a member of a human rights organization

Cases
Location of case in SG report
2025-040-001
Relevant SG report
Year of the report
2025
Country Geolocation

Latitude: -4.038333

Longitude: 21.758664

Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
Congo, Democratic Republic of the
From Region
Type of record
Unnamed individual/group/organization
Gender
Male
Was the victim a foreign national?
No
Was the victim a minor?
No
Individual's/organization's activity

a member of a human rights organization and focal point for UNJHRO had been sharing information on the human rights situation in his area, where the Zaire and Coopérative pour le Développement du Congo (CODECO) armed groups have reportedly carried out attacks targeting civilians on ethnic grounds.

Type of rights defended
  • Unclear in SG Report
Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
No
Reported trigger of reprisal

focal point for UNJHRO had been sharing information on the human rights situation in his area

Engagement with UN body
  • UN Peace Operation / Political mission
Type of attempted engagement
  • Submission of information to UN
Dates of mentioned reprisals
June 2024
Location of mentioned reprisals
DRC
Reprisal information

In June 2024, the human rights defender was allegedly assaulted at his residence by armed individuals believed to be affiliated with the Zaire armed group. They reportedly subjected him to severe physical violence. In July 2024, a local chief reportedly informed the human rights defender that members of CODECO had allegedly planned to kill him and advised him to leave his home for safety.

Types of reprisals suffered
  • Physical attack: Physical attack - General
  • Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
Alleged/likely perpetrators
Non-state actor(s)
Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
No
Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
No
Further case development
  1. During the reporting period, the United Nations Joint Human Rights Office (UNJHRO) of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) documented seven incidents of reprisals against male (2) and female (5) civil society actors, mostly human rights defenders, including three youth, for cooperation with the Mission, described below. Four incidents were attributed to the Movement du 23 Mars (M23), two to local armed groups, and one to State actors, in different locations in conflict-affected provinces of North Kivu and Ituri Provinces. Names and details of those concerned are withheld due to fear of further reprisals.
  2. According to information received by OHCHR, the Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23) continued to be openly hostile towards human rights defenders and journalists whom they accused of reporting on M23’s activities, including to the United Nations. This public hostility worsened during the reporting period, when the M23 gained control of large territories, including Goma and Bukavu, the two largest cities of the Eastern provinces of North and South Kivu, and publicly banned activities of civil society actors, human rights defenders and independent media in occupied areas and systematically targeted them. The number of reported cases of reprisals for cooperation with UNJHRO and other United Nations agencies in the affected areas during the period is believed to underrepresent the actual figures. Many victims fled or went into hiding before they could report allegations of human rights violations to the United Nations, and in some instances, UNJHRO could not secure their consent for fear of further reprisals. Cases in other provinces are also likely under-reported due to a lack of communication infrastructure hindering access to victims and reporting as well as to limited awareness of what constitutes reprisals, the importance of reporting them, and how to do so.
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