Abduweli Ayup
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2025-024-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2025
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 35.86166
Longitude: 104.195397
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- China
- From Region
- Dates of prior UN action
- 24 February 2025, 25 February 2025
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Male
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
A Uyghur linguist and activist
- Type of rights defended
- Caste/Ethnic minorities' rights/Racism
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
Raised concerns regarding the situation of the Uyghur language in the country at the Second International Conference on Language Technologies for All, co-organized by UNESCO, the European Language Resources Association, and its Special Interest Group on Under-resourced Languages, and held at UNESCO’s Headquarters between 24 and 26 February 2025.
- Engagement with UN body
- UNESCO
- Dates of engagement
- 24 February 2025, 25 February 2025
- Type of attempted engagement
- Participation in meeting on UN premises
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 24 February 2025, 25 February 2025
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, France
- Reprisal information
During the reporting period, OHCHR received allegations of intimidation against Mr. Abduweli Ayup, a Uyghur linguist and activist, during his participation in the Second International Conference on Language Technologies for All, co-organized by UNESCO, the European Language Resources Association, and its Special Interest Group on Under-resourced Languages, and held at UNESCO’s Headquarters between 24 and 26 February 2025.
25. According to information received by OHCHR, on 24 February 2025, the first day of the conference, Mr. Ayup intervened twice in the plenary during the question and answer segments. He reportedly raised concerns regarding the situation of the Uyghur language in the country. Following his public interventions, he was allegedly approached by unidentified individuals, who challenged his views and inquired about the whereabouts of his family. When Mr. Ayup stated that his siblings were detained, possibly in prison facilities following earlier internment, the individuals challenged this statement and referred to the siblings as “terrorists”. 26. Later on 24 February 2025, the Organizing Committee informed Mr. Ayup via email that they were unable to secure approval to include his “poster” presentation in the program of the following day. Nevertheless, on 25 February 2025, Mr. Ayup proceeded to deliver his presentation informally at the conference, during which he was reportedly filmed without his consent by an unknown individual. Mr. Ayup was reportedly being followed and at times filmed during his participation in the conference by an unknown individual.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Surveillance
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Government response dates
- 18 July 2025
- Government response content
On 18 July 2025, the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report, stating that, in accordance with the law, the State protects individuals and organizations engaged in normal exchanges and cooperation with the United Nations, and rejected the allegations of reprisals against those who cooperate with United Nations human rights mechanisms. The Government emphasized that China is governed by the rule of law, that judicial authorities act in accordance with the law, and that false allegations of reprisals against those cooperating with United Nations human rights mechanisms must not be used to interfere with lawful judicial proceedings or to advocate on behalf of offenders, as this undermines the rule of law and infringes on China’s judicial sovereignty, which China firmly opposes.
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No