Kenyan Justice Reuben Nyakundi ruled that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to prove Jacktone Odhiambo's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the murder of LGBTQ+ activist Edwin Chiloba. Sentencing is scheduled for December 16.

The judge noted that forensic and DNA tests revealed an intimate relationship between Jacktone Odhiambo and Edwin Chiloba; he added that the evidence was a crucial part of the case, offering insight into the nature of their connection and supporting the prosecution's argument linking Odhiambo to the crime.

Chiloba, a prominentLGBTQ+ rights activist and model, was reported missing in January 2023. His body was found the following day, stuffed in a metal boxalong a road near Eldoret.

The discovery sparked a national and international outcry, with rights organizations raising concerns about the dangers LGBTQ+ individuals face in Kenya.

Condemnation from human rights groups

Groups such as the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and Amnesty International Kenya condemned the killing. They urged authorities to ensure a thorough investigation and justice for the slain activist.

Odhiambo, who had been living with Chiloba at an apartment in Eldoret, was arrested shortly after the incident.

Investigations revealed that the murder occurred between December 31, 2022, and January 3, 2023, when the body was recovered.

The court heard testimony from 22 witnesses, including government pathologist Dr. Johansen Oduor, who confirmed that Chiloba died from asphyxiation caused by smothering.

Despite Odhiambo's denial of involvement, the evidence presented during the trial was overwhelming, according to Justice Nyakundi. 

Call for stronger protection for sexual minorities

Activists in Kenya have called for stronger protections for sexual minorities and an end to violence and discrimination.

Ivy Werimba, the communications and advocacy officer at galck+,  a coalition of 16 LGBTIQ organizations in Kenya, described the ruling as long-awaited justice for Kenya's LGBTQ+ community.

"It is justice that took a long time to get there," Werimba told DW. "My credits to the National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission and all the partners they've been working with. They've been patient and pushed to not only mobilize the community to show up to court, but also to get the case itself to the point where we finally have a sentencing date."

Werimba noted the systemic barriers LGBTQ+ individuals face in seeking justice in Kenya and across African countries.

"The system doesn't think that the community really has or should be catered to by justice. Back in 2023, the first thing was just shock — that two men were in a relationship and that this had happened within a same-sex relationship," she explained, adding that such a reaction was mirrored by the justice system and media conversations.

Verdict a significant milestone for LGBTQ+ rights in Kenya

Despite the challenges, Werimba said the verdict is a milestone.

"It's really great that we finally have a ruling that highlights that when queer people are saying they want their rights, it's not anything special," she stressed.

 "We are also Kenyan citizens living our own lives and going through things we'd like our institutions to help us with," she said. "This ruling is an indication of progress, showing that queer people are being seen by various institutions, especially the judiciary."

Francis Musii, a student at Jomo Kenyatta University, echoed Werimba's sentiments. 

"This ruling shows that justice can work for everyone, no matter who they are. It's a step forward for equality in our country," Musii told DW. "But let's be honest, this case only got attention because it was high-profile. There are so many others who never get justice; they need justice too."

The case has drawn attention to the widespread violence and discrimination faced by members of the LGBTQ+ community in Kenya, where same-sex relations remain criminalized.

Activists have called for urgent reforms to protect marginalized communities, emphasizing the importance of addressing deep-rooted societal biases that often lead to tragic outcomes.

Edited by: Chrispin Mwakideu

Indonesia, Southeast Asia's largest economy, is one of the world's major textile producing nations. The country's 5,000 large and medium garment and textile companies supply many of the world's notable fashion brands, such as Tommy Hilfiger, Uniqlo and Calvin Klein.

Yet, its garment workforce, which is predominately female, faces widespread exploitation and gender-based violence. 

Power imbalances, a culture of silence in the workplace along with unrealistic production targets, make female workers particularly vulnerable. Many even forgo breaks in order to hit their targets. 

Upon returning home, they are still responsible for caring for their families — a dual burden that significantly impacts their physical and mental wellbeing.

Championing female workers in Indonesia

Didit Saleh and Nitya Swastika, members of Indonesia's Trade Union Rights Center (TURC), recently visited Germany to advocate for female workers' rights in Indonesia.

TURC was founded in 2004 to educate workers about trade unions and labor rights in Indonesia.

"We want to ensure that brand owners can guarantee better and fairer treatment for female workers, especially in terms of occupational health and safety," Saleh told DW.

TURC's research shows that in small villages, factory jobs with major brands are considered prestigious, leading many people to pay brokers to secure factory jobs.

The companies, which are aware of such practices, do to little to prohibit or curb the practice.

"To secure employment, some individuals are willing to pay up to 10 million Indonesian Rupiahs [$630, €598]. However, after starting work, they realize the situation is not as favorable as they had imagined," Swastika told DW.

Dual roles, double burdens for female workers

"We want the public here [in Germany] to be aware of the real situation in Indonesia. Here, brands may only have large offices, not factories with 50,000 workers," Swastika said. "Therefore they often do not know the real situation in their supplier's factories."

Swastika also highlighted the complex dimensions of violence and oppression against women. 

Research by TURC found that since most of the workers are women, many men have become unemployed or work irregular, low-income jobs. In many cases, male household members still refuse to share domestic duties, citing cultural norms.

This imbalance often leaves female workers — who often bear the dual burden of being the main breadwinner while managing household responsibilities — with limited rest and significant stress.

"As a result, female workers are not focused on their work and often experience work accidents," Swastika said, adding that they struggle to engage with unions because many union members are men.

"Even if there are female workers who wish to be active in the union, they face opposition from their partners, who object or disagree and do not allow it," she said.

Attention has been drawn to gender-based violence in Indonesia following campaigns by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and other groups.

Obstacles to female union membership

Satyawanti Mashudi, from the National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan), stated on the commission's website that various trade unions have reported gender-based discrimination in the industry against female workers, particularly regarding differences in wage structures and promotions.

Female workers also face violations of their rights related to freedom of association and encounter difficulties in obtaining permission to participate in union activities for female union administrators.

There are negative perceptions regarding women joining labor unions.

"In some areas in Central Java, for instance, our research indicates that women who wish to join a labor union must first obtain permission from their husbands," Saleh said.

Another challenge is the stigma around labor unions, often viewed as left-wing and controversial. 

"So, it is considered dangerous," Saleh said. "In some areas, the labor union movement is even considered taboo."

Edited by: Keith Walker 

The Iranian parliament has approved the so-called hijab and chastity bill, which mandates women to wear hijabs and introduces strict penalties on those who do not.

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, women in Iran have been required to cover their hair in public.

Increasing numbers choose not to wear hijabs, especially since the 2022 death in police custody of Iranian-Kurdish woman Jina Mahsa Amini.

The 22-year-old had been arrested by Iran's morality police for allegedly violating the country's strict dress code.

Amini's death sparked widespread protests, largely led by women and schoolgirls, calling for political change. It also inspired the "Women, Life, Freedom" movement, which challenged authorities' enforcement of the hijab mandate.

The hijab and chastity bill was drafted by the Iranian judiciary on the instructions of former President Ebrahim Raisi in response to the increasing reluctance of many women to wear the hijab.

What does the new law say?

Iranian media reports say the legislation imposes fines equivalent to up to 20 months of the average salary for women who improperly wear a hijab or forgo it altogether in public or on social media.

Fines must be paid within 10 days, failing which violators will face restrictions on access to government services, such as the issuance or renewal of passports, driver's licenses and exit permits.

Mary Mohammadi, a US-based Iranian political analyst, told DW that the law aims to hinder woman by making their struggle too costly.

"It seeks to prevent the advancement of women's demands, bolster the morale of the regime's ideological supporters, exhaust the psyche of society by creating all-encompassing conflicts in daily life and weaken the revolutionary potential led by women," she said.

The legislation requires institutions to provide CCTV footage to help police identify people opposing the compulsory hijab. Noncompliance will result in fines or the dismissal of the institutions' officials.

It also criminalizes the design or promotion of items such as clothing, statues and toys deemed to encourage "nudity" or lack of veiling.

The Industry, Mines and Trade Ministry has been tasked with monitoring clothing producers and suppliers to ensure garments comply with hijab legislation.

Pezeshkian's hijab dilemma

The law was passed by lawmakers four months into Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian's term.

Pezeshkian, who is widely viewed as aligned with the reformist movement that advocates for greater freedoms and better relations with the West, criticized the strict enforcement of hijab regulations during his election campaign.

Many of Pezeshkian's supporters had hoped that his administration would ease the rules surrounding compulsory hijabs. However, critics argue that compulsory hijab enforcement lies beyond the government's direct control.

"In a broader view, the disagreement over its implementation between the hard-liners in the Islamic Parliament and the so-called reformist Pezeshkian in the administration is a staged display of internal regime conflicts over the mandatory hijab law," Mohammadi said.

More than two years after the death of Mahsa Jina Amini, and despite heightened threats and additional security cameras in cities, many women still appear in public without hijabs.

"In practice, Iranian women themselves have eliminated compromise and tolerance from their options, defining only two paths for themselves: death or freedom," Mohammadi said.

What happens next?

The Iranian parliament has forwarded the law to Pezeshkian for his signature, which is required before the law can take effect.

Under the country's constitution, the president has the authority to withhold notification to the relevant agencies, effectively delaying its enforcement.

Activists and women's rights advocates have urged Pezeshkian to exercise his authority and refrain from enacting the law.

Restrictions and pressures on women in Iran persist, with the law even amplifying concerns among some officials within the Islamic Republic.

They anticipate that opposition to the legislation will extend beyond social media, potentially sparking a new wave of street protests across the country.

Edited by: Keith Walker

A United Nations (UN) report on gender equality, combined with the recent defeat of Japan's conservative-minded Liberal Democratic Party, has triggered renewed optimism that legal changes can be forced through to permit women to retain their maiden names after marriage.

The first review of equality in Japanby the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in eight years has, however, met with a backlash from traditionalists demanding that the organization stay out of Japan's domestic affairs.

The debate has persisted for decades, despite an advisory panel to the Justice Ministry recommending in 1996 that the Civil Code, which serves as Japan's foundational legal framework, be amended to permit separate surnames.

Even though 57% of Japanese people supported a selective surname system for married couples in a June poll by the Mainichi newspaper — with only 22% opposed — many conservatives in politics insist that allowing women to keep their maiden names would undermine the family unit.

Resistance from the right

"There is no need to change the law as it would only cause confusion in society," said Yoichi Shimada, who won a seat in the October general election for the far-right Conservative Party.

"The most important issue to consider is the children, who would end up having a different name to one of their parents, which undermines the sense of family," he told DW.

Campaigners opposed to the current system claim Japan is the only country in the world that still requires married couples to have the same family name. Most of the time, it would be the husband's name — just 5.5% of newly married couples chose to take the wife's family name according to a 2023 survey by the Ministry of Health.

Critics say that the expectation for the woman to adopt the man's name stems from Japan's male-dominated society, in which a small number of conservative politicians in the lower house of Parliament, the Diet, stick to outdated positions. But many critics are now becoming more optimistic.

"It may be slow, but I think that change is beginning to happen," said Sumie Kawakami, a lecturer at Yamanashi Gakuin University and author of a book on gender issues in Japan.

"Earlier this year, the leader of Keidanren [The Japan Business Federation] expressed support for a change in the law to allow women to keep their maiden name because it is having a negative impact on businesses," she told DW.

Challenges for women in business

Keidanren highlighted queries and complaints from foreign firms about women facing issues with travel and identification when their professional and legal names differ. The women are often refused entry at security checkpoints or denied accommodation when their identity documents do not match.

Kawakami believes the Keidanren position put the issue back in the spotlight, but the UN report issued in October has given the campaign extra impetus. The UN committee is made up of 23 international experts and conducts periodic assessments of gender equality in the 189 countries and regions that have ratified the convention.

Still, the committee's recommendations have attracted criticism in the Japanese media, with the conservative-leaning Sankei newspaper declaring in an editorial published on November 4 that the UN's position is, "Nothing but arrogant interference in Japan's internal affairs."

"It shows a woeful lack of knowledge of the facts and depreciates Japanese culture and customs," the editorial added. "It has nothing to do with gender equality or discrimination against women. That the UN body should even discuss this issue in such a wrong context is unacceptable."

Momentum for change

Yet with the conservative LDP losing Japan's latest election, momentum for change is growing.

The Democratic Party for the People, the Japanese Communist Party, and even centrist members of the LDP and its political partner Komeito have all expressed support for changing the law.

"For the first time, I would like to think that there is hope that we can finally make this change," said Kawakami.

"Change is very slow in Japanese politics and it might not happen immediately, but with the support of the majority of the public, business leaders and more and more politicians, it can happen."

Edited by: Keith Walker

On Tuesday, a message was posted on the X account of Iranian journalist and human rights activist Kianoosh Sanjari, stating that if four political prisoners were not released by the following evening, Sanjari would end his own life in protest against the regime Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

By Wednesday evening, two more messages had been published, reaffirming Sanjari's resolve to carry out his plan. Minutes later, Sanjari's death was confirmed by political and civil activists at the scene. The full details of the incident remain unclear.

Sanjari, who was 42 years old, had endured numerous imprisonments and detentions by the Islamic Republic since the age of 17.

'Solitary confinement disturbed my soul'

In a 2022 interview, previously unpublished due to the events surrounding the death of Iranian-Kurdish woman Jina Mahsa Amini after she was arrested for allegedly violating Iran's strict dress code and the ensuing protests, DW had asked Sanjari about how solitary confinement had affected his life.

"The positive effect of solitary confinement on me was that it made me more patient and resilient. It expanded my worldview and revealed to me the ugliness of dictatorship," he said.

"However, I cannot deny that solitary confinement also disturbed my soul and spirit. Before, I sometimes thought about death and even hesitated, but eventually, through a deeper understanding of the world around me and the history of humanity, my sadness lessened. I was able to understand myself and others more."

Imprisoned, tortured

Sanjari's life was deeply intertwined with journalism and the defense of human rights. He left Iran in 2007 and, after living for a short time in the Kurdistan region of Iraq and Norway, Sanjari moved to the United States where he worked for the Farsi service of the Voice of America. He returned to Iran in 2016, and was subsequently arrested multiple times — including during the "Women, Life, Freedom" protest movement after Amini's death.

"Many years ago, in Evin prison in Tehran, they slapped me 20 times before asking the first question," Sanjari told DW. "In recent years, the treatment in prison has been better, but humiliation, pressure and white [psychological] torture have continued."

"The solitary cell is a form of torture because a person is placed in a vacuum, unaware of everything happening outside the four walls. It's a kind of vacuum of time, place, people, family and life. Sometimes, you lose whether it's day or night."

Despite repeated arrests and ongoing security threats, Sanjari never wavered in his commitment to advocating for the release of political prisoners and defending human rights in Iran.

"If your ideals are not strong enough, you will collapse. I spent a total of over a year in solitary confinement," he said. "I heard the cries and screams of many prisoners and witnessed those who committed suicide in solitary confinement, who were later brought to my cell."

Another victim of the Islamic Republic

Sanjari's death has sparked much discussion in recent days, particularly on social media. Some have claimed the messages posted on his X account were not written by Sanjari himself, suggesting that his account was controlled by Iran's security agents. Others have argued that his death may have been caused by factors other than suicide.

However, almost all users agree that Sanjari, like many others human rights activists and journalists, was yet another victim of the Islamic Republic. In tribute, many have since reposted a profound phrase found on Sanjari's X account:

"The life of a homeland owes me to think only of life, and not of the homeland."

Edited by: Martin Kuebler

If you are suffering from serious emotional strain or suicidal thoughts, do not hesitate to seek professional help. You can find information on where to find such help, no matter where you live in the world, at this website: https://befrienders.org/

When the Azerbaijani government launched a crackdown on reporters in August 2014, investigative journalist and human rights activist Emin Huseynov feared for his freedom and his life.

"When they started first [the] repression against all of us, most of my colleagues [were] jailed," said the now 44-year-old.

A prominent critic of Azerbaijan's authoritarian ruler, Ilham Aliyev, Huseynov had previously been badly beaten by police. When the repression started in 2014, he sought protection in the Swiss Embassy in Baku, the capital of the former Soviet republic bounded by the Caspian Sea and Caucasus Mountains.

Now Huseynov lives in exile. He cannot go back to his homeland for fear of ending up in prison like the dozens of other government critics and environmental activists currently behind bars in Azerbaijan.

NGO Human Rights Watch has said repression has worsened in the tiny petro-state over the past two years. The group has urged the European Union to spotlight the "deteriorating human rights situation" when world leaders descend upon Baku for the COP29 conference to discuss climate action and fair financing for global climate protection.

As host and lead negotiator, Azerbaijan has said it wants to promote the goals of the historic Paris Agreement. It will focus on compliance with the 1.5-degree Celsius (2.7-Fahrenheit) temperature limit, more climate protection, financial support for developing countries and climate justice, according to official documents sent to the nearly 200 participating states.

Oil, gas are 'a gift from God'

Traditionally, the climate conference host acts as a kind of mediator in negotiations and can set the tone of the talks. Azerbaijan's Aliyev has already made clear where his priorities might lie at the negotiating table.

"I have always said that having oil and gas deposits is not our fault. It's a gift from God," Aliyev told German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin this past April.

At the meeting, Aliyev said he would defend the right of countries to invest in and promote fossil fuels as a way to help drive his country's prosperity and fight poverty.

The COP host's electricity mix is made up of 93% fossil fuels. Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific project, has given Azerbaijan the worst possible rating for climate protection, on par with other oil countries like Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran.

"Huge investments are being made in fossil fuels, and climate protection measures are minimal," said Niklas Höhne from the New Climate Institute, an NGO based in Cologne, Germany. The country also does not have a zero-emissions target.

COP host 'doesn't care' about climate

COP hosting duties normally rotate among states in the five United Nations regional groups: Africa, Asia-Pacific, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as Western European and other countries.

"The climate negotiations will only succeed if we have a strong and very credible presidency," said Höhne. Azerbaijan has advertised itself as better than it is when it comes to climate protection and "that is not a good start," added the climate policy expert.

Despite its fossil fuel reliance, Azerbaijan's potential for solar and wind energy and to produce green hydrogen for export is huge, according to Climate Action Tracker. While there has been some investment in renewables, that potential is barely being exploited. The organization estimates the country's emissions will increase by as much as 20% in the coming years.

"He doesn't care about the climate," said exiled reporter Huseynov of Aliyev, adding that the president is more concerned with using the international conference to legitimize his rule. He is "trying to use this important climate change event for whitewashing [his] toxic political image," said the human rights activist.

In February, Aliyev secured a landslide victory following a snap election, which OSCE observers described as restrictive and undemocratic. Huseynov said the country's population is "still in poverty even [if] oil and gas exports give billions to the country."

Former oil executive will chair COP29

Mukhtar Babayev, Azerbaijan's environment minister and former sustainability officer at the state oil company SOCAR, will chair this year's climate negotiations.

Powerful figures from the oil and gas industry presiding over climate conferences is nothing new. Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber, an executive at United Arab Emirates' state oil and gas company ADNOC, chaired the 2023 conference in Dubai. French energy group TotalEnergies and ADNOC recently bought a 30% equity stake in an Azerbaijani gas field in the Caspian. Oil and gas account for 90% of the country's exports.

Most of those exports go to the EU, with Russia's war in Ukraine bolstering energy ties between the bloc and Azerbaijan. When Azerbaijan seized full control of the Nagorno-Karabakh region following a military assault and expelled over 100,000 Armenians last year, the EU criticized the move. But it continues to rely on Azerbaijan's gas, even if the petro-state is a minor oil and gas player compared to Saudi Arabia, China and the United States.

Environmental activists, journalists in danger

Away from the negotiations at the UN climate summit in Baku, the situation for government critics and environmentalists on the ground is bad. Human Rights Watch has said climate protests are violently suppressed, and activists are arrested on fictitious grounds.

In April, for example, police arrested human rights and climate activist Anar Mammadli outside a kindergarten for alleged smuggling of counterfeit cash. Just before his arrest, Mammadli co-founded an initiative to campaign for civil rights and climate justice in Azerbaijan, said HRW. He's still in prison.

Reprisals against critics have been intensifying ahead of the climate conference, said HRW — as has brutality against journalists. "Some of the colleagues are not only tortured in the prisons, they are murdered," said Huseynov, adding that President Aliyev does not want independent voices to speak to the international media.

Azerbaijan has also imposed entry bans on four German lawmakers for criticizing its human rights record. Huseynov has called on world leaders to exert pressure on the country's ruler by linking their attendance at the climate conference to the release of political prisoners.

The activist himself was only allowed to leave the Swiss Embassy and the country through foreign political pressure. Ahead of the 2015 European Games in Baku, the Swiss government successfully demanded Huseynov's release. In the meantime, many other government critics remain in prison in Azerbaijan.

Edited by: Jennifer Collins and Sarah Steffen

Translation: Jennifer Collins

Starting Friday, people aged 18 and older will be able to change official records to alter their names and genders or have the gender marker removed altogether, under Germany's new Self-Determination Act.

There is a mandatory three-month wait between applying and making a personal declaration, but the requirement for two psychiatric assessments and a court hearing have been scrapped.

Minors — over the age of 14 — can do so with parental approval, or seek legal recourse. Parents can act on behalf of younger children, but the child needs to be present at the register office and give their assent. This is a purely bureaucratic procedure with no medical implications.

Nyke Slawik, a German parliamentarian and transgender woman who helped negotiate the bill for the Green Party, hailed the law as a historic reform of international significance. "It's a sign of hope in times where right-wing populist voices are getting louder again and where there is unfortunately a rollback in many countries in terms of the rights of queer people," she told DW.

More accessible, less costly, far less intrusive

Kalle Hümpfner, policy officer for the German Trans* Association (BVT), welcomed the fact that gender self-recognition will now be much more accessible and less costly.

Hümpfner stressed that the new law will also make the process far less intrusive. "In the assessments, people were forced to divulge a lot of very personal information — information that was shared with the court. There have been many awful reports of people having to talk about their sexual preferences, about their masturbation practices, or their underwear choices," Hümpfner said.

Some 1,200 people in Berlin, with its thriving LGBTQI+ community, have submitted applications to date, according to the German press agency dpa. The Catholic news agency KNA has reported a similar level of interest in other major cities.

Richard Köhler is an expert advisor for TGEU (Trans Europe and Central Asia), a nonprofit advocacy group for trans and nonbinary people. He said the move brought Germany back into line with international human rights law and European developments of the last 10 years. It is now the 12th country in Europe to introduce legal self-determination legislation.

"Let's face it, it's an issue affecting a small number of people in a very personal way and respecting their choices doesn't harm anyone else, but it does uphold the core values of dignity and freedom that we all share," he said. Köhler warned that many other countries in Europe are introducing bans on legal and medical transition, including in Georgia and Russia.

Making lives of a marginalized minority easier

The changes make the practical daily lives of transgender, inter-sex, and nonbinary people much easier, as there is no longer a potential mismatch between appearance and official paperwork, which can make traveling abroad prohibitive or even just paying by credit card a serious headache.

Once someone has applied to change their gender and first name, no further applications can be made for a minimum of 12 months. Right-wing populists have suggested the new law would lead to people changing their gender marker every year.

Altering a birth certificate generates a huge volume of follow-through bureaucracy in changing official documents, from driving licenses to school exam certificates. "It's an enormous amount of work to make your documents match and no one does that just for fun," said Hümpfner of the German Trans* Association.

Inclusivity and gender politics have become sensitive topics in Germany. Germany's center-left government of Social Democrats (SPD), Greens and neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP) took over in late 2021 with a pledge to progress and modernize the government, and included the change to the law in their coalition treaty. It was opposed by the largest opposition bloc, the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and Bavaria's Christian Social Union (CSU) and also by the far-right populist Alternative for Germany (AfD).

The new Self-Determination law was passed in April 2024 after a hotly contested debate in which a number of restrictions were added.

'Orchestrated attack against democracy, equality, diversity'

Hümpfner expressed regret that anxiety and fear of abuse had framed the debate — with transgender people repeatedly cast in the role of potential perpetrators. "Time and time again during the entire legislative process, it was forgotten that this is about the basic rights of a marginalized and still very disadvantaged group," said Hümpfner.

Changes to the draft law included appearing to give business owners the right to decide whether or not to refuse individuals access to their premises on the basis of their gender. "There was a lot of discussion about women's saunas. Our experience is that many transwomen rarely or never go into saunas because being in these places and being stared at a lot because of their physicality is regarded as unpleasant," said Hümpfner.

Another concern raised during discussions surrounding the passage of the bill was about the possibility of transwomen using women's shelters. The Association of Women's Shelters (FHK) told the German newspaper Tagesspiegel this was baseless. "We do not know of a single case from our membership of transgender women misusing a safe house or becoming violent there — and that although transwomen have been regularly using safe houses for many years and finding protection in them without great ado," said the FHK.

Köhler also argued that the way the debate had been steered had poisoned public discourse and polarized the population, adding that people in the trans community were experiencing a rise in antagonism and harassment as a result.

"We're seeing an orchestrated attack against democracy, against equality, against the diversity in our society. And it's deliberate and it's orchestrated and it's heavily financed," said Köhler. He said trans people were easy targets because they made up such a small minority and so few people had personal contact with them.

Women's fears being instrumentalized

Beate von Miquel, the chair of the National Council of German Women's Organizations (DF) and a gender researcher, told DW that the issue was being politically instrumentalized and had become part of a culture war by far-right groups not known for their advocacy of women's rights.

"It is really bitter for the women's movement that this has become a very divisive issue. We should not allow ourselves to be divided," she said.

Von Miquel, whose umbrella organization represents 60 women's associations and groups, warned that the trans community and women's organizations should not be played off against one another.

"There is concern that the category woman or women will disappear and that it won't be about women anymore," said Miquel. "We will stay the German Women's Council. But there must be more freedom and diversity and individuality, there is more than one way of living gender and being a woman."

Edited by: Rina Goldenberg

While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.

On Tuesday, the German Foreign Ministry summoned its ambassador to Iran and lodged a "strong protest" after Jamshid Sharmahd, a German-Iranian political dissident, was executed in Tehran.

The Islamic Republic had accused Sharmahd of being the "ringleader of the terrorist Tondar group, who directed armed and terrorist acts in Iran from America."

Hamid Ashtari, a political activist based in Sweden who spent eight years in Iranian prison, said Sharmahd's execution comes as Iran's ruling regime faces pressure on multiple fronts.

"Whenever the regime faces escalating political, social, and economic issues that weaken it, there tends to be an increase in executions. This is based on the belief that executing individuals can help the regime address its problems and reinforce its authority," he told DW.

Sharmahd accused by Tehran of ties to US and Israel

The little-known Tondar group, the armed wing of the "Kingdom Assembly of Iran," is based in California and says it seeks to restore Iran's monarchy that was overthrown by the 1979 Islamic revolution.

The Tondar group began its activities around 20 years ago but has maintained limited connections and cooperation with other Iranian opposition groups and had a minimal presence in popular Farsi-language media.

On August 1, 2020, Iran's Ministry of Intelligence said that its agents had captured Sharmahd in a "complex operation," without revealing further details.

On the same day, Iran's intelligence minister alleged that Sharmahd had been "heavily supported by US and Israeli intelligence services" and had been "drawn" to Iran through elaborate operations, ultimately landing in custody.

This was widely understood to imply that Iranian agents had abducted Sharmahd while he was in the United Arab Emirates and forcibly brought him to Iran.

Before his kidnapping, believed to have taken place in Dubai, and subsequent detention in Iran, the 69-year-old Sharmahd had been residing in California.

In February 2023, Sharmahd was sentenced to death by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Court, following his conviction on charges of "corruption on Earth," which, according to the UN, is a term Iran uses "to refer to a broad range of offences, including blasphemy and 'crimes' relating to Islamic morals."

Sharmahd was also accused of planning the 2008 bombing of a mosque during prayers in the southern Iranian city of in Shiraz that left 14 people dead and injured more than 200. 

Iran pinned blame for the blast on the Tondar group.

Confession under torture

Human rights organizations and Sharmahd's family have reported that he was subjected to torture while in prison.

Iranian state television aired propaganda videos in which Jamshid Sharmahd appeared to "confess" his involvement in the 2008 Shiraz blast.

Amnesty International reported that during the investigation and trial, Sharmahd was denied the right to choose an independent lawyer and to defend himself.

In May 2021, his family disclosed that the government-appointed lawyer demanded $250,000 from them, stating he would only "sit there in court" and would not represent Sharmahd unless the payment was made.

Was Iran sending a message?

Many view the execution of Sharmahd as a clear warning from the Islamic Republic to people and groups opposing Iranian authorities at home and abroad.

"The Islamic Republic was founded on two main pillars: execution and repression. Through executions, the regime aims to project its strength and compel the Iranian society and its true opposition to submit to its authority," Ashtari said.

Numerous opponents of the Islamic Republic and social media users assert that the military tensions with Israel have significantly weakened the Iranian government. In this context, the recent execution serves as a stark reminder that Tehran will continue to be unwavering in cracking down on dissent.

Jamshid Sharmahd was not the sole political prisoner in Iran to receive a death sentence.

Human rights organizations report that dozens of other political prisoners have also been sentenced to death or have been arrested on charges that could result in death punishment.

As a result, concerns have grown regarding the potential execution of these sentences for other prisoners.

 Gazelle Sharmahd told DW soon after her father's conviction in 2023 that he was the victim of a "terrorist regime" in Tehran.

"This is a regime that kidnaps people like my dad from outside of Iran, takes them over there. This terrorist regime will not respond to any kind of talks or diplomacy."

Edited by: Wesley Rahn 

Italian best-selling author, journalist and outspoken government critic Roberto Saviano is attending this year's Frankfurt Book Fair —  but only because he received a special invitation from the German organizers following a controversy in his home country.

Saviano has built his reputation on exposing and criticizing the Mafia in books such as  "Gomorrah" (2006), as well as his latest novel, "Falcone" — centered on the life and death of Italy's most famous anti-Mafia crusader, judge Giovanni Falcone.

In recent years, however, Saviano has also drawn media attention for his harsh criticism of Italy's far-right government, led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

The author was forced to pay a fine of €1,000 ($1,090) last October for calling Meloni a "bastard" over her migration policy.

Many see his issues with the government as the trigger for the scandal around his attendance at the world's largest book fair,  which opened in Frankfurt on Wednesday.

Writers say censorship hiding behind Saviano snub

Every year, the organizers of the Frankfurt Book Fair choose one country as the "guest of honor," putting its literary scene in the spotlight. This year's "guest of honor" is Italy.

The Italian delegation was thus allowed to invite over 100 authors to represent the country at the five-day fair.

But when the list was published this May, Saviano's name was conspicuously absent.

In response, a group of over 40 Italian writers published an open letter decrying the apparent snub against the anti-Mafia author. The writers behind the letter — most of whom have been invited to Frankfurt — claimed the government is attempting to suppress critical voices "through more or less explicit forms of censorship" and "increasingly suffocating political interference in cultural spaces."

Publishers say there was 'no desire' to exclude Saviano

The head of the Italian Publishers Association (AIE) subsequently apologized for leaving out Saviano, but claimed it was done with no ill intent. Talking to Corriere della Sera in late June, AIE chief Innocenzo Cipolletta said the selectors followed the usual method of asking Italian publishers to suggest writers for the book fair. Once all suggestions were in, "Saviano was not there," because none of the publishers suggested him, Cipolletta told the daily.

"We did not add him, just as we did not add other names, and I am sorry for this, because Saviano is a very important figure," Cipolletta said in June. "However, there was no desire to exclude him."

Separately, the head of the Italian delegation, Mauro Mazza, said that they intended to put the spotlight on "original authors." Mazza then extended an additional invitation to Saviano, which the writer rejected.

Spotlight on Meloni's government

The apology did little to appease government critics in Italy, especially coming just days after another journalist, Giulia Cortese, was fined €5,000 for mocking Prime Minister Meloni's stature and calling her a "little woman."

Eventually, Saviano confirmed he would travel to Frankfurt after he was invited by the fair's director Jürgen Boos.

"Here in Germany they must have asked themselves: Why these lies, this obsessive desire for censorship?" he said in an interview for La Repubblica paper published on Tuesday. "But I don't consider myself a winner. Nobody won in this."

He also dismissed the explanation provided by the publishers' association in Italy as "hogwash."

"There are a lot of authors on the list that no publisher had nominated. It was a set-up. The AIE allowed itself to be influenced by politics. In our country, the culture is so deprived of resources that it becomes susceptible to blackmail," he said.

Meanwhile, Germany's writers association PEN Berlin commented on the scandal, describing Saviano as "the most famous Italian writer in the world."

"By not inviting him… the Italian government has only managed to put a brighter spotlight on its illiberal practices," Austrian author and PEN Berlin spokeswoman Eva Menasse was quoted as saying by the British Guardian.

Hesse premier warns against 'this damn indifference'

Italian Culture Minister Alessandro Giuli has also traveled to Germany for the Frankfurt fair. At the opening ceremony, Giuli pledged to defend "the inviolable freedom of expression in any form," even at the cost of hurting his own government.

And in a thinly veiled reference to the scandal, the leader of Germany's state of Hesse, where Frankfurt is located, praised Saviano, noting that freedom of speech was "the first thing to be banned when dictators come to power."

Hesse Premier Boris Rhein said the greatest danger for democracy was "this damn indifference," pointing out that Saviano, just like his hero Falcone, is not indifferent.

"Democracies die slowly," Rhein said, warning that "many people only wake up when it is far too late."

Edited by: Elizabeth Grenier

When her father died, "D" said her overwhelming emotion was relief. Living in exile in Japan, she had only been able to communicate with her parents in China using web cameras for several years out of fear that she would be arrested if she ever set foot in her homeland.

D only wants to be referred to as a letter of the alphabet because she lives in constant fear of Chinese authorities.

"I was relieved because he did not have to worry about me any more," she told DW. D said her father, who was a dissident author, had been ostracized, punished "and suffered all his life" for standing up to the Chinese state.

"In a normal world, parents want their children to come home," she said. "But my father knew that he could not protect me. He had no choice but to tell me not to go home. I could not see him in person. I could only cry on video."

But the Chinese government has ways of exerting pressure on its critics — even those living in exile.

Beijing's agents leave written messages in mailboxes and make silent phone calls. They send messages on social media, they suggest their target might want to make a brief trip back home and, most insidiously, they threaten exiles' families who have remained in China.

These tactics are regularly used against Chinese nationals who have fled to the relative safety of Japan, many of whom keep up their campaigns for freedom and democracy.

Chinese exiles 'harassed'

A report released earlier this month by the Tokyo office of Human Rights Watch (HRW) said that dozens of Chinese, including people from ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, Tibet and Inner Mongolia, are being systematically "harassed" by Beijing.

The report said the harassment is "aimed at deterring members of the diaspora from protesting against the government or engaging in events deemed politically sensitive."

Despite living in Japan, D describes herself as being part of the "Tiananmen Generation" of young people who demanded democracy in the summer of 1989, only to see their peaceful protests brutally suppressed. She was not in Beijing at the time, but it has helped shape her.

Now in her 50s, D is a writer, poet, translator and researcher in Japan, working at a university translating dissident Chinese authors' works and publishing Japanese language versions of their books.

In 2007, she met author Liu Xiaobo in Beijing and subsequently translated several of his works.

"Around this time, I only had a distant interest in politics, but I was worried about Chinese writers who could not speak out," she said.

Liu Xiaobo was arrested in December 2008 for his involvement in the "Charter 08" manifesto on human rights.

D's translations of Liu's works into Japanese came out the next year and Liu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010.

China's most famous political prisoner, Liu was granted medical parole in June 2017 after being diagnosed with cancer and he died a few weeks later.

Pursued for writing poetry

But D's connections with Liu had consequences, along with her translations of poetry critical of the regime, interviews with the Chinese "underclass," and books on Tibet and massacres in Inner Mongolia during the Cultural Revolution.

"To the Chinese government, these writers are all 'anachronisms.' Therefore, I have also become an 'anachronism.'"

In the intervening years, her family has been "harassed," D said. This has included threatening calls and heavy-handed knocks on the door from secret police. During one brief visit to see her parents some years ago, security officials stopped by to "drink tea" and quiz her.

"In June, the authorities sent three people to my 87-year-old mother's house to ask me, through my mother, 'not to make friends with people who are not good at what they do and not to write articles that are not true,'" she said. "Their purpose was to force me, by threatening my mother, to stop writing."

"I have not directly criticized the Chinese government; I am a writer, not a politician, and I only have a remote interest in politics," D said. "But my friends in China are either dead, in prison, or have been forced to leave their hometowns. Too many."

What can Japan do?

The HRW report makes it clear that many other Chinese living in Japan are subject to the same pressures.

According to "AB," an ethnic minority Mongol quoted in the report, public security officials visited his family in Inner Mongolia after he took part in a demonstration in Tokyo, and that his relatives now live in fear.

The family of "RS" has also been targeted after he was involved in protests in 2009 in Xinjiang. The pressure has taken "a mental toll on his family," the report said.

"JK" was contacted on WeChat and pressured to provide information on other Chinese living in Japan, including by taking photos of them.

Teppei Kasai a program officer at HRW in Tokyo, said the Japanese government should do more to protect the rights of dissidents living in Japan.

Japan's Foreign Ministry declined to comment for this report and the National Police Agency did not respond to a request for information on the measures it had implemented to protect Chinese nationals in Japan.

"Japan should review its policies to establish support mechanisms to help those facing Chinese government harassment," Kasai said in a statement issued to DW. "Japan should promptly establish a national system to investigate cases of transnational repression.”

D admits that she lives in a constant state of concern.

"I say I am not afraid because I have trust in Japan and the democratic state, but Japan is geographically close to China and the penetration overseas of the Chinese Communist Party is deep," she said. "The tactics that they use are cunning. I cannot say that Japan is a safe place."

And that is why she says she wants to remain unidentified.

"I ask you not to use my real name, even though it is a sign of cowardice and fear," she said. "It is very sad."

Edited by: Wesley Rahn 

The race for the White House is in full swing. Members of both parties including their respective presidential candidates — Vice President Kamala Harris for the Democrats and former President Donald Trump for the Republicans — have accused each other of spreading lies, fake news and foreign propaganda.

While some right-leaning Republicans have insisted that it's everyone's right to say whatever they like, center-left Democrats tend to be more open to some restrictions on free speech. A 2023 poll from RealClear Opinion Researchsuggested that three-quarters of Democrats think the government should limit "hateful" social media posts.

Did Hillary Clinton call for imprisonment of fake news spreaders?

Earlier this week, Trump supporters were outraged over a video of Hillary Clinton that had aired earlier in the day on US broadcaster MSNBC. Among other claims, they accused the former secretary of state of demanding that political opponents be penalized for exercising their right to free speech.

DW's Team Fact check had a look.

Claim: "Hillary Clinton suggests jailing Americans for posting 'misinformation'," the well-known right-wing X account "End wokeness" posted on Tuesday, along with a video clip that had gained more than 68 million views as of Thursday evening.

The account "Wall Street Apes" targeted Republican voters with an X post that has garnered 2.9 million views. It says: "Hillary Clinton now calling for Trump supporters to be thrown in prison for sharing misinformation."

DW Fact check: False.

In the interview, Clinton proposed that "[Americans] should be civilly or even in some cases criminally charged" for certain social media posts. However, she did not call for charges for anyone who has posted or reposted erroneous or counterfactual content, as some of the reactions suggest.

This stance could be viewed as scandalous as it would also contradict freedom of speech, which is a constitutional right in the US, as in most, if not all, democratic countries.

However, in the interview clip in question, Clinton was talking about US citizens who are getting paid by Russian agents to "parrot Russian talking points." She referred to US special counsel Robert Mueller, who in 2018 indicted 13 Russians for allegedly meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

She went on to suggest that indicting Americans for spreading Kremlin propaganda would be a "better deterrence," as Russians are very unlikely to "ever stand trial in the United States."

Is Clinton bending restrictions on the freedom of speech?

Writing on X, Alex Mooney, a Republican congressman from West Virginia, issued a "reminder" to his followers alongside the Clinton clip: "Democrats Fear Our First Amendment Right to Speech," referring to section in the US Constitution that ensures the right to free speech.

However, many governments and supreme courts worldwide, including those in Washington and Germany, have limited free speech when it has interfered with other constitutional rights, such as personal or public security. That's why incitement of crime is usually not covered by the right to freedom of expression.

Morevoer, the  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which almost all UN states have signed and ratified at least in part, states that freedom of expression can also reach its limits when it comes to hate speech.

For example, 

Germany has stricter limits on hate speech than the US. However, in both countries, defamatory or discriminatory verbal abuse can only be punished when "it goes beyond mere expression of opinion and targets a particular person for harm," as explained by theNational Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), an alliance of 59 national not-for-profit organizations. However, NCAC asserts, that in the US such harassment usually is only punishable when it, purposeful or effectively, creates "an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment", as NCAC puts it.

A trial taking place in Tampa Bay, Florida, where four men have been accused of conspiracy and acting as unregistered Russian agents, could shed new light on whether promoting foreign propaganda is punishable in the US.

Just like the Republicans who have — wittingly or not — misinterpreted Clinton's interview, the four defendants in Florida, as reported in "The New York Times" on September 3, have argued that prosecutors are criminalizing dissent opinions that are protected under the First Amendment.

Edited by: Rachel Baig

A journalist in Pakistan investigating violence during a protest march for the release of jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan was arrested by Islamabad Police.

Television host Matiullah Jan, who also has a big presence on YouTube, has been charged with terrorism, drug peddling, and attacking police, according to his lawyer Imaan Mazari.

"It is no less than a joke," she said. "There is not an iota of truth in these charges."

Jan and colleague 'abducted'

Thousands of Khan supporters marched on central Islamabad demanding that the former leader be released on Tuesday.

Jan's colleague Saqib Bashir said they were collecting data from the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) on the casualties after the march when they were taken. 

They had both been picked up by men wearing black uniforms, blindfolded and bundled into a car.

A first information report (FIR) was filed against Jan at the Margalla Police Station in Islamabad on Thursday, indicating he was arrested at a checkpoint in the capital.

Geo TV reported that Jan would be brought before the anti-terrorism court later on Thursday.

Calls for Jan's immediate release

The Committee to Protect Journalists expressed "grave alarm" over Jan's "abduction" and demanded his immediate release.

"Authorities must ensure Jan's safety and immediate release," the organization wrote on social media.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) called for Jan's immediate and unconditional release, noting he was arrested while covering the recent protests in Islamabad.

Speaking to DW, the HRCP's Maheen Pracha said his disappearance was part of a "very well-entrenched pattern of the state cracking down on journalists who are trying to establish information that is considered contentious or sensitive."

Journalists doing such work would often disappear for short periods and then "appear in custody on often trumped-up charges, as occurred in Matiullah's case," she said. 

Pracha also renewed her group's appeal for the government and officials from Khan's PTI party to enter talks to try to defuse the months of protests and police restrictions on them, calling the current situation "untenable." 

"The fact is that the PTI has the right to protest peacefully. It is enshrined in the constitution. But what has happened is that the state has, over now many months, pushed what is a popular party against the wall. And, in that situation, tensions are bound to escalate as we saw over the weekend," she said. 

lo, msh/zc (AFP, AP, Reuters)

"It's not just Germany, the whole world is currently divided when it comes to the Middle East conflict," says Meron Mendel, director of the Anne Frank Educational Center in Frankfurt.

He's a proponent of dialogue between different points of view, but this is not easy to achieve nowadays. The public tone has become harsher, including in Germany. There are people who regard every criticism of Israel as a form of antisemitism, and there are pro-Palestinian activists who disrupt cultural events.

This recently happened in Berlin. US artist Nan Goldin, one of the most renowned contemporary photographers in the world, had traveled to the German capital to open her retrospective "This Will Not End Well" at the Neue Nationalgalerie. The traveling exhibition has been in the works for three years, and Berlin is the third stop after Stockholm and Amsterdam. But art was not the focus of the opening speech.

Accusations against Israel and Germany

Goldin made her stance on the Middle East conflict clear during the exhibition's opening evening on November 22. "I decided to use this exhibition as a platform to amplify my position of moral outrage at the genocide in Gaza and Lebanon," she said.

Goldin lamented the loss of tens of thousands of human lives who have died violent deaths in the past 13 months. And she reprimanded Germany and the state's solidarity with Israel. Germany is home to the largest Palestinian diaspora in Europe, the artist pointed out, but protests by Palestinians are still being met with police dogs. "Are you afraid to hear this, Germany?"

Goldin is Jewish; her grandparents escaped antisemitic pogroms in Russia at the end of the 19th century. "I was brought up knowing about the Nazi Holocaust. What I see in Gaza reminds me of the pogroms that my grandparents escaped," Goldin said. "The entire infrastructure of Palestine has been destroyed. The hospitals, the schools, the universities, the libraries. It's also a cultural genocide. Why can't you see this, Germany?"

Pro-Palestinian activists cheer Goldin

Goldin's speech was well received by many visitors. "Her fearless words of care and clarity resonated throughout this country, which is currently using the full force of the law, media, cultural and academic institutions to silence and criminalize the Palestinian solidarity movement," the Berlin-based South African artist and activist Adam Broomberg wrote on Instagram. "It felt like the first time in a long time that we could breathe in Germany."

Many activists turned up with keffiyehs and Palestinian flags, shouts of "Viva Palestine" echoed through the hall, and protesters also gathered outside the museum, where a banner with the slogan "Staatsräson is genocide" was unfurled. German politicians refer to Germany's special responsibility to Israel as "Staatsräson," or "reason of state."

Neither Nan Goldin nor the pro-Palestinian artists' collective Arts & Culture Alliance Berlin responded to DW's inquiries before publication of this article.

Mendel has noted a change in the pro-Palestinian protest movement. "The protests are now less about the demand to end the war or to reach a ceasefire but rather, in most cases, about what is meant by anti-Zionism: namely the idea that Israel has no right to exist as a state and that everything 'from the river to the sea' is Palestine," Mendel says. This is also due to how Israel is viewed in much of the world, he explains: as a "colonial" state — the last outpost of the West in the Global South.

Are exhibition cancellations justified?

Activists argue that pro-Palestinian voices in Germany are being silenced, and exhibitions by pro-Palestinian artists are being canceled in droves. Goldin also spoke about this.

"We actually had a few cases after October 7 where Palestinian or pro-Palestinian artists were 'canceled,'" says Mendel. "Exhibitions were canceled, conferences were canceled, people were uninvited." One example is the South African artist Candice Breitz, herself a Jew, who was falsely accused of having signed a BDS letter — the movement calling for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel. An award ceremony at the 2023 Frankfurt Book Fair for the Palestinian author Adania Shibli was also postponed.

Mendel believes that several of these decisions were wrong and affected people who did not hold antisemitic views. But there were also cases where excluding people could arguably be justified, he explains, such as individuals "who, for example, saw the Hamas massacre on October 7 as a liberation act and thus implicitly called for violence themselves."

There has been a long-running debate in Germany about when someone is considered antisemitic. The German Bundestag recently passed a resolution on antisemitism entitled "Never again is now: Protecting, preserving and strengthening Jewish life in Germany."

"This resolution is nothing more than a repeat of the resolutions that were already passed in 2017, with the adoption of this IHRA definition [of antisemitism], and in 2019, with what's known as the BDS resolution," says Mendel. "In this respect, this resolution doesn't really change anything about the situation. We've had this standstill, boycott and counterboycott since documenta, at the very latest."

Critics of the new resolution complain that it creates a climate of self-censorship and mistrust. Among other things, they criticize the resolution's use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism, which can be interpreted very broadly. For example, "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" is defined as antisemitic. By this logic, Goldin's position that Gaza reminds her of the pogroms her grandparents escaped could arguably be considered antisemitic.

The debates are becoming more heated — this was evident at the opening of the exhibition in the Neue Nationalgalerie. When the museum's director, Klaus Biesenbach, stepped up to the microphone to respond to Goldin, he was almost drowned out by the loud chanting of activists. A man who is responsible for art suddenly became the representative of a state that is struggling with how to manage the protests against Israel.

Freedom of expression lost in the tumult

Biesenbach read in vain amidst the din. Politicians later complained that the disruptors were not interested in dialogue. Once they had left the hall, Biesenbach repeated his speech.

"As a museum, we are deeply committed to freedom of art and freedom of expression, even if we do not agree with what is being expressed," Biesenbach said. "Equally important is our commitment to the dignity of every individual, which requires a firm rejection of all forms of antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism and all other forms of hatred, bigotry and violence."

The Neue Nationalgalerie clearly distanced itself from the protesters' statements. "Israel's right to exist is not in question for us. Hamas' attack on the Jewish state on October 7, 2023, was a cruel act of terrorism that cannot be justified by anything," Biesenbach said. "At the same time, we sympathize with the civilian population in Gaza and Lebanon, whose suffering must not be overlooked. All people in the Middle East have the right to live without fear and with the knowledge that they are safe. We are committed to a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict."

In a statement, Biesenbach said that culture is the place in society where debate and discussion can take place — but not fighting.

Hardened fronts

Mendel sees things similarly and explains that the tumult at the exhibition's opening can be viewed in different ways. "You can say it was an act of protest, and protest can be loud and can sometimes be disruptive." But, he went on, people should then sit down together and facilitate dialogue between different positions.

The Neue Nationalgalerie attempted to do precisely this in the aftermath of the opening, with a symposium entitled "Art and Activism in Times of Polarization." Palestinians and Israelis, Zionists and anti-Zionists, Jews and non-Jews — everyone was supposed to be able to openly express their opinion, as Goldin had done in her opening speech. "It was clear that she would take a decidedly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli position, and yet she was given the stage and allowed to say anything she wanted," says Mendel.

Goldin, however, declined to take part in the symposium. And some pro-Palestinian activists even tried to stop it from taking place. "They not only threatened and attacked panel guests but also employees of the Neue Nationalgalerie," says Mendel. "They were called 'Nazis' and threatened with consequences. So we see that extremists from both sides use exactly the same weapons — the weapons of boycott and cancellation to prevent civilized, constructive discussion."

Despite several cancellations, Mendel believes the symposium was a success. "We were not aiming to reach a consensus by the end of the day," he says, but people talked to each other respectfully. "This then raises the question of who we pay attention to — to those who shout loudly, who call for a boycott and use violence? Or do we pay attention to the 500 people who spoke interestedly and critically with one another?"

This article was originally written in German.

On Sunday (November 24), Israel's far-right Cabinet voted unanimously to sanction Haaretz, the nation's oldest newspaper. The motion was put forward by Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi (Likud), apparently in response to critical coverage of the Israel-Hamas war and a speech by Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken, who suggested imposing sanctions on senior government officials for violating international law.

The proposal stipulates ending government advertising with the newspaper and a contact boycott. It also calls for canceling all subscriptions to the left-liberal newspaper for state employees and employees of state-owned companies.

Haaretz, which publishes in Hebrew and English and is widely respected internationally, responded to the decision by saying that the boycott "is another step in Netanyahu's journey to dismantle Israeli democracy. Like his friends Putin, Erdogan, and Orban, Netanyahu is trying to silence a critical, independent newspaper," a statement said. Noa Landau, deputy editor-in-chief wrote on social media platform X, "we will not be deterred."

Solidarity with Haaretz

Criticism was widespread among Israeli media watchdogs and within the journalism community. "It's very worrying because they want to destroy the gatekeepers, and the media is the gatekeeper," Anat Saragusti, head of the Israeli Journalists' Union, told DW.

"There is solidarity among all journalists and all media who understand that this is something big." Saragusti also said that this was just one of several attempts to restrict press freedom, including legislation to shut down Israel's public broadcaster and intimidation campaigns against individual journalists.

Nahum Barnea, a prominent commentator in the daily Yedioth Ahronoth, wrote that "while dozens of missiles fired by Hezbollah, the organization we already defeated, filled the skies overhead and millions of worried Israelis rushed to take shelter, our government was busy addressing the question that truly preoccupies its ministers: How to financially screw over a media outlet." 

Publisher's speech in the spotlight

On X, Israeli Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi wrote, "we won't allow a reality in which a publisher of a newspaper in Israel calls for sanctions against it and supports the State's enemies in the middle of a war and will still be financially supported by the State." He also wrote, "fancy reading the poison that is Haaretz newspaper? Feel free to do so. We'll just stop funding it. Inconceivable for you [Haaretz] huh? Freedom of expression yes, funding for poison against the State and the army? Absolutely not."

In October, Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken, in a speech delivered at an event his paper had organized in London, called for international sanctions on Israeli leaders.

"A Palestinian state must be established and the only way to achieve this, I think, is to apply sanctions against Israel, against the leaders who oppose it and against the settlers who are in the occupied territories in contravention of international law," Schocken reportedly said.

His speech drew sharp criticism in Israel — including from Haaretz journalists — for referring at one point to Palestinians as "freedom fighters." Schocken subsequently clarified his comments and said his mention of Palestinian "freedom fighters" was not a reference to Hamas militants. An editorial in the newspaper criticized its publisher, saying that any organization attacking civilians is "a terrorist organization, and its members are terrorists. They are certainly not freedom fighters." 

Nevertheless, the latest move is seen by Israeli media watchdogs as an effort to silence critical coverage.

"In 2023, when the judicial overhaul started, the intention was to change the media landscape simultaneously, and Minister Karhi, when he entered his position as minister of communications, said his goal is to shut down the Public Broadcasting Corporation," said Oren Persico, editor at HaAyin HaShevi'it [Hebrew: Seventh Eye], an online magazine investigating media issues and freedom of the press. "Now they are back, there are a few bills right now trying to limit freedom of the press." 

Public broadcaster also targeted

Since its TV and radio launch in 2017, replacing the old, politically influenced Israeli Broadcast Authority (IBA), Israeli public broadcaster Kan (Hebrew: Here) has become an integral part of the country's media landscape. Its news operations include journalists from all sides of Israeli society, right and left wing alike. Its social media channels enjoy high popularity among Israelis.

Prime Minister Netanyahu and his ministers tried to reduce Kan's influence from the start. In a 2016 article for right-wing newspaper Makor Rishon, journalist Amit Segal wrote that Netanyahu would like to stop Kan's establishment, even if that meant keeping the IBA.

Those attempts continue under current Communications Minister Karhi.  At the beginning of 2023, the Haaretz Group daily business newspaper TheMarker reported in February that the Netanyahu government's attempts to shut down Kan were due to it "not being prone to political pressure."

Other laws such as the so-called Al Jazeera law were also passed. In May, the Israeli government shut down Al Jazeera's office in Israel under the new law, which allows for the closure of foreign media outlets deemed a threat to national security. The Israeli military also later raided and closed Al Jazeera's Ramallah bureau in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The closure orders have been renewed every 60 days since the site was shuttered. 

Haaretz remains defiant

This latest initiative is likely to be challenged at Israel's Supreme Court, analysts said.

"It really invites an appeal to the High Court, as you shouldn't insert political views into these calculations because the objective is to get the message to the public," Persico told DW, referring to the government agencies advertising in newspapers. "The question is, will the government advertising agency really boycott Haaretz because of the political decision of the government."

Haaretz remains defiant, stating in its response to the government's decision that it "will not balk and will not morph into a government pamphlet that publishes messages approved by the government and its leader."

Edited by: Jon Shelton; Rob Mudge