Taliban investigating death threats against UN Afghan female staff
In its latest update on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, the UN mission to the country said dozens of female national staff were subjected to explicit death threats in May.
Advertisement
The threats came from unidentified individuals related to their work with the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, or UNAMA, other agencies, funds, and programmes, 'requiring the UN to implement interim measures to protect their safety', according to the report.
It said the Taliban told the UN mission that their personnel were not responsible for the threats. An Interior Ministry investigation is under way, the report said.
Afghan girls attend a religious studies class at the Tasnim-e-Nusrat religious education centre in Kabul (Ebrahim Noroozi/AP)
Afghan authorities, including the Interior Ministry, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the report or the investigation.
The Taliban barred Afghan women from working at domestic and foreign nongovernmental organisations in December 2022, extending this ban to the UN six months later, and then threatening to shut down agencies and groups still employing women.
Advertisement
Humanitarian agencies say the Taliban have hampered or interfered with their operations, allegations denied by authorities.
The UN report is the first official confirmation of death threats against Afghan women working in the sector. The report also highlighted other areas affecting women's personal freedoms and safety.
In Herat, inspectors from the Vice and Virtue Ministry began requiring women to wear a chador, a full-body cloak covering the head. Dozens of women deemed 'not in compliance' were barred from entering markets or using public transportation. Several women were detained until relatives brought them a chador, the report said.
In Uruzgan, women were arrested for wearing a headscarf, a hijab, rather than a burqa.
Advertisement
Women have also been denied access to public areas, in line with laws banning them from such spaces. In Ghor province, police forced several families to leave a recreational area. They warned the families against visiting outdoor picnic sites with women.
In Herat, vice and virtue inspectors stopped family groups with women and girls from accessing an open recreational area, only allowing all-male groups.
Nobody from the Vice and Virtue Ministry was immediately available to comment on the Ghor, Herat and Uruzgan incidents, which the UN said happened in May.
In Kandahar, the Public Health Department instructed female health care workers to be accompanied to work by male guardians with an identification card proving that they were related to the woman by blood or marriage.
Advertisement
It was not immediately clear if the card is specific to Kandahar or will be rolled out across Afghanistan.
'The process to apply for a mahram (male guardian) identification card is reportedly cumbersome and can take up to several weeks as it requires the de facto Department for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice and a member of the local community (eg malik, imam or village elder) to verify the relationship,' the UN report said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Convicted Indian asylum seekers will be deported while human rights appeals heard
Foreign criminals from India and 14 other countries will be deported before their human rights appeals have been heard after the Government announced an expansion to its 'deport now, appeal later' scheme. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, said foreign criminals had been 'exploiting' the immigration system by 'remaining in the UK for months or even years while their appeals drag on'. She has expanded a scheme that allows the UK to deport offenders who have had a human rights claim against their removal rejected, with any appeals heard from abroad over a video link. It comes as the Government struggles to tackle the small boats crisis. A further 435 migrants who arrived in small boats were brought to shore on Saturday – the highest total since the 'one-in, one-out' deal with France was announced. The total number arriving in boats this year has hit 25,000, with that figure reached more quickly than in any previous year. The rules currently apply to foreign offenders from eight countries, but ministers are adding another 15 countries to the list, including India, Bulgaria and Australia. The other countries now in the scheme are Angola, Botswana, Brunei, Canada, Guyana, Indonesia, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Uganda and Zambia. The scheme is designed to prevent lengthy human rights appeals that can prevent offenders from being deported because of court backlogs and delays. Labour has ramped up its policy on deportations after criticism from the Conservatives and Reform UK that too many jail cell places were taken up by foreign criminals. On Sunday the Home Office announced it would change the law to allow foreign offenders to be immediately deported on conviction to reduce the number of migrants in British jails. Ms Cooper said: 'Those who commit crimes in our country cannot be allowed to manipulate the system, which is why we are restoring control and sending a clear message that our laws must be respected and will be enforced.' The Home Office said the expansion of 'deport now, appeal later' would help 'scale-up' the UK's ability to remove foreign criminals. However, a Home Office spokesman could not give a figure for the number of deportations that would happen under the new rules because decisions would be made on a 'case-by-case basis'. Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, said the move would save £54,000 a year per prison place. Since Labour came to power last year, almost 5,200 foreign offenders have been deported – a 14 per cent increase on the previous 12 months. Although officials have said increasing deportations will help ease pressure on overcrowded prisons, figures from the Ministry of Justice from the end of June suggest there are currently just 772 prisoners from the 15 new countries covered by 'deport now, appeal later'. Of the new countries, only Indians are in the top nationalities among current prisoners. There are no offenders from Botswana or Brunei currently behind bars. The 'deport now, appeal later' scheme for human rights claims was introduced in 2014 but was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court three years later, in cases where deportation would prevent an offender from giving live evidence in their appeal. The court noted that giving evidence over a video link could be sufficient, provided it was financially and logistically possible, in effect limiting the policy to countries where video appeal facilities were realistically available. The UK currently has arrangements for video appeals with eight countries, including Tanzania, Belize, Finland and Estonia. David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, said: 'We are leading diplomatic efforts to increase the number of countries where foreign criminals can be swiftly returned, and if they want to appeal, they can do so safely from their home country. 'Under this scheme, we're investing in international partnerships that uphold our security and make our streets safer.'
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on attacking the ECHR: the real target is judicial independence and the rule of law
Most British citizens have little contact with human rights law, which is as it should be in a mature democracy. Widespread anxiety about basic freedoms is a feature of more repressive regimes. Many people will only have heard of the European convention on human rights (ECHR) in the context of the last Conservative government's failed attempts to dispatch asylum seekers to Rwanda, or in a handful of incidents where convicted criminals or terrorist suspects have avoided deportation to jurisdictions where they might face inhumane treatment. Such cases are amplified by politicians who are hostile to the whole apparatus of human rights law. The Strasbourg court that adjudicates on breaches of the ECHR is denounced as an enemy of British sovereignty. Those attacks will continue for as long as asylum, and small-boats traffic on the Channel in particular, are salient political issues – for the foreseeable future, in other words. Labour's new 'one-in, one-out' scheme for returning seaborne refugees is more robust in legal and humanitarian terms than the failed Tory method. France is a safe country. That won't stop critics accusing the government of failing to control the border and citing international human rights conventions as the main impediment to the restoration of law and order. Nigel Farage has said he would 'get rid of the ECHR' as a day-one priority should Reform UK ever form a government. Kemi Badenoch is drifting to the same position, albeit with circumspection. The Conservative leader acknowledges that peremptory rupture is not straightforward, especially for Northern Ireland since European convention rights are woven into the Good Friday agreement. Mrs Badenoch has commissioned a report to consider how an ECHR exit might be achieved but expressed her personal view that Britain 'will likely need to leave' because human rights are wielded as a 'sword … to attack democratic decisions and common sense.' The core argument, for both Mrs Badenoch and Mr Farage, is that voters want politicians to expel undesirable elements from society but the popular will is being thwarted by unelected judges. Human rights, in this conception, are a loophole through which criminals and foreign interlopers evade justice. Ideas codified after the second world war as foundational principles of a new democratic settlement for Europe are recast as attacks on the law-abiding majority. This rhetorical subterfuge gets a purchase on public discourse through channels previously opened by Brexit. The ECHR is not an EU institution, but the fact of it being European in name stirs suspicion that it is an alien imposition. Dispensing with human rights obligations would be a necessary step for any government seeking to emulate Donald Trump's programme of detaining and deporting migrants without regard for due process. It is not far-fetched to envisage a Reform government recreating that model, given Mr Farage's record of admiration for Mr Trump. ECHR rulings are not infallible. A 71-year-old institution can reasonably be scrutinised with a view to reform. But that is not what its noisiest UK antagonists have in mind. They target the convention not because it is a big part of public life, but because it is a minor one and poorly understood. It is a soft target in a longer campaign to undermine judicial independence, discredit liberal principle and, ultimately, degrade the rule of law to the benefit of unaccountable executive power.
Reuters
5 hours ago
- Reuters
Iran says IAEA official to visit for talks, no access to nuclear sites planned
Aug 10 (Reuters) - A senior official from the U.N. nuclear watchdog will fly to Iran for talks on Monday, but no visit to nuclear sites is planned, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Sunday. Since Israel launched its first military strikes on Iran's nuclear sites during a 12-day war in June, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been unable to access Iran's facilities, despite IAEA chief Rafael Grossi stating that inspections remain his top priority. Iran has accused the agency of effectively paving the way for the bombings by issuing a damning report on May 31, which led the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors to declare Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations. Iran, which denies seeking nuclear weapons, said it remained committed to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). "Negotiations with the IAEA will be held tomorrow to determine a framework for cooperation," Araghchi said on his Telegram account. "A Deputy Director General of Grossi will come to Tehran tomorrow, while there are no plans to visit any nuclear sites until we reach a framework." Last month, Iran enacted a law passed by parliament suspending cooperation with the IAEA. The law stipulates that any future inspection of Iran's nuclear sites by the IAEA needs approval by Tehran's Supreme National Security Council.
