By The Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua

A. Background 1. Pursuant to its resolution 49/3, the Human Rights Council established the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua, to investigate alleged human rights violations and abuses committed in Nicaragua since April 2018 and provide guidance on justice and accountability. In its resolution 52/2, the Council extended the mandate of the Group for a period of two years. The Group is composed of Jan-Michael Simon (Chair), Ariela Peralta Distéfano and Reed Brody. 2. The Group has previously concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that, since April 2018, State and non-State actors had committed serious human rights violations and abuses against an ever-growing range of real or perceived opponents and their relatives in a systematic and widespread manner. 1 The Group determined that some of those violations constituted, prima facie, the crimes against humanity of murder, imprisonment, torture, including rape and other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity, deportation and persecution. 3. The present conference room paper, which complements the report submitted to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/58/26), contains the detailed findings of the Group of Experts on the structure of the repressive State, chains of command and State and individual responsibilities in relation to the main patterns of violations and abuses documented since the beginning of its mandate. Ten functional diagrams illustrating the de jure and de facto connections between different State and non-State entities are available on the Group’s web page. 2 4. The present document identifies individuals whom the Group of Experts has reasonable grounds to believe are responsible for violations, abuses and crimes. A list of these names was sent to the Government of Nicaragua to give the identified individuals an opportunity to respond to the allegations made against them. The Group recalls that while the threshold of "reasonable grounds to believe" is lower than that required to establish responsibility in criminal proceedings, it is sufficient to justify the initiation of investigations (see section I(C)(3) below). While that threshold does not preclude the identification in the present conference room paper of possible individual responsibilities, determinations about individual criminal responsibility can be made only by competent judicial authorities with full respect for the right to a fair trial of the accused. 5. Despite the Council's calls upon the Government of Nicaragua to cooperate fully with the Group, including by granting it unfettered access to the whole country, the Government continues to refuse to engage with the Group. Since the beginning of its mandate, the Group has sent 17 unanswered letters to the Nicaraguan authorities requesting information. 3 On 27 February 2025, the Government of Nicaragua announced its withdrawal from the Human Rights Council and all its subsidiary mechanisms. 4 6. On 26 March 2025, the Human Rights Council decided to postpone consideration of the adoption of the outcome document of the Universal Periodic Review of Nicaragua, fourth cycle, scheduled for the 58th session of the Human Rights Council. This decision was taken as Nicaragua's positions on the recommendations received on 13 November 2024 during the Review were not received. The Human Rights Council decided to call on the Government of Review were not received. The Human Rights Council decided to call on the Government of Nicaragua to resume its cooperation and to schedule the consideration of the outcome document of the Universal Periodic Review at its 60th session.5 7. Despite the lack of cooperation and elevated security risks for victims, witnesses and others providing information, the Group was able to gather, analyse and corroborate the information and evidence necessary to establish the facts of, and prima facie responsibility for,the serious violations, abuses and crimes described in the present conference room paper.

By The Youth Endowment Fund

The Youth Endowment Fund asked nearly 11,000 children aged 13–17 across England and Wales to share their experiences of violence. The findings are set out in separate reports, each exploring a different theme. This one focuses on teenage children’s experiences of exploitation and ‘gangs’. When we asked teenage children whether they had been in a ‘gang’, we defined a ‘gang’ as: “A group of young people who think of themselves as a ‘gang’, probably with a name, who are involved in violence or other crime.” We used the word ‘gang’ because it is one that many young people recognise and use themselves, more than phrases such as group-based criminality. But we also recognise its limitations: the term oversimplifies a complex issue and can reinforce harmful stereotypes. To reflect these sensitivities, we use inverted commas when referring to ‘gangs’. At several points in this report, we share the words of James (whose name has been changed to protect his identity), who, from ages 12 to 18, was criminally exploited. His story lays bare the reality

By Chukwudi Kingsley Onyeachu, Ikechukwu Clement Okoro & Martina Mgbosolu Ugwuoke 

Cybercrime and violent extremism have not only become mutually reinforcing, in recent times, but also fast growing, multidimensional and easily joined by the youth for lack of socio-economic opportunities to break out of poverty and overcome family and peer pressures. Research findings have proven that to ‘get-rich-quick’ through cyber-criminalities influences performance of human blood and body parts rituals, which translates to violent extremism. The youth who make money through these inhuman practices that negate acceptable societal values believe that education, apprenticeship, human capital development and decent work are a dysfunctional social-orientation. Careful observations have shown that when the youth acquire illicit money, the result is excessive clubbing, frivolous spending, promotion of prostitution, substance abuse, which undermine effective youth engagement in socio-economic development. The youth bulge theory was adopted in the study. The theory postulates that large youth population can become a “demographic dividend” when their potentials are properly harnessed, and it can also become a “demographic bomb” in the face of systemic socio-economic exclusion, unemployment, hunger and family poverty. The methodology applied was content analysis, leveraging empirical studies in Nigerian context and other sources of data. The paper revealed that youth unemployment, systemic corruption, absence of transparency in the administration of poverty alleviation interventions and limited opportunities are manifestations of youth exclusion from decision-making process and they are key factors influencing youth participation in cybercrime and violent extremism. The paper recommended practical youth-specific engagement strategies in socio-economic development as a means to discouraging cybercrime and its associated extreme practices.

Discov glob soc 3, 72 (2025)

By Kaoem Telapak and Environmental Investigation Agency UK 

Indonesia is the world’s largest producer of palm oil, a substance used in thousands of everyday items including food stuffs, cleaning products, shampoo and as a biofuel. 

Indonesian exports of palm oil and related products were worth almost $28 billion in 2024. The Fangiono family, through various family members, is linked to a multitude of palm oil companies in Indonesia. This report outlines the most urgent and ongoing alleged violations by these companies, as of 2025. The companies featured have been accused of deforestation, landgrabs, corruption, operating without proper permits and conflicts with local and indigenous people, with evidence suggesting these are continuing and even expanding issues. Cases studies span Sumatra, Kalimantan and Papua – regions which not only represent different ecological zones but also host distinct indigenous populations and present different legal and political challenges. The family is led by its patriarch – known by his first name, Martias – who was convicted in 2007 of obtaining palm oil permits through bribery and corruption. He was fined more than $38 million and jailed for one-and-a-half years. Today, the Fangiono family operates several major corporate groups, including First Resources, FAP Agri and Ciliandry Anky Abadi, with Martias’ relatives having key positions in these groups. However, there have been numerous reports by NGOs over the years exposing the opaque corporate layers of the family’s companies and alleging control of a network of shadow companies accused of dubious practices, such as deforestation and violating communities’ rights. Such charges have been largely denied by First Resources and FAP Agri, both of which have sustainability policies. But some prominent brands, including Unilever and PepsiCo, are reported to have suspended sourcing palm oil from them due to such allegations. In this report, Kaoem Telapak (KT) and the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) outline how the number of companies linked to the family continues to grow and present ongoing allegations of illegal activities, human rights violations and environmental destruction connected with them, while asking how they can continue to act with impunity. 

London: EIA, 2025. 44p.