Donald Trump, President of the United States of America, addresses the general debate of the General Assembly’s eightieth session in 2025. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider.
By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
President Donald Trump’s executive order to stop United States support for 66 international organizations, including 31 United Nations (UN) groups, has faced strong opposition from these organizations, the global community, humanitarian experts, and climate advocates, who are concerned about the negative effects on global cooperation, sustainable development, and international peace and security.
This executive order follows earlier withdrawals from the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The United States has recently reduced its funding for foreign aid organizations.
The majority of the affected bodies in this executive order are organizations that center around issues in climate change, labor, peacekeeping, migration, and civic space conditions. In a statement from the U.S. Department of State, it is confirmed that Trump’s review of these organizations found them to be “wasteful, ineffective, and harmful.”
The executive order primarily affects organizations that address climate change, labor rights, peacekeeping, migration, and civic space conditions. In a statement, the department described the organizations, calling them vehicles for “progressive ideologies” funded by American taxpayers and misaligned with United States’ national interests.
“The Trump Administration has found these institutions to be redundant in their scope, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful, poorly run, captured by the interests of actors advancing their agendas contrary to our own, or a threat to our nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity,” said United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “President Trump is clear: It is no longer acceptable to be sending these institutions the blood, sweat, and treasure of the American people, with little to nothing to show for it. The days of billions of dollars in taxpayer money flowing to foreign interests at the expense of our people are over.”
The order instructs all executive departments and agencies to begin implementing the withdrawals immediately. For the affected UN agencies, this entails ending United States participation and halting funding. Rubio also confirmed that the review of additional international organizations is still underway.
Humanitarian experts and spokespersons for many of the affected entities have voiced alarm and condemnation with President Trump’s order, warning of severe consequences for climate action, human rights, peacebuilding efforts, multilateral governance, and global crisis-response systems—particularly at a time of mounting international instability.
“Today, we are witnessing a complete shift from global cooperation towards transactional relations,” said Yamide Dagnet, Senior International Vice President at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
“It is becoming less about shared principles, rule of law, and solidarity, thereby risking more global instability. By choosing to run away from addressing some of the biggest environmental, economic, health, and security threats on the planet, the United States of America stands to lose a lot. With diminishing credibility and competitiveness in the industries of the future, the United States will be missing out on job creation and innovation, ceding scientific and technological leadership to other countries,” Dagnet said.
She called on world leaders to commit to multilateralism.
“The world is bigger than the United States—and so are the solutions to our problems, which require global cooperation more than ever, including among states, provinces, and cities globally. This is the moment when world leaders need to resolutely commit to multilateral collaboration if we’re going to overcome these global threats to ensure a safe and sustainable future for all.”
Many have also criticized the United States’ à la carte approach to meeting its international obligations, only supporting the operations and agencies that align with President Trump’s priorities.
“I think what we’re seeing is the crystallization of the United States approach to multilateralism, which is ‘my way or the highway,’” said Daniel Forti, the head of UN affairs at the International Crisis Group. “It’s a very clear vision of wanting international cooperation on Washington’s own terms.”
The Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) said it regretted “the deeply disappointing news of the United States’ intention to withdraw its participation in IPBES, along with more than 60 other international organizations and bodies.”
Dr. David Obura, Chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), said the U.S. was a founding member and “scientists, policymakers and stakeholders—including Indigenous Peoples and local communities—from the United States have been among the most engaged contributors to the work of IPBES since its establishment in 2012, making valuable contributions to objective science-based assessments of the state of the planet for people and nature.”
Apart from their contributions to IPBES, “decision-makers in the United States—at all levels and in all spheres of society—have also been among the most prolific users of the work produced by IPBES to help better inform policy, regulations, investments and future research.”
Obura thanked the United States for their contribution but noted that the withdrawal would have a massive impact on IPBES and the planet.
“Unfortunately, we cannot withdraw from the fact that more than 1 million species of plants and animals face extinction. Nor can we change the fact that the global economy is losing as much as USD 25 trillion per year in environmental impacts, or restore the missed opportunities of not acting now to generate more than USD 10 trillion in business opportunity value and 395 million jobs by 2030.”
Historically, the United States has been the largest financial contributor to the UN, providing approximately 22 percent of the organization’s regular budget and roughly 28 percent of all peacekeeping funds.
The withdrawal of United States support from 31 UN bodies is expected to trigger substantial budget shortfalls, cutbacks in humanitarian staffing, and the loss of critical technical expertise supplied by its personnel. These setbacks are likely to hinder progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), reduce food assistance and medical services for people in protracted crises, and embolden authoritarian governments to resist humanitarian oversight and intervention.
“The US decision to disengage from dozens of United Nations programs and agencies, along with other international bodies, is just President Trump’s latest assault on human rights protections and the global rule of law,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch (HRW).
“Whether withdrawing from the Human Rights Council or defunding the UN Population Fund, which helps millions of women and girls around the world, this administration has been trying to destroy the very same human rights institutions that the US helped build over the last 80 years. UN member countries should resist the US campaign to demolish tools they use to uphold human rights and ensure that vital UN programs have the funding and political support they need.”
At a press briefing at the UN Headquarters, Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General António Guterres, informed reporters of the UN’s reaction to the United States withdrawal, emphasizing that the UN remains committed to assisting people in need regardless of United States participation
“As we have consistently underscored, assessed contributions to the United Nations regular budget and peacekeeping budget, as approved by the General Assembly, are a legal obligation under the UN Charter for all Member States, including the United States,” said Dujarric.
“All United Nations entities will go on with the implementation of their mandates as given by Member States. The United Nations has a responsibility to deliver for those who depend on us. We will continue to carry out our mandates with determination.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
By Anis Chowdhury
DHAKA, Bangladesh, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
As many of you know, out of the blue, I have been called in to assist the Interim Government led by Nobel Laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus in stabilising the economy left in ruins by the fallen autocratic-kleptocratic regime that looted the banks, stole public money and robbed small investors in the capital market to siphon off billions of dollars out of the country. I had never served in a government; neither had I ever expected this opportunity. However, my UN experience and political economy understanding have been handy.
Anis Chowdhury
Reflecting back the year that we have just passed, I trust, you have been well as we wished each other at the start of 2025 the best of our health and spirit. Unfortunately, despite our earnest wish, the world was not peaceful during 2025.Hopes and global disorder
Hopes kindled briefly for justice for the Palestinians as the European powers, including Australia (a European settler colony) were forced to recognise the Palestine State, and Narcissist Trump pushed for some peace in both Ukraine and Gaza in his mad desperation for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Yet Gaza is still being bombarded with Israel’s genocidal intent, making a mockery of deranged Trump’s rhetorical claim of achieving “peace in the Middle East for the first time in 3,000 years”, and the illegal occupation of the West Bank along with settler violence continues unabated with complete immunity in blatant violations of international laws.
Narcissist Trump sanctioned the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ) in his desperate attempt to save Israeli war criminals, including Benjamin Netanyahu and justify Israel’s genocide and settler violence. Trump upended his assault on the rule-based order with arbitrary so-called ‘reciprocal tariff’.
Bangladesh
As for the post-fascist Hasina Bangladesh, the year 2025 began with high expectations. And as for me, the year 2025 has been extra-ordinary.
Today, I am pleased to say that we have been able to avert a full-blown crisis. Heart-felt thanks to our ‘remittance fighters’ who whole-heartedly trusted the Interim Government’s various reform initiatives. Expatriate Bangladeshis sent a record $30.04 bn in remittances in the 2024–25 fiscal year, the highest amount ever received in a single fiscal year in the country’s history. Forex reserves surged to $33 bn, hitting 3-year high as December remittances crossed $3bn. You can get a report card by Finance Advisor, Dr. Salehuddin and myself, published in the Daily Star on 18 August 2025.
Of course, not everything has been rosy. The much-hoped systemic transition remains full of uncertainty. I see systemic transition as the process of total transformation of a caterpillar inside a cocoon. We still do not know whether the ‘caterpillar in the cocoon’ will turn out to be a butterfly or a moth. People are genuinely worried as the past systemic transition opportunities were wasted.
I myself found road-blocks at every turn. Bureaucratic inertia and resistance have frustrated my efforts for genuine reforms. It has been a real-life experience of the classic British political satire, “Yes, Minister”. Like Sir Humphrey Appleby, the bureaucrats will display outwardly extra-ordinary humbleness, but will politely defy citing rules of business. Bureaucratic resistance is the main stumbling block for achieving coordination, coherence and integration in policy making and implementation, thus, causing wasteful duplications, inefficiency and lack of effectiveness.
Nevertheless, I achieved some success. One of them is the agreement to expand the voluntary Bangladesh National Cadet Corps programme to cover ALL youths (aged 18) in 10-12 years, so that we can have a disciplined workforce to be readily deployed during any national emergency. Needless to say, that this is an imperative to realise demographic dividend. We are hoping to roll out the programme from July 2026 to coincide with the July Revolution anniversary.
Despite frustrations and uncertainties, I am hopeful as I can see a seismic shift in the political dynamics of the country. This coincides with the demographic shift – the youth (15-30 years) representing nearly 30% of the population. These youths have a different vocabulary of politics; they want justice, inclusion, self-respect, and dignity – they are fiercely nationalist.
Recently martyred Hadi is their embodiment. The establishment is understandably threatened and tried to silence the youth by assassinating Hadi; but they failed to extinguish the flame, instead, everyone has become a Hadi, standing unwavering in their commitment to carry out Hadi’s mission of building a just nation where citizens can live with dignity, free from fear, subjugation, and oppression. Hadi re-centred our national conscience on Insaf: justice, dignity, and fairness not as rhetorical slogans, but as non-negotiable ethical foundations of the State and society.
In an era of moral drift, Hadi reminded the nation that no political order can last without justice at its core. He ignited a generation with civic courage and moral responsibility. Free from fear, patronage, or transactional politics, young people saw in Hadi a new model of leadership: ethical, principled, and accountable. In doing so, he reshaped the future political character of Bangladesh and moved national thinking beyond entrenched legacy power structures toward people-centric, principled governance. He challenged the inevitability of corruption and coercion, insisting instead that politics could be reclaimed as a moral vocation. His life poses an enduring question to those who seek power: Will you serve justice, or merely rule?
Let me end this year-end message with my personal tribute to Khaleda Zia, who has recently passed away after a long illness imposed on her by the vindictive Hasina regime, falsely convicting her and imprisoning in a substandard cell. Like her husband, Shaheed President Zia, she was thrust into the whirlpool of history. They never sought power; but when the responsibility fell on their shoulders, they carried out their duties to the nation whole-heartedly and selflessly; thus, they became a true statesman (woman), winning hearts and minds of their people.
Perhaps Khaleda Zia’s most enduring legacy lies in her extraordinary restraint and dignified disposition, even under severe and prolonged adversity. Her self-restraint, rooted in grace rather than weakness, distinguished her from many of her contemporaries and offers a powerful lesson for today’s often abrasive and confrontational political culture.
Warmest regards and best wishes for the New Year
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Two malnourished children receive food supplements at a health centre in Tawila, North Darfur, Sudan. Credit: UNICEF/Mohammed Jamal
By Oritro Karim
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
As Sudan approaches 1,000 days of civil war, late December and early January saw a brutal escalation of violence, with drone strikes hitting areas at the center of the country’s deepening hunger crisis.
While the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) advance across western and southern Sudan, and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) tighten control over the east and the capital, civilians are at a high risk of being caught in the crossfire. Thousands have been displaced as a direct result of violence, humanitarian access remains severely strained, and most civilians are unable to access basic, essential services.
In late December, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) released its annual Emergency Watchlist report, outlining the humanitarian crises in 20 countries and identifying those at the greatest risk of deteriorating conditions in 2026. For the third year in a row, Sudan ranked at the top of the list, with the IRC describing the nation’s crisis as the “largest humanitarian crisis ever recorded”, as well as the largest and fastest growing displacement crisis in the world.
“This crisis is entirely man-made,” said IRC country director for Sudan, Eatizaz Yousif. “The ongoing conflict has decimated livelihoods, displaced millions, and blocked life-saving aid from reaching those in desperate need.” According to IRC estimates, roughly 150,000 Sudanese civilians were killed in 2025—a number expected to rise in the new year as the conflict intensifies and collapsing emergency services struggle to meet rapidly growing needs.
The first week of 2026 have been particularly turbulent for besieged civilians in Sudan. Between January 1 and 3, multiple drone strikes occurred in Dilling, South Kordofan, causing numerous civilian deaths and injuries and generating considerable panic among residents.
On January 3, drone strikes targeted a market and a medical clinic in the Al Zurg and Ghurair villages in North Darfur, which has been described as the “epicenter of Sudan’s hunger crisis” by the United Nations (UN), causing extensive damage. The same day, two drone attacks occurred in the Kulbus locality in West Darfur, leading to the displacement of over 600 civilians.
According to figures from the International Organization for Migration (IOM), between December 31 and January 4, over 1,000 civilians were driven from their homes and fled to South Kordofan as a result of violence. On January 6, brutal clashes between warring parties caused over 2,000 civilians to flee from North Kordofan in a single day.
Conditions for displaced civilians in North Darfur are extremely dire, with the IRC underscoring a widespread lack of access to basic services. Approximately 400,000 families fleeing violence in neighboring El Fasher have arrived in Tawila, overwhelming the region’s already strained humanitarian capacity. Many are living in makeshift shelters without adequate food, clean water, or healthcare. IRC teams have also reported more than 170 young children in Tawila separated from their families, highlighting the severe protection risks facing displaced communities.
“The sight of these small children arriving alone, without the whereabouts or the fate of the rest of their family, is harrowing,” said Arjan Hehenkamp, IRC’s Darfur crisis lead. “Extremely disturbing reports and satellite imagery confirm that people are not able to flee El Fasher to safe places like Tawila, which means they are trapped, detained, or worse.”
On December 29, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) conducted a nutritional assessment in North Darfur’s Um Baru locality—one of the regions most affected by conflict and food insecurity—and found that 53 percent of nearly 500 children screened showed signs of acute malnutrition, many of them being under five years old. Eighteen percent of the screened children were found to suffer from severe acute malnutrition, which can be fatal in weeks if left untreated.
“When severe acute malnutrition reaches this level, time becomes the most critical factor,” said UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell. “Children in Um Baru are fighting for their lives and need immediate help. Every day without safe and unhindered access increases the risk of children growing weaker and more death and suffering from causes that are entirely preventable.”
According to estimates from the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), roughly 21.2 million people across Sudan—nearly half of the population—are experiencing high levels of food insecurity, with over 3.7 million children under five, as well as pregnant and lactating women, urgently requiring treatment for acute malnutrition. Furthermore, famine was officially declared in El Fasher and Kadugli in November, with humanitarian experts projecting that it could spread to 20 additional localities across Darfur and Kordofan.
In late December, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) announced a large-scale seed distribution campaign to assist in winterization efforts and combat Sudan’s deepening nutrition and hunger crisis for the new year. Launched in Khartoum in November, the campaign aims to strengthen and rehabilitate Sudan’s local food production. FAO seeks to reach over 134,000 households, or 670,000 people, across ten states, including Al Jazirah, Blue Nile, Gedaref, Kassala, Khartoum, Northern State, Red Sea, River Nile, Sennar, and the White Nile states.
Targeted households will receive a variety of vegetable seeds including eggplant, green pepper, jute mallow, okra, onion, pumpkin, rocket, snake cucumber, tomato, and zucchini. This campaign aims to restore dietary diversity, improve household nutrition, and revitalize livelihood opportunities. This is crucial for a country like Sudan, in which roughly 80 percent of the population relies on agriculture as a lifeline for food and income.
Additionally, the UN and its partners are working on the ground in Khartoum to strengthen protection services for vulnerable civilians. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is currently in the process of removing debris, distributing medications, creating short-term employment opportunities, and providing psychosocial support.
In late December, UNDP and the UN Secretary General’s Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) launched a campaign titled Strengthening Capacities for Peace and Social Cohesion in Kassala and Red Sea States, in cooperation with UNICEF, to promote gender equality, social cohesion, youth engagement, equitable governance, and successful livelihoods.
“During the war, many of us felt hopeless, but being part of this group gave me purpose,” said Khawla, a youth ambassador from Kadugli trained by the program. “When I see young people listening, asking questions, and starting to believe that peace is possible, I know our work matters. It’s not just about awareness—it’s about restoring trust and rebuilding our communities from the ground up.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
President John Dramani Mahama of Ghana addressing the UN General Assembly last September. Credit: UN Photo
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
MOSCOW, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
Squeezed between import substitution and dependency syndrome, a condition characterized by a set of associated economic symptoms—that is rules and regulations—majority of African countries are shifting from United States and Europe to an incoherent alternative bilateral partnerships with Russia, China and the Global South.
By forging new partnerships, for instance with Russia, these African countries rather create conspicuous economic dependency at the expense of strengthening their own local production, attainable by supporting local farmers under state budget. Import-centric partnership ties and lack of diversification make these African countries committed to import-dependent structures. It invariably compounds domestic production challenges. Needless to say that Africa has huge arable land and human resources to ensure food security.
A classical example that readily comes to mind is Ghana, and other West African countries. With rapidly accelerating economic policy, Ghana’s President John Dramani Mahama ordered the suspension of U.S. chicken and agricultural products, reaffirming swift measures for transforming local agriculture considered as grounds for ensuring sustainable food security and economic growth and, simultaneously, for driving job creation.
President Mahama, in early December 2025, while observing Agricultural Day, urged Ghanaians to take up farming, highlighting the guarantee and state support needed for affordable credit and modern tools to boost food security. According to Mahama, Ghana spends $3bn yearly on basic food imports from abroad.
The government decision highlights the importance of leveraging unto local agriculture technology and innovation. Creating opportunities to unlock the full potential of depending on available resources within the new transformative policy strategy which aims at boosting local productivity. President Mahama’s special initiatives are the 24-Hour Economy and the Big Push Agenda. One of the pillars focuses on Grow 24 – modernising agriculture.
Despite remarkable commendations for new set of economic recovery, Ghana’s demand for agricultural products is still high, and this time making a smooth shift to Russia whose poultry meat and wheat currently became the main driver of exports to African countries. And Ghana, noticeably, accepts large quantity (tonnes) of poultry from Russia’s Rostov region into the country, according to several media reports. The supplies include grains, but also vegetable oils, meat and dairy products, fish and finished food products have significant potential for Africa.
The Agriculture Ministry’s Agroexport Department acknowledges Russia exports chicken to Ghana, with Ghanaian importers sourcing Russian poultry products, especially frozen cuts, to meet significant local demand that far outstrips domestic production, even after Ghana lifted a temporary 2020 avian flu-related ban on Russian poultry.
Moreover, monitoring and basic research indicated Russian producers are actively increasing poultry exports to various African countries, thus boosting trade, although Ghana still struggles to balance imports with local industry needs.
A few details indicate the following:
* Significant Market: In any case, Ghana is a key African market for Russian poultry, with exports seeing substantial growth in recent years, alongside Angola, Benin, Cote d’Voire, Nigeria and Sierra Leone.
* Demand-Driven: Ghana’s large gap between domestic poultry production and national demand necessitates significant imports, creating opportunities for foreign suppliers like Russia.
* Major Exporters: Russia poultry companies are focused on increasing generally their African exports, with Ghana being a major destination. The basic question: to remain as import dependency or strive at attaining food sufficiency?
* Product Focus: Exports typically include frozen chicken cuts (legs and meat) very vital for supplementing local supply. But as the geopolitical dynamics shift, Ghana and other importing African countries have to review partnerships, particularly with Russia.
Despite the fact that challenges persist, Russia strongly remains as a notable supplier to Ghana, even under the supervision of John Mahama’s administration, dealing as a friendly ally, both have the vision for multipolar trade architecture, ultimately fulfilling a critical role in meeting majority of African countries’ large consumer demand for poultry products, and with Russia’s trade actively expanding and Ghana’s preparedness to spend on such imports from the state budget.
Following two high-profile Russia–Africa summits, cooperation in the area of food security emerged as a key theme. Moscow pledged to boost agricultural exports to the continent—especially grain, poultry, and fertilisers—while African leaders welcomed the prospect of improved food supplies.
Nevertheless, do these African governments think of prioritising agricultural self-sufficiency. At a May 2025 meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia’s Economic Development Minister, Maxim Reshetnikov, underlined the fact that more than 40 Russian companies were keen to export animal products and agricultural goods to the African region.
Russia, eager to expand its economic footprint, sees large-scale agricultural exports as a key revenue generator. Estimates suggest the Russian government could earn over $15 billion annually from these agricultural exports to African continent.
Head of the Agroexport Federal Center, Ilya Ilyushin, speaking at the round table “Russia-Africa: A Strategic Partnership in Agriculture to Ensure Food Security,” which was held as part of the international conference on ensuring the food sovereignty of African countries in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) on Nov. 21, 2025, said: “We see significant potential in expanding supplies of Russian agricultural products to Africa.”
It mentioned that the Agriculture Ministry’s Agroexport Department, and the Union of Grain Exporters and Producers, exported over 32,000 tonnes of wheat and barley to Egypt totaling nearly $8 million during the first half of 2025, Kenya totaling over $119 million.
Interfax media reports referred to African countries whose markets are of interest for Russian producers and exporters. Despite existing difficulties, supplies of livestock products are also growing, this includes poultry meat, Ilyushin said. Exports of agricultural products from Russia to African countries have more than doubled, and third quarter of 2025 reached almost $7 billion.
The key buyers of Russian grain on the continent are Egypt, Algeria, Kenya, Libya, Tunisia, Nigeria, Morocco, South Africa, Tanzania and Sudan, he said. According to him, Russia needs to expand the geography of supplies, increasing exports to other regions of the continent, increase supplies in West Africa to Benin, Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and the French-speaking Sahelian States.
Of course, Russian exporters have nothing to complain. Africa’s dependency dilemma still persists. Therefore, Russia to continue expanding food exports to Africa explicitly reflects a calculated economic and geopolitical strategy. In the end of the analysis, the debate plays out prominently and also the primary message: Africa cannot afford to sacrifice food sovereignty for geopolitical solidarity.
With the above analysis, Russian exporters show readiness to explore and shape actionable strategies for harnessing Africa’s consumer market, including that of Ghana, and further to strengthen economic and trade cooperation and support its dynamic vision for sustainable development in the context of multipolar friendship and solidarity.
Kester Kenn Klomegah focuses on current geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development-related questions in Africa with external countries. Most of his well-resourced articles are reprinted in several reputable foreign media.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Activists at a My body, My choice protest. Credit: Voicepk.net
By Zofeen Ebrahim
KARACHI, Pakistan, Jan 8 2026 (IPS)
As 2026 dawns, women in Pakistan are left grappling with a stark reality: rape and marital rape continue to be misinterpreted by judges in the country’s highest courts.
Earlier this month, Pakistan’s Supreme Court set aside a rape conviction, changing it to fornication (consensual sex out of marriage) – reducing a 20-year sentence to five years and slashing the fine from 500,000 rupees to 10,000 rupees, sparking fresh calls for better protections for Pakistani women.
“Such judgments do not give confidence to women to come out and report sexual violence perpetrated on them,” said Ayesha Farooq, chairperson of the government-notified Committee of the Anti-Rape Investigation and Trial Act, formed in 2021.
Despite protective legislation, 70 percent of gender-based violence incidents go unreported. Of those reported, the national conviction rate stands at just 5 percent, with some categories as low as 0.5 percent and domestic violence convictions at 1.3 percent.
Poor judgments may discourage survivors of sexual violence from reporting their cases to the authorities. Illustration: Kulsum Ebrahim/IPS
Senator Sherry Rehman highlighted the stark figures: in 2024, Islamabad had seven convictions out of 176 rape cases, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa one out of 258, Sindh none from 243 rape cases and Balochistan reported 21 rapes with no convictions.
Nida Aly, Executive Director of AGHS, said, “I have never felt so disappointed in our judiciary. Judges have failed as a gender-competent forum and lost credibility.”
The Supreme Court case involved a survivor who, in 2015, was raped at gunpoint while relieving herself in the woods. She reported the incident seven months later; DNA tests confirmed the accused as the father of her child. The trial court convicted him, and the Lahore High Court upheld the verdict. Yet at the Supreme Court, two of three judges reclassified the act as fornication, citing the complainant’s silence, lack of resistance, and absence of physical marks. Section 496-B of the Penal Code prescribes five years’ imprisonment and a Rs10,000 fine for fornication.
This reasoning drew sharp criticism from the National Commission on the Status of Women, which said consent cannot be inferred from silence, delayed reporting, or lack of resistance, and urged courts to recognise the realities of trauma, fear, coercion, and power imbalances in sexual violence cases.
Ironically, after the recasting of the case, the woman was exempted from punishment.
She was reminded of another case of rape in 2024, where a woman accused her brother’s friend of rape.
“The same judge converted the conviction of rape into fornication – along with arguments like “the woman showed no resistance; there were no marks of violence” and there was a two-day delay in reporting to the police.
Justice Ayesha Malik’s dissenting note arguing there was no “standardised” rulebook response by the victim emphasised consent.
Jamshed M. Kazi, Country Representative, UN Women Pakistan, said such cases resonate far beyond the courtroom. “The language used and the conclusions reached shape not only legal precedent but also social attitudes, survivor confidence, and public trust in justice.”
He added, “For survivors of sexual violence, judgements can leave lasting marks on the lives of women and girls, affecting how their experiences are believed and remembered, and may discourage reporting, reinforcing silence, fear, or self-doubt among survivors.”
Another case saw the Lahore High Court dismiss rape complaints against a husband because he was still legally married, even though he raped the woman at gunpoint. The judge, while maintaining the conduct of the man to be “immoral” and “inappropriate under religious or social norms”, said it was not a crime since the marriage continued to exist legally at the time of the incident.
“The judge focused on the validity of the marriage and completely disregarded the woman’s claim of non-consent and being subjected to forced sex at gunpoint,” pointed out Aly.
While there is no explicit provision criminalising marital rape, the Protection of Women (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 2006 removed marriage as a defence to rape. When the definition of rape was substantially revised under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2021, no marital exemption was reintroduced.
Between 1979 and 2006, Maliha Zia, Director, Gender, Inclusion & Development at the Karachi-based Legal Aid Society, explained, marriage operated as a defence to rape because the law defined rape as sexual intercourse by a man with a woman “who is not his wife” under specified circumstances. The deliberate removal of the words “not his wife” in 2006 therefore eliminated marriage as a defence, a position that has remained unchanged since.
“The 2006 Protection of Women Act was an important step; it corrected major injustices by separating rape from zina (unlawful sexual intercourse – including adultery and fornication),” said Dr Sharmila Faruqui, a member of the National Assembly. “But it stopped short of clearly saying that lack of consent within marriage is also rape and that silence has allowed old assumptions to survive.”
Faruqui stressed the need for judicial sensitisation, particularly at senior levels, but noted that judges are ultimately bound by the law. “When the law is unclear, even well-intentioned interpretations can go wrong,” she said. She called for legislative clarity—through a penal code amendment or another carefully considered route—emphasising that consent, grounded in dignity and equality, must remain central regardless of marital status. “Marriage was never meant to be a license for violence.”
This was endorsed by Zia, who has been among the trainers of judges who hear GBV cases. “Much work needs to be done to constantly sensitise the justice sector on women’s experiences and the trauma they go through due to sexual violence. “Many work on the assumption that the woman is most likely lying, especially if she didn’t fight or run or report straight away,” she added.
To its credit, Pakistan, under the anti-rape act of 2021 special courts were notified to look into gender-based violence cases. To date there are 174 such courts. Unfortunately, these courts are not exclusively handling GBV cases, said Zia. But even with this limitation, rape case convictions in Sindh rose to 17 percent in 2025, from 5 percent in 2020, when such courts did not exist. “Imagine how much better it could be!” According to her, in districts where there is a high caseload of GBV, courts should be exclusive, not necessarily more.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Despite impressive global declines in mortality rates, life expectancies at birth vary significantly among countries. Credit: Shutterstock
By Joseph Chamie
PORTLAND, USA, Jan 7 2026 (IPS)
While death is inevitable for everyone, the timing of “The Appointment in Samarra” varies significantly among and within populations. Fortunately, mortality levels of human populations have declined significantly worldwide in recent years, leading to increased survival rates and delayed appointments in Samarra.
For example, in the mid-20th century, life expectancies at birth for males and females were 45 and 48 years, respectively. Today, males and females have life expectancies at birth of 71 and 76 years, respectively, which is an increase of more than 25 years. Additionally, females generally have higher life expectancies than males across countries (Figure 1).
Source: United Nations.
Despite impressive global declines in mortality rates, life expectancies at birth vary significantly among countries. Currently, life expectancies at birth for males and females range from highs of about 82 and 87 years, respectively, in Japan and Italy, to lows of approximately 55 and 57 years, respectively, in Nigeria and the Central African Republic.
Inequities in life expectancies at birth persist across different age groups. For example, by the age of 65, country differences in life expectancy remain substantial. In Japan and Italy, life expectancies for males and females at age 65 are approximately 20 and 24 years, respectively. In contrast, the life expectancies for males and females at age 65 in Nigeria and the Central African Republic are about 12 and 13 years, respectively.
Similarly, infant mortality rates vary greatly among countries around the world. The mortality rates of infants range from lows of approximately 2 deaths per 1,000 births in Japan and Italy to highs over 30 times greater, with about 68 deaths per 1,000 births in Nigeria and the Central African Republic.
Longer life expectancies for the world’s population have also led to an increase in the number of centenarians.
In 1950, there were nearly 15,000 centenarians worldwide, making up 0.001% of the global population. Today, there are approximately 630,000 centenarians, accounting for close to 0.01% of the world’s population. By 2050, the number of centenarians is projected to reach 2.6 million, representing around 0.03% of the world’s population (Figure 2).
Source: United Nations.
There are many important factors that influence when and how the appointment in Samarra will occur. These factors include place of birth, residence, sex, socio-economic status, housing, healthcare, nutrition, diet, education, friends, exercise, genetics, disease prevalence, economic stability, public health, injuries, mental health, environmental conditions, political stability, human rights, social support, sanitation, substance use, lifestyle choices, parenting, personal habits, poverty, and violence (Table 1).
Declines in fertility rates have followed mortality rate declines, commonly described as the demographic transition. The fertility rate of the world’s population has fallen from a high of about 5.3 births per woman in the early 1960s to 2.2 births per woman today.
More than half of all countries and areas worldwide have a fertility rate below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman. In many of these countries, deaths outnumber births, resulting in negative rates of population growth.
For example, in China, deaths began outnumbering births about five years ago. This trend is expected to continue for the rest of the 21st century, leading to population decline and the demographic ageing of the Chinese population.
The timing and circumstances of appointments in Samarra differ among the populations of more developed and less developed countries. People in the latter group are more likely to die from communicable diseases than from noncommunicable diseases, which are chronic conditions typically associated with older, aging populations and lifestyle factors.
Among more developed countries, major causes of death include heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. Other leading causes are Alzheimer’s and other dementia, tuberculosis, diarrheal diseases, HIV/AIDS, and external causes and injuries.
Currently, life expectancies at birth for males and females range from highs of about 82 and 87 years, respectively, in Japan and Italy, to lows of approximately 55 and 57 years, respectively, in Nigeria and the Central African Republic
Additionally, in many countries, cancer has replaced heart disease as the leading cause of death. The most common cancers are breast, lung, colon, rectum, and prostate cancer.
Approximately a third of cancer deaths are due to tobacco use, high body mass index, alcohol consumption, low fruit and vegetable intake, and lack of physical activity. Air pollution is also an important risk factor for lung cancer. Many cancers can be cured if detected early and treated effectively.
In many less developed countries, major causes of death include lower respiratory diseases, stroke, heart disease, malaria, and pre-term birth conditions. Other important causes include diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis, birth trauma, and HIV/AIDS.
Another major cause of death in recent years has been the coronavirus or COVID-19. The World Health Organization declared it a global pandemic on 11 March 2020, and it ended in May 2023, but remains an ongoing health threat. The pandemic resulted in over 7 million officially reported deaths worldwide, but the estimated excess morality is significantly higher, ranging between 18 and 35 million.
A crucial factor influencing the timing of appointments in Samarra is the availability of universal health coverage. According to the World Health Organization, universal health coverage ensures that every individual in a country has access to a wide range of health services, from emergency treatments to palliative care, without facing financial difficulties.
As of 2024, 73 out of the 195 countries worldwide were reported to offer some form of universal health coverage, which covers around two-thirds of the global population of 8.2 billion.
Among more developed nations, the United States stands out as a notable exception for not providing universal health care to all its citizens. In 2024, private health insurance coverage remained more prevalent than public coverage, with 66% of the U.S. population being covered. Additionally, the U.S. was noted for having the highest healthcare spending figure per capita in the world.
A significant debate surrounding the appointments in Samarra revolves around the right to die or medically assisted suicide. The differing perspectives about assisted suicide focus on the balance between individual autonomy and the sanctity of life.
Some believe that individuals experiencing unbearable suffering, often due to a terminal illness or incurable condition, should have the legal right and control to decide on medically assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia. In contrast, others argue that assisted suicide devalues human life and opens the door to potential abuse. They also emphasize the importance of palliative care for those facing illness or personal struggles.
Medically assisted suicide is legal under specific circumstances in a limited number of countries. Those places include Australia, Austria. Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, and twelve states in the United States.
In order to be eligible for medical assistance in dying, an individual typically must meet certain criteria. These criteria may include having a terminal illness or disability, being of sound mind, expressing a voluntary desire to die, and being capable of self-administering the lethal dose.
While the appointment in Samarra is inevitable for every human being, the timing of when this appointment will occur remains a topic of debate among the scientific community.
Some believe that there is a fixed limit to human life span, largely attributed to the gradual processes of biological ageing. They stress the implausibility of radical life extension for humans in the 21st century.
On the other hand, some argue that there is no conclusive evidence that the limit of human life span has been reached. The oldest supercentenarian on record, Jeanne Calment of France, lived to be 122 years and 164 days. Some experts predict that this current record of 122 years will be surpassed by the end of the 21st century, possibly even reaching 130 years.
In conclusion, the mortality rates of human populations have decreased globally in recent years, leading to improved chances of survival, longer life expectancies, and a growing number of centenarians. However, the timing and circumstances of the inevitable appointment in Samarra vary, with populations in more developed countries continuing to experience lower death rates and longer life expectancies compared to populations in less developed countries.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, and author of many publications on population matters.