efforts to seize El-Fasher. The report found that the RSF committed murder, torture, rape, sexual slavery, extermination, and persecution against civilians, amongst other crimes, during fighting with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF). The group also raised alarm at the displacement of hundreds of thousands of children, as well as the disproportionate impact of the conflict on people with disabilities. The report is based on interviews with 247 survivors and witnesses of abuses and open-source investigations, including video and satellite imagery analysis. Nine of these videos showed RSF commanders conducting or directing crimes. During the report launch on 1 July in Nairobi, Kenya, Amnesty International Secretary General Agnès Callamard called for an immediate ceasefire and urged the deployment of an international protection force. Callamard also called on the international community to promote accountability efforts for crimes committed in Sudan, including by supporting the investigation and prosecution of the commanders named in Amnesty’s report.
On 1 July 2026, the International Criminal Court (ICC) confirmed that Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger had officially notified the UN Secretary-General of their decisions to withdraw from the Rome Statute, the Court’s foundational treaty. This action initiates the one-year withdrawal process stipulated in Article 127 of the Statute. These notifications followed earlier announcements by the three military-led governments, which have increasingly distanced themselves from international institutions while enhancing cooperation through the Alliance of Sahel States. Although the withdrawal will not take immediate effect, these states will continue to be bound by their obligations under the Rome Statute for one year, and this process will not impact any ongoing investigations or proceedings initiated prior to the effective date of their withdrawal.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/07/burkina-mali-niger/
On 1 July 2026, China’s Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Law entered into force, framing “ethnic unity” as a precondition for national development and requiring alignment with a single, state-defined national identity. Amnesty International warned that the law, which prohibits vaguely defined acts that “undermine ethnic unity or create ethnic division,” risks further entrenching existing policies of forced assimilation affecting Uyghurs, Tibetans, Mongolians and other non-Han groups, amid existing measures such as state-run boarding schools and restrictions on minority languages and religious practice. During a State Council press conference on 24 June, senior Chinese officials confirmed that provisions of the law are intended to apply extraterritorially, meaning individuals and organisations outside China could be held accountable for conduct deemed to undermine ethnic unity or incite separatism. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, urged China to repeal the law, warning it could restrict freedom of language, religion, education, and peaceful assembly, while the US and the EU separately raised concern over its extraterritorial reach, and Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council described it as a tool for forced unification.
On 3 July 2026, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) convened its 13th urgent debate since 2006 to address the human rights situation in and around El Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state in Sudan. The debate followed a formal request by a core group of five member states, comprising Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, and the UK, and came three days after the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) warned, on 30 June, that intensifying drone strikes were disrupting access to drinking water and electricity in El Obeid and that the city could not be allowed to become “another El Fasher,” a reference to the earlier siege and mass killing of civilians there. Ahead of the debate, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, described the situation as a “red alert” requiring urgent attention from heads of state and government. A draft resolution tabled by the same core group condemns the escalating violence attributed to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and its allies, encourages greater support for countries hosting Sudanese refugees, and condemns all forms of external interference in the conflict. The draft resolution is expected to be put to a vote on Monday. The convening of an urgent debate is a rare procedural mechanism, invoked only a handful of times in the Council’s history, and reflects the deepening international alarm over the situation in North Kordofan.
On 3 July 2026, the Council of the European Union (the Council) decided to impose restrictive measures on six Russian nationals involved in the development of chemical weapons, specifically epibatidine, traces of which were found in samples taken from the body of Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny following his death in a Russian penal colony. The Council stated that the presence of the toxin led to the conclusion that poisoning with epibatidine was highly likely the cause of his death. The individuals listed are scientists and researchers within the military sphere, several of whom worked at the Signal Scientific Centre, where they researched and published on the synthesis of epibatidine, contributing to its development as a chemical weapon. The listings include Igor Babkin, head of the centre’s laboratory. The measures were adopted under the EU’s legal framework for restrictive measures against the proliferation and use of chemical weapons, first established in 2018, and consist of an asset freeze and a travel ban to the EU for those named. With this addition, the sanctions regime now applies to a total of 31 individuals and six entities.
On 3 July 2026, six human rights and press freedom organisations, comprising Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, Legal Agenda, the Lebanese Centre for Human Rights (CLDH), Reporters Without Borders, and the Press Syndicate in Lebanon, issued a joint statement warning that the framework agreement signed by Israel and Lebanon in Washington on 26 June risks betraying victims of war crimes committed during the conflict. The statement singled out clause 13, which bars recourse to hostile or adverse actions in international political or legal fora, as a provision that risks foreclosing victims’ access to justice, and clause three, which conditions the return of displaced residents on prior disarmament, as prolonging displacement in violation of international humanitarian law. This followed a statement issued the previous day, on 2 July, by the EU, in which the High Representative welcomed the agreement as offering a needed perspective towards de-escalation and the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity, urging all parties to adhere to its terms through the newly established trilateral Military Coordination Group. The two statements reflect differing assessments of the framework agreement’s implications for peace, security, and accountability in Lebanon.