Over the past decade, human rights defenders (HRDs) have courageously organised to stop corporate abuse and prevent business activities from causing harm – exposing human rights and environmental violations, demanding accountability, and advocating for rights-respecting economic practices. From Indigenous Peoples protecting forests from mining activities to journalists exposing health and environmental harms related to logging to workers advocating for better conditions in the garment sector, HRDs are at the forefront of creating a more equitable, sustainable and abundant world where rights are protected, people and nature thrive, and just economies can flourish.

Every one of us has the right to take action to protect our rights and environments and contribute to creating a more just and equitable world, and yet those who do often face great risk. Businesses have the responsibility to respect human rights, including the right of all people to defend human rights. When companies fail to listen to HRDs, they lose important allies – people and groups fighting for transparency and accountability, and against corruption, which are all essential elements of an open and stable business operating environment. With authoritarianism on the rise, the imperative of realising a just global energy transition, and deepening inequality around the world, the role of business has rarely been so important – especially as HRDs pressing for rights-respecting corporate practice face increasing challenges.

From January 2015 to December 2024, the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (the Resource Centre) recorded more than 6,400 attacks across 147 countries against people who voiced concerns about business-related risks or harms. This is close to two attacks on average every day over the past ten years. In 2024 alone, we tracked 660 attacks.

Civic space – the environment that enables all of us to organise, participate, and communicate freely in our societies – has also continued to deteriorate over the past decade. According to Civicus, only 3.6% of the world’s population currently lives in countries with open civic space, where citizens and civil society organisations are able to organise, participate and communicate without restrictions. In every region, governments have abused their power to limit the civic freedoms of people advocating for responsible business practice by detaining journalists, passing restrictive legislation (such as foreign funding bills and critical infrastructure laws), criminalising and prosecuting HRDs, and using violent force at protests, among other actions.

This is harmful for business. Civic space restrictions create an ‘information black box,’ leaving companies and investors with gaps in knowledge about potential or actual negative human rights impacts, which can lead to legal, financial, reputational and other risks. Democracy and full enjoyment of civic freedoms are central to addressing the key challenges humanity faces and to sustainable economic growth – some economists have found that democratisation causes an increase in GDP per capita of between 20% and 25%. In addition, under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and subsequent guidance, business actors also have a responsibility to respect human rights, which includes engaging in robust human rights due diligence that identifies and mitigates risks to civic freedoms and HRDs.

In our current context of continued erosion of democracy, deregulation, backlash against environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns, increased conflict, and the weaponsation of both law and technology against human rights defence, HRDs remind us to transcend polarisation and persist in realising a more just and abundant future for us all. Key wins over the past decade include a legally binding instrument to protect environmental defenders, regulations to curb strategic lawsuits against public participation, and important victories advancing corporate accountability following advocacy and judicial efforts. Representatives from Indigenous communities have shared a powerful vision for a rights-respecting energy transition – an essential framework for the future. They are innovating, at times together with progressive businesses, to bring about transformative new business models designed to deliver shared prosperity in alignment with Indigenous Peoples’ self-determined priorities.

Between January 2015 and December 2024, the Resource Centre documented more than 6,400 cases of attacks globally against HRDs challenging corporate harm. These attacks were against Indigenous Peoples, youth leaders, elders, women defenders, journalists, environmental defenders, communities, non-profit organisations and others, negatively affecting tens of thousands of people.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Our research is based on publicly available information, and given the severity of civic space restrictions in some countries and security concerns, many attacks go unreported. In addition, governments are largely failing in their duty to monitor attacks. In countries and regions where few attacks are documented, this does not mean that violence against defenders is nonexistent, but rather that the information is not accessible. Learn more about our research methodology.

Restrictions on civic space helped to facilitate these attacks. Other drivers included weak rule of law and unaccountable governance, economic models focused on profit maximisation through unsustainable resource extraction, racism and discrimination, and lack of consultation with potentially affected stakeholders.

“I routinely hear from Indigenous defenders working in isolated, remote or rural areas that businesses and governments do not consult with them properly – and that their right to give or withhold their free, prior and informed consent for activities negatively affecting their lives or their territories is either manipulated or ignored. Some attacks are committed by agents acting for businesses, others by government authorities and businesses acting together.”

– Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders

Latin America and the Caribbean and Asia and the Pacific have consistently been the most dangerous regions for HRDs raising concerns about corporate harm, accounting for close to three in four (71%) attacks in the past decade. Africa follows with 583 instances of attacks – close to a third of these occurred in Uganda.

In Latin America, the majority of attacks are concentrated in six countries that account for 35% of all attacks globally – Brazil (473), Mexico (455), Honduras (418), Colombia (331), Peru (299) and Guatemala (256). Despite comprising only 0.1% of the world’s population, 6.5% of attacks took place in Honduras. In Asia, the highest number of attacks occurred in the Philippines (411), India (385), Cambodia (279) and Indonesia (216).

Another trend is an increase in attacks in the United Kingdom, where 91% of attacks have been judicial harassment (arrests, criminal charges and SLAPPs). Attacks in the UK notably increased from seven in 2022 to 21 in 2023 – the same year the UK Government’s Public Order Act, which significantly increased the police’s power to respond to protests, came into force, undermining freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association. Attacks further increased in 2024 to 34. Almost all of these attacks were against people raising concerns about the fossil fuel sector.

Killings and disappearances

Over the past decade, we documented close to 1,100 killings of HRDs who bravely spoke out against corporate harm. In 2024 alone, we recorded the murders of 52 people.

We commemorate the lives, courage and vital work of these HRDs and their communities. While governments have a duty to investigate these murders, the majority of attacks  – both lethal and non-lethal – go uninvestigated and unpunished, fostering a culture of impunity that only emboldens further violence.

Indigenous defenders are particularly at risk. Close to a third (31%) of those killed were Indigenous defenders. Most of the killings of Indigenous defenders occurred in Latin America, as well as the Philippines.

We also tracked 116 abductions and disappearances, which leave families and communities bereft, in the dark as to the safety and whereabouts of their loved one. Most took place in Mexico and the Philippines.

Disappearence of two defenders in Mexico

Co-authored with Global Rights Advocacy

The mining sector is the most dangerous sector for HRDs in Mexico. Over the past decade, a quarter of attacks were against HRDs raising concerns about mining; 40% of those attacks were killings. In the coastal mountains of Michoacán, there is powerful resistance by Indigenous Peoples to mining, amidst a generalised atmosphere of violence. Indigenous Peoples are defending their territories against private interests and organised crime, facing criminalisation, persecution, aggression and killings.

They also alleged that Ternium is using land for purposes other than those established, such as the exploitation of a property that they had agreed to use as a waste deposit.

"My papa has been a social activist his entire life. He is an activist for the rights of Indigenous Peoples, especially the Nahua people, to whom we belong. He is a person very, very loved and known throughout the region for the work he has done. He has basically given his entire life to this region. It is what he loves the most." – Keivan Diaz Valencia, grandson of Antonio Diaz

On 15 January 2023, after winning lawsuits that would allow a democratic election of communal authorities and set the agenda for mining development, Antonio and Ricardo were forcibly disappeared. Their vehicle was found after they participated in a community assembly discussing these issues, with flat tires and bullet marks. Despite numerous forensic findings, the HRDs’ whereabouts remain unknown.

For over four years, the HRDs fought in courts to protect the rights of the Nahua community of Aquila. Both defenders reported different kinds of threats, including being followed by armed men. During a community assembly in December 2022, with company managers present, both HRDs allegedly received threats that they would be forcibly disappeared if they continued to speak out against Ternium. Ricardo was also part of a government protection mechanism for HRDs due to his work protecting Indigenous rights. Additionally, in December 2022, Antonio sent a letter to then-Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, accusing Ternium of paying armed forces to attack and repress members of the Aquila community.

Families and advocates demand a broader investigation into the context of violence against environmental defenders, and the role of security forces, state authorities, and the company Ternium. Ongoing violence and threats against witnesses, family members, and lawyers heighten risks, making urgent humanitarian action essential.

To that end, the families and their representatives created the Mecanismo Independiente de Recuperación Humanitaria para Antonio y Ricardo (MIRHAR), and through multilateral diplomacy are seeking collaboration from Luxembourg, the United States, and Ternium to find the truth. They are also demanding that Mexico reinstall the agreed upon high level task force to implement recommendations from the United Nations Committee on Enforced Disappearances and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

The Resource Centre invited Ternium and Techint Group to respond to allegations raised by the community and to the disappearances of Antonio and Ricardo. Ternium denied all allegations; its full response is available here and prior responses are available here. Techint Group did not respond.

"We are trying to carry on, to stay healthy so that we can continue because we don't know how long it will take. We won't stop looking for him – not for a second do we forget that he is not with us. And that they have done things to him. That is driving us crazy." – Ana Lucía Lagunes Gasca, Ricardo's sister

Judicial harassment

Many governments are not only neglecting their duty to protect human rights, but are also weaponising the legal system to attack defenders, enabling private actors to do the same. Over the past decade more than half of the attacks we tracked constituted judicial harassment (3,311), which includes arbitrary detention, abusive subpoenas, strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and criminal prosecution.

In the past ten years, we have recorded over 530 instances of SLAPPs – both civil and criminal lawsuits – brought or initiated by private actors since 2015 against HRDs raising concerns about business. During 2024, we identified 26 cases that bear the hallmarks of SLAPPs. Latin America has been consistently the region with the highest number of SLAPP cases (191), with Honduras (46) and Peru (46) leading the region. A significant number of cases have been recorded in the United States of America (55), Thailand (54), and Cambodia (32) as well. Sixty-nine percent of these SLAPPs included criminal charges that could involve long prison sentences. The mining sector is responsible for almost a third (31%) of the total number of SLAPPs.

Strategic lawsuits against public participation masquerade as legitimate legal actions but are actually an abuse of the legal system, draining public resources and eroding public trust in judicial integrity. This misuse of the legal system serves private interests at the expense of legitimate human rights work. Our research reveals that the most common charges relate to libel and defamation, damages, incitement to commit a felony, instigating a strike, computer-related crimes, anti-boycott laws, racketeering and conspiracy. The consequences for such offences and crimes often involve severe monetary compensations, lengthy prison sentences, and allow for pretrial detention measures, incarcerating HRDs during proceedings, which can last for years.

The recent ruling against Greenpeace in the United States, widely considered to bear the hallmarks of a SLAPP, is one example. On 20 March 2025, a North Dakota jury ruled in favour of fossil fuel company Energy Transfer and found Greenpeace liable for defamation and other claims in connection with protests led by Indigenous Peoples against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The case took eight years and resulted in a jury deciding that Greenpeace entities should pay the multi-billion dollar company over $660 million in damages.

“This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations. It is part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponize our courts to silence dissent. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech.”
– Sushma Raman, Interim Executive Director of Greenpeace USA

The Resource Centre invited Energy Transfer to respond; the company’s full response is available here.

Crackdown on public protest and civil disobedience

“The exercise of the right to peaceful assembly is one of the most important tools people have for advocating for more effective and equitable climate action and environmental protection.” – Clement Voule, Former U.N. special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association

Over the past decade, as the devastating impacts of the climate crisis have become clearer, people across the globe have organised, protested, and engaged in direct action to stop fossil fuel projects and urge a transition to renewable energy. In response to this powerful mobilisation, often led by Indigenous Peoples and youth, governments have intensified restrictions on the right to protest. This crackdown has taken many forms, including criminalising non-violent protest action, passing critical infracture laws designed to protect fossil fuel projects, increasing operational and administrative burdens for civil society organisations, engaging in surveillance of protestors, stigmatising people as “terrorists” or “anti-development”, fast-tracking projects without meaningful community consultation, and restricting freedom of expression and access to information. This suppression of the rights to peaceful assembly, to protest, and to participate in public life has occurred in both democractic and autocratic societies and can have a chilling effect on sharing information about human rights and environmental risks related to business projects.

Engaging in civil disobedience – acts of deliberate law-breaking concerning matters of public interest conducted publicly and non-violently, such as blocking roads and traffic, occupying government officials’ offices, and physically attaching oneself to company equipment – is a form of exercising the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly guaranteed by articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Respect for these fundamental rights is vital for a just energy transition, among other business and human rights issues. Consultations prior to commencing business operations are often insufficient, with protest becoming one of the only avenues to highlight risks and harms associated with projects.

Yet, many governments opt to suppress the right to peaceful assembly rather than address the underlying human rights and environmental abuses driving people to protest. In recent years, we have recorded numerous instances of attacks on people protesting fossil fuel projects and urging climate action, including across Europe and the UK. Recent research by the University of Bristol found that British police arrest environmental protesters at nearly three times the global average rate, revealing the country as a world leader in the legal crackdown on climate activism.

Another example was the government crackdown on widespread protests in Panama following the National Assembly's approval of a contract for copper extraction in Central America's largest open-pit copper mine, operated by Minera Panamá, a subsidiary of Canada's First Quantum Minerals. At least 30 people were arrested, 21 were charged with terrorism, including Damaris Sánchez Samudio. and several people were injured, including journalist and activist Aubrey Baxter, who lost an eye due to excessive use of police force. Abdiel Díaz and Iván Rodríguez were shot and killed by a gunman in November 2023 and Tomás Milton Cedeño García was also killed. The Resource Centre previously invited Minera Panamá and First Quantum Minerals to respond; they did not.

Many attacks involve collusion between state, business enterprises and other non-state actors, and perpetrators are often hard to identify.

Based on public sources, our data shows that state actors – including police officers, local authorities, armed forces and the judiciary – are the most common direct perpetrator of attacks on HRDs, often prioritising economic profits over human rights and benefiting business actors.

States

States have the primary obligation to protect HRDs – under international law they are required to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of individuals within their territory and/ or jurisdiction. According to the UNGPs and their subsequent guidance, this includes protecting against human rights abuses by business actors. This requires taking appropriate steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication.

Yet states are not only failing in their duty to protect against human rights abuses by business, they are often perpetrators of attacks on HRDs themselves, such as by arresting and charging people exercising their freedoms of expression and assembly at demonstrations against potentially harmful business projects.

Business enterprises

“Protecting and respecting human rights defenders is not an option, but an obligation, for States and business enterprises, respectively. The most wise, forward thinking and effective business enterprises will view human rights defenders as partners. They will engage with them early, and often... [T]hey will also find that it is in their own best interests, strengthening risk management overall, contributing to building trust and ultimately making a positive impact towards the rule of law and a rights-respecting environment amid growing threats to civic space.” – UN Working Group on Business & Human Rights

Regardless of whether states are fulfilling their human rights obligations, companies have a responsibility to prevent and address human rights abuses in relation to their business activities and relationships. If business actors are causing or contributing to human rights abuse affecting HRDs, their responsibility is clear-cut: end the abuse and address and remedy any harm. Even in cases where there are no apparent direct links between companies or investors and attacks, business actors are expected to proactively use their leverage to promote respect for the rights of HRDs and civic freedoms. Corporate responsibility to respect human rights includes ongoing meaningful engagement with rightsholders, including HRDs, raising concerns about risks and harms related to their operations, value chains or business relationships. Failure to meaningfully engage rightsholders can lead to social unrest, conflicts, litigation and significant financial consequences for companies and investors.

When operating or investing in environments with significant restrictions on civic space, business actors also have a discretionary opportunity to proactively support and uphold civic freedoms – and it is in their interest to do so. Contexts with open civic space are more likely to be stable, predictable operating environments. Civic space restrictions limit companies and investors’ knowledge about potential or actual negative human rights impacts, which can lead to legal, financial, reputational, and other risks. Actions companies can take to support open civic space include raising concerns about restrictions on civic freedoms in meetings with home and host government officials, engaging in collective action through business associations and multi-stakeholder initiatives, and signing public statements in support of HRDs and civic freedoms, among others.

Even when states are direct perpetrators, companies can be connected with attacks, such as by calling police or state security forces to disperse peaceful protests; providing governments with services or products enabling unlawful surveillance; and obstructing unionisation. Other tactics used by companies to gain control over land and resources, often leading to conflict and attacks, include dividing communities and engaging in inadequate consultation processes.

Corporate capture – when business actors use their political clout to influence the decision-making of states for their benefit over its citizens – is also widespread across the globe. This can include lobbying against environmental protection regulation, drafting legislation privately with lawmakers to limit the right to protest, and exploiting governance gaps for corporate benefit, among other actions. In addition, while restrictions on civic space and civil society increase across the globe, corporate actors benefit from incentives and frameworks that do not promote respect for human rights and decreasing regulation in many jursidictions. One example is Investor-State Dispute Settlements, a set of rules through which foreign investors can sue states if they take actions that negatively affect their investments, creating an incentive for governments to ignore community concerns about business projects and a chilling effect on governments' ability to govern in public interest, including by ensuring protections for HRDs.

Companies connected with the highest number of attacks

Over the past decade the projects associated with the highest number of attacks were Lake Albert oil extraction and development project (which includes the East African Crude Oil Pipeline) (Uganda and Tanzania), Inversiones los Pinares (Honduras), Dakota Access Pipeline (USA), Las Bambas Mine (Peru), and Line 3 Pipeline (USA and Canada). Click the cards below to explore details on attacks and these projects.

None of the companies involved in these projects have publicly available, company-wide policy commitments to not contribute to or tolerate attacks on HRDs. TotalEnergies EP Uganda has published a statement that it does not, “tolerate any threats, intimidation, harassment, or violence against those who peacefully and lawfully promote Human Rights in relation to our activities”. In the most recent edition of its Human Rights Briefing Paper, TotalEnergies states, “It is our view that an open civic space and the role of civil society organisations and other Human Rights defenders are necessary to ensure respect for Human Rights and to voice the concerns of right holders. As part of our activities, we promote dialogue and discussions with Human Rights defenders, as defined in the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.”

Attacks on HRDs occur in relation to almost every business sector in every region of the world. Over the past decade, the sectors connected with the highest number of attacks have been mining (1,681), agribusiness (1,154), fossil fuels (792), renewable energy (454) and logging (359).

These five sectors are intimately connected to the climate crisis. Fossil fuels and the agribusiness sectors are the top polluting industries. Mining, agribusiness, fossil fuels and logging are leading drivers of deforestation.