Agrégateur de flux

Tax expenditures (TEs) constitute a key instrument in Swiss fiscal policy. Although they are widely used at both the federal and cantonal levels to pursue economic, social, and environmental objectives, their fiscal cost, effectiveness, and distributional consequences remain only partially documented. This report reviews the current state of TE reporting, estimation, evaluation, and reform in Switzerland.
The available evidence suggests that annual revenue forgone from federal TEs amounts to more than CHF 24 billion. However, this figure should be interpreted with great caution. It is based on outdated and incomplete information and likely represents a lower-bound estimate of the true fiscal cost of federal TEs. The latest comprehensive federal TE report was published by the Federal Tax Administration (FTA) in 2011, while many of the underlying revenue forgone estimates were themselves derived from an even older study conducted by the FTA in 2009 using tax return data from the canton of Bern and extrapolated to the rest of the country. More recently, the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) published a combination of aggregate and provision-level estimates for 2019 in its 2021 report on the “State Footprint”. The figures included new estimates for some TE provisions, namely for TE granted through the mineral oil tax and further excise taxes as well as the vehicle tax and the national road tax. Yet, most of the data was based on the estimates published in 2011. The report estimated the overall yearly revenue forgone stemming from the use of TEs at more than CHF 24 billion.
The 2011 report provides a detailed discussion of the benchmark classification of TE provisions used in Switzerland. The definition of the benchmark tax system is key for TE policy-making as TEs are defined as deviations from the reference or benchmark tax system. Interestingly, and unlike most of the countries worldwide that rely primarily on existing legislation, the benchmark tax system (BTS) for direct taxes in Switzerland is defined based on two theoretically grounded benchmarks: one based on income and an alternative one based consumption.
The lack of reliable and up-to-date information is particularly concerning given the legal framework governing subsidies and TEs. Article 7(g) of the Federal Act on Financial Aids and Compensation Payments (Subsidies Act, SubA) establishes that, in principle, the use of TEs should be avoided. In its 1986 dispatch, the Federal Council explicitly warned that TEs can undermine tax equity, reduce democratic oversight, and escape systematic scrutiny because their fiscal implications are often difficult to quantify. On this note, Article 5 of the SubA requires the federal government to report on TEs every six years as part of its broader subsidy reporting obligations. This requirement has not been fulfilled. The issue has been repeatedly noted by the Federal Council, Parliament, and the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) and yet, a regular and institutionalized reporting framework has still not been established.
The current estimate of more than CHF 24 billion in TEs on the federal level does not account for the fiscal cost of cantonal TEs. Indeed, at the subnational level, reporting is even more limited with only two significant estimation exercises: a 2011 study conducted by the FTA on personal income-related TEs in the canton of Zug, and a 2025 review of personal income tax (PIT) related TEs published by the canton of Zürich. No canton has established a recurring TE reporting framework. Furthermore, no federal or cantonal estimation exercise currently provides estimates of TEs granted through corporate income tax (CIT), despite the growing importance of tax incentives in the CIT system.
Based on the limited available data from 2011, one can observe that the composition of Swiss TEs is highly concentrated. The ten largest federal provisions account for approximately CHF 16.1 billion, or roughly 63 percent of total reported federal revenue forgone. The largest single provision is the deduction for mandatory second-pillar pension contributions under PIT, estimated at CHF 3.5 billion annually. Other major provisions include the reduced VAT rate on food, plants, and printed products (CHF 2.2 billion), VAT exemptions for real estate transactions and rentals (CHF 2.0 billion), and VAT exemptions for social and health services (CHF 1.9 billion). 
Beyond transparency concerns, the absence of robust information undermines the evaluation of TE effectiveness. Switzerland lags significantly behind international standards in this area. There is currently no formal TE evaluation framework providing guidance on ex-ante assessments, ex post evaluations, governance arrangements, or data-sharing procedures. As a result, policymakers often lack the evidence necessary to determine whether TEs represent value for money and achieve their intended objectives; or are ineffective, too costly or generate unintended distributional and economic effects. The combination of weak reporting practices and limited access to administrative tax data has contributed to a striking lack of official ex-post evaluations.
The situation is somewhat more encouraging regarding ex ante assessments. Federal institutions regularly prepare ad hoc analyses in response to parliamentary requests and legislative initiatives. These assessments frequently provide valuable information on the expected fiscal and economic effects of proposed TE reforms and play an important role in informing political debate. 
TEs remain high-up in the political debate and reform agendas. Recent years have seen numerous legislative initiatives involving reduced VAT rates, PIT deductions, inheritance and gift tax exemptions, and CIT incentives. Examples include the extension of the lower VAT rate for accommodation services until 2035 (just voted down by the National Council and now with the Council of States), repeated debates on the deductibility of childcare expenses and Pillar 3a contributions, and discussions surrounding cantonal inheritance and gift tax exemptions. In the CIT field, the introduction of patent boxes and research and development (R&D) super-deductions at the cantonal level illustrates the dynamics of TE policy-making involving different tiers of government as this has been triggered by the Federal Act on Tax Reform and AHV Financing (TRAF).

Peter Hongler is a professor of tax law at the University of St. Gallen. 
Agustin Redonda is a Senior Fellow with the Council on Economic Policies (CEP), where he leads CEP’s work on
tax expenditures and tax incentives. He is also the co-founder and co-director of the Tax Expenditures Lab, which
hosts the Global Tax Expenditures Database (GTED) and the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index (GTETI).
 

Tax expenditures (TEs) constitute a key instrument in Swiss fiscal policy. Although they are widely used at both the federal and cantonal levels to pursue economic, social, and environmental objectives, their fiscal cost, effectiveness, and distributional consequences remain only partially documented. This report reviews the current state of TE reporting, estimation, evaluation, and reform in Switzerland.
The available evidence suggests that annual revenue forgone from federal TEs amounts to more than CHF 24 billion. However, this figure should be interpreted with great caution. It is based on outdated and incomplete information and likely represents a lower-bound estimate of the true fiscal cost of federal TEs. The latest comprehensive federal TE report was published by the Federal Tax Administration (FTA) in 2011, while many of the underlying revenue forgone estimates were themselves derived from an even older study conducted by the FTA in 2009 using tax return data from the canton of Bern and extrapolated to the rest of the country. More recently, the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) published a combination of aggregate and provision-level estimates for 2019 in its 2021 report on the “State Footprint”. The figures included new estimates for some TE provisions, namely for TE granted through the mineral oil tax and further excise taxes as well as the vehicle tax and the national road tax. Yet, most of the data was based on the estimates published in 2011. The report estimated the overall yearly revenue forgone stemming from the use of TEs at more than CHF 24 billion.
The 2011 report provides a detailed discussion of the benchmark classification of TE provisions used in Switzerland. The definition of the benchmark tax system is key for TE policy-making as TEs are defined as deviations from the reference or benchmark tax system. Interestingly, and unlike most of the countries worldwide that rely primarily on existing legislation, the benchmark tax system (BTS) for direct taxes in Switzerland is defined based on two theoretically grounded benchmarks: one based on income and an alternative one based consumption.
The lack of reliable and up-to-date information is particularly concerning given the legal framework governing subsidies and TEs. Article 7(g) of the Federal Act on Financial Aids and Compensation Payments (Subsidies Act, SubA) establishes that, in principle, the use of TEs should be avoided. In its 1986 dispatch, the Federal Council explicitly warned that TEs can undermine tax equity, reduce democratic oversight, and escape systematic scrutiny because their fiscal implications are often difficult to quantify. On this note, Article 5 of the SubA requires the federal government to report on TEs every six years as part of its broader subsidy reporting obligations. This requirement has not been fulfilled. The issue has been repeatedly noted by the Federal Council, Parliament, and the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) and yet, a regular and institutionalized reporting framework has still not been established.
The current estimate of more than CHF 24 billion in TEs on the federal level does not account for the fiscal cost of cantonal TEs. Indeed, at the subnational level, reporting is even more limited with only two significant estimation exercises: a 2011 study conducted by the FTA on personal income-related TEs in the canton of Zug, and a 2025 review of personal income tax (PIT) related TEs published by the canton of Zürich. No canton has established a recurring TE reporting framework. Furthermore, no federal or cantonal estimation exercise currently provides estimates of TEs granted through corporate income tax (CIT), despite the growing importance of tax incentives in the CIT system.
Based on the limited available data from 2011, one can observe that the composition of Swiss TEs is highly concentrated. The ten largest federal provisions account for approximately CHF 16.1 billion, or roughly 63 percent of total reported federal revenue forgone. The largest single provision is the deduction for mandatory second-pillar pension contributions under PIT, estimated at CHF 3.5 billion annually. Other major provisions include the reduced VAT rate on food, plants, and printed products (CHF 2.2 billion), VAT exemptions for real estate transactions and rentals (CHF 2.0 billion), and VAT exemptions for social and health services (CHF 1.9 billion). 
Beyond transparency concerns, the absence of robust information undermines the evaluation of TE effectiveness. Switzerland lags significantly behind international standards in this area. There is currently no formal TE evaluation framework providing guidance on ex-ante assessments, ex post evaluations, governance arrangements, or data-sharing procedures. As a result, policymakers often lack the evidence necessary to determine whether TEs represent value for money and achieve their intended objectives; or are ineffective, too costly or generate unintended distributional and economic effects. The combination of weak reporting practices and limited access to administrative tax data has contributed to a striking lack of official ex-post evaluations.
The situation is somewhat more encouraging regarding ex ante assessments. Federal institutions regularly prepare ad hoc analyses in response to parliamentary requests and legislative initiatives. These assessments frequently provide valuable information on the expected fiscal and economic effects of proposed TE reforms and play an important role in informing political debate. 
TEs remain high-up in the political debate and reform agendas. Recent years have seen numerous legislative initiatives involving reduced VAT rates, PIT deductions, inheritance and gift tax exemptions, and CIT incentives. Examples include the extension of the lower VAT rate for accommodation services until 2035 (just voted down by the National Council and now with the Council of States), repeated debates on the deductibility of childcare expenses and Pillar 3a contributions, and discussions surrounding cantonal inheritance and gift tax exemptions. In the CIT field, the introduction of patent boxes and research and development (R&D) super-deductions at the cantonal level illustrates the dynamics of TE policy-making involving different tiers of government as this has been triggered by the Federal Act on Tax Reform and AHV Financing (TRAF).

Peter Hongler is a professor of tax law at the University of St. Gallen. 
Agustin Redonda is a Senior Fellow with the Council on Economic Policies (CEP), where he leads CEP’s work on
tax expenditures and tax incentives. He is also the co-founder and co-director of the Tax Expenditures Lab, which
hosts the Global Tax Expenditures Database (GTED) and the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index (GTETI).
 

Tax expenditures (TEs) constitute a key instrument in Swiss fiscal policy. Although they are widely used at both the federal and cantonal levels to pursue economic, social, and environmental objectives, their fiscal cost, effectiveness, and distributional consequences remain only partially documented. This report reviews the current state of TE reporting, estimation, evaluation, and reform in Switzerland.
The available evidence suggests that annual revenue forgone from federal TEs amounts to more than CHF 24 billion. However, this figure should be interpreted with great caution. It is based on outdated and incomplete information and likely represents a lower-bound estimate of the true fiscal cost of federal TEs. The latest comprehensive federal TE report was published by the Federal Tax Administration (FTA) in 2011, while many of the underlying revenue forgone estimates were themselves derived from an even older study conducted by the FTA in 2009 using tax return data from the canton of Bern and extrapolated to the rest of the country. More recently, the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) published a combination of aggregate and provision-level estimates for 2019 in its 2021 report on the “State Footprint”. The figures included new estimates for some TE provisions, namely for TE granted through the mineral oil tax and further excise taxes as well as the vehicle tax and the national road tax. Yet, most of the data was based on the estimates published in 2011. The report estimated the overall yearly revenue forgone stemming from the use of TEs at more than CHF 24 billion.
The 2011 report provides a detailed discussion of the benchmark classification of TE provisions used in Switzerland. The definition of the benchmark tax system is key for TE policy-making as TEs are defined as deviations from the reference or benchmark tax system. Interestingly, and unlike most of the countries worldwide that rely primarily on existing legislation, the benchmark tax system (BTS) for direct taxes in Switzerland is defined based on two theoretically grounded benchmarks: one based on income and an alternative one based consumption.
The lack of reliable and up-to-date information is particularly concerning given the legal framework governing subsidies and TEs. Article 7(g) of the Federal Act on Financial Aids and Compensation Payments (Subsidies Act, SubA) establishes that, in principle, the use of TEs should be avoided. In its 1986 dispatch, the Federal Council explicitly warned that TEs can undermine tax equity, reduce democratic oversight, and escape systematic scrutiny because their fiscal implications are often difficult to quantify. On this note, Article 5 of the SubA requires the federal government to report on TEs every six years as part of its broader subsidy reporting obligations. This requirement has not been fulfilled. The issue has been repeatedly noted by the Federal Council, Parliament, and the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) and yet, a regular and institutionalized reporting framework has still not been established.
The current estimate of more than CHF 24 billion in TEs on the federal level does not account for the fiscal cost of cantonal TEs. Indeed, at the subnational level, reporting is even more limited with only two significant estimation exercises: a 2011 study conducted by the FTA on personal income-related TEs in the canton of Zug, and a 2025 review of personal income tax (PIT) related TEs published by the canton of Zürich. No canton has established a recurring TE reporting framework. Furthermore, no federal or cantonal estimation exercise currently provides estimates of TEs granted through corporate income tax (CIT), despite the growing importance of tax incentives in the CIT system.
Based on the limited available data from 2011, one can observe that the composition of Swiss TEs is highly concentrated. The ten largest federal provisions account for approximately CHF 16.1 billion, or roughly 63 percent of total reported federal revenue forgone. The largest single provision is the deduction for mandatory second-pillar pension contributions under PIT, estimated at CHF 3.5 billion annually. Other major provisions include the reduced VAT rate on food, plants, and printed products (CHF 2.2 billion), VAT exemptions for real estate transactions and rentals (CHF 2.0 billion), and VAT exemptions for social and health services (CHF 1.9 billion). 
Beyond transparency concerns, the absence of robust information undermines the evaluation of TE effectiveness. Switzerland lags significantly behind international standards in this area. There is currently no formal TE evaluation framework providing guidance on ex-ante assessments, ex post evaluations, governance arrangements, or data-sharing procedures. As a result, policymakers often lack the evidence necessary to determine whether TEs represent value for money and achieve their intended objectives; or are ineffective, too costly or generate unintended distributional and economic effects. The combination of weak reporting practices and limited access to administrative tax data has contributed to a striking lack of official ex-post evaluations.
The situation is somewhat more encouraging regarding ex ante assessments. Federal institutions regularly prepare ad hoc analyses in response to parliamentary requests and legislative initiatives. These assessments frequently provide valuable information on the expected fiscal and economic effects of proposed TE reforms and play an important role in informing political debate. 
TEs remain high-up in the political debate and reform agendas. Recent years have seen numerous legislative initiatives involving reduced VAT rates, PIT deductions, inheritance and gift tax exemptions, and CIT incentives. Examples include the extension of the lower VAT rate for accommodation services until 2035 (just voted down by the National Council and now with the Council of States), repeated debates on the deductibility of childcare expenses and Pillar 3a contributions, and discussions surrounding cantonal inheritance and gift tax exemptions. In the CIT field, the introduction of patent boxes and research and development (R&D) super-deductions at the cantonal level illustrates the dynamics of TE policy-making involving different tiers of government as this has been triggered by the Federal Act on Tax Reform and AHV Financing (TRAF).

Peter Hongler is a professor of tax law at the University of St. Gallen. 
Agustin Redonda is a Senior Fellow with the Council on Economic Policies (CEP), where he leads CEP’s work on
tax expenditures and tax incentives. He is also the co-founder and co-director of the Tax Expenditures Lab, which
hosts the Global Tax Expenditures Database (GTED) and the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index (GTETI).
 

Was passiert mit den Standortdaten die meine Apps speichern? Und welche Desinformationskampagnen nutzt Russland um die Politik in westlichen Staaten zu beeinflussen? In dieser Folge Cybernation geht es um den Handel mit Standortdaten und die Frage, warum solche Daten nicht nur ein Datenschutzproblem, sondern auch ein Risiko für die nationale Sicherheit sein können. Außerdem schauen wir auf aktuelle Recherchen zu russischen Desinformationskampagnen in Europa: Was haben Plastikskelette vor dem Brandenburger Tor mit antisemitischen Schmierereien in Frankreich zu tun? Und was erhofft sich Russland von den Aktionen?

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

There are increasing questions over the reliability of the United States as a strategic partner.

Iran hat zwei Atommächte besiegt – so Außenamtssprecher Ismaeil Baghai unmittelbar nach Unterzeichnung der Rahmenvereinbarung, durch die der Krieg zwischen Iran, Israel und den USA beendet werden soll. Zwar steht die Erarbeitung eines endgültigen Abkommens noch aus, doch schon jetzt sieht sich die Islamische Republik als Gewinner. Sollte das Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Bestand haben, hätte Teheran seine zentralen Kriegsziele weitgehend erreicht. 

Ein Frieden nach iranischem Drehbuch

Teheran ist in den Konflikt nicht unvorbereitet eingetreten. Seit dem »12 Tage Krieg« 2025 wurden Raketen- und Drohnenkapazitäten erweitert, Kommandostrukturen dezentralisiert und Entscheidungsbefugnisse an untere Ränge delegiert, um Enthauptungsschläge zu überstehen. Parallel sah der Sicherheitsapparat detaillierte Eskalationsoptionen vor. Die Kriegsstrategie umfasste sofortige Vergeltungsschläge gegen Ziele in der Nachbarschaft und eine faktische Schließung der Straße von Hormus. 

Davon versprach sich die iranische Führung nicht nur, die politischen und wirtschaftlichen Kosten weit über die Region hinaus in die Höhe zu treiben. Sie sah in der Meerenge im Persischen Golf auch eine Möglichkeit, den Fokus von Verhandlungen zu verschieben. Denn noch bevor die USA ein einziges Problem mit Iran lösen konnten, stellte Teheran sie mit Hormus vor ein weiteres. Nicht das Nuklearprogramm, sondern die Sicherheit der Seewege sollte nun zuerst auf den Verhandlungstisch. Irans ballistische Raketen und regionale Milizen wurden gleich ganz von der Agenda gestrichen.

Oberstes Ziel blieb bei all dem der Systemerhalt. Noch im Januar waren Massen gegen die Islamische Republik auf die Straße gegangen, bevor die Proteste gewaltsam niedergeschlagen wurden. Inzwischen haben die Anhänger des Systems ihre Präsenz verstärkt. Während die USA und Israel zu Beginn noch offen mit einem Regimewechsel drohten, wich die Rhetorik rasch pragmatischen Kriegszielen. Teheran hingegen hielt Kurs: Repression verschärfen, Zugeständnisse meiden und die Gegenseite politisch ermüden.

Der iranische Plan scheint aufzugehen. Teheran erhält Genehmigungen für Ölexporte, mittelfristig Zugriff auf eingefrorene Konten und die Aussicht auf weitere, umfassende Sanktionserleichterungen. Im Gegenzug muss es vor allem die sichere Schifffahrt durch Hormus wieder gewährleisten. Das MoU löst damit in erster Linie Probleme, die durch den Krieg erst geschaffen wurden.

Und Europa hatte doch recht

Dabei hatte Trump in seiner ersten Amtszeit beteuert, mit einer Politik des maximalen Drucks ein besseres Ergebnis als die Atomvereinbarung von 2015 erzielen zu können. Zu viel Geld habe Iran erhalten, zu wenig Zugeständnisse gemacht. Die Europäer blieben skeptisch und hielten auch dann noch an der Übereinkunft fest, als Trump sie längst verlassen hatte. Dem schrittweisen Zerfall der Vereinbarung hatten sie am Ende dennoch nur wenig entgegenzusetzen.

Bis heute bleibt das Atomabkommen die weitreichendste Sicherheitsübereinkunft, die je mit Iran erzielt wurde. Die Islamische Republik musste sich einem engmaschigen Kontroll- und Verifikationsregime fügen, mehr als 12.000 Zentrifugen abbauen, Anreicherungsaktivitäten minimieren und die gesamte Infrastruktur so weit zurückbauen, dass mindestens ein Jahr nötig gewesen wäre, um auch nur Spaltmaterial produzieren zu können. Vom Bau einer Atombombe war Iran damit weit entfernt. Vor allem aber musste Teheran monatelang in Vorleistung gehen, bevor eine einzige Sanktion ausgesetzt wurde.

Dagegen profitiert die Islamische Republik im Rahmen des MoU schon jetzt von Sanktionserleichterungen ohne Beschränkung ihres Atomprogramms. Was mit dem 440 Kilogramm schweren Bestand an hoch angereichertem Uran geschehen soll, das sich noch immer im Land befindet, oder wann Atomanlagen wieder umfassender internationaler Kontrolle unterworfen werden, ist noch zu verhandeln. Die nächsten 60 Tage sollen hier Klarheit bringen – ein Zeitfenster, das keine substanziellen Ergebnisse erwarten lässt und in dem Verhandlungserfolge durch anhaltende israelische Angriffe im Libanon unterminiert werden könnten.

Die Europäer stehen schon zu lange an der Seitenlinie. Das MoU zeigt, was passiert, wenn sie dort verharren. Sie verfügen über das technische Know-how und die diplomatische Erfahrung, um tragfähige Pakete für Inspektionen, technische Begrenzungen und realistische Zeitfenster zu schnüren. Jetzt braucht es die Entschlossenheit, diese auch auf den Tisch zu legen.

L'accord n'a pas encore été officiellement signé, mais l'attention se porte déjà sur les principaux défis à venir : la campagne d'Israël au Liban, le programme nucléaire iranien et le détroit d'Ormuz.

Opening ceremony of RightsCon 2025 in Taipei, Taiwan. Credit: Equality Now

By S. Mona Sinha and Mrinalini Dayal
NEW YORK, Jun 19 2026 (IPS)

RightsCon, the world’s leading summit on human rights in the digital age, has served for over a decade as a vital global gathering, bringing together civil society, academics, technologists, policymakers, and the private sector in cross-border collaboration. The abrupt cancellation of RightsCon 2026, following intervention by Zambia’s government just days before the convening was due to commence in Lusaka, should concern us all.

Worryingly, this is not an isolated disruption. It reflects a deeply troubling global pattern of shrinking civic space alongside a rapidly growing, well-resourced, and increasingly networked transnational anti-rights movement. We are calling on civil society, donors, the media, and democratic governments to take a strong stand against these coordinated efforts to undermine human rights and the forums that uphold them.

S. Mona Sinha

Access Now explains RightsCon cancelled due to political interference

On May 1, RightsCon organiser and host Access Now released a statement announcing the summit, scheduled to run between May 5 and 8, could not proceed after Zambia announced it was postponing the event to ensure it “aligns with Zambia’s national values, policy priorities, and broader public interest.”

Access Now reported that on April 27, one day after the Zambian Ministry of Technology and Science had endorsed RightsCon, government officials told organisers that diplomats from China were pressuring Zambia because Taiwanese civil society participants were planning to attend. Zambia’s new conditions for allowing the conference to proceed included select topics being moderated and the exclusion of some participants, including Taiwanese civil society representatives.

Access Now has called this interference “transnational repression” and a deliberate effort to project authoritarian preferences across borders and shrink civic spheres.

Mrinalini Dayal

Why RightsCon matters for digital rights and gender equality

Digital rights advocacy is essential to advancing gender equality. That is why Equality Now co-founded the Alliance for Universal Digital Rights (AUDRi), a global campaign working toward a digital future where everyone can enjoy equal rights to safety, freedom, and dignity.

Equality Now and AUDRi were looking forward to returning to RightsCon to reconnect with allies and forge new relationships. Over 500 sessions were scheduled, including two by Equality Now on co-creating solutions to online safety and privacy challenges, and addressing the exclusion of women from artificial intelligence development and other emerging technologies.

Activists have spent months preparing, from developing proposals and collaborating with partners to organising funding, travel, and logistics. Significant time, energy, and resources have been invested that cannot be recouped.

RightsCon is one of the few annual, in-person opportunities where smaller frontline organisations meet potential funders. Locally led groups, particularly those in the Global Majority already grappling with funding cuts and rising competition for limited resources, will be hardest hit by the lost networking, visibility, and donor engagement that sustains their work.

Beyond this substantial loss is the deeply troubling shutting down of a vital locus for dialogue and collective action, alongside a growing anxiety that this will not be the last such disruption of an essential global forum.

RightsCon: a unique mix of diverse voices

RightsCon is the only global, civil society-led convening focused on the intersection of technology and human rights. Other international gatherings on the internet, emerging technologies, and digital governance are generally complex, exclusionary multilateral processes dominated by governments and the tech companies whose products and power are meant to be scrutinised.

Discussions about digital harms, inequality, and the future of our online world are often relegated to the margins or excluded completely, despite their far-reaching consequences. In contrast, RightsCon is where activists set the agenda, and lived experience is central.

Participants working towards safer, inclusive digital futures can share insights and learn from others’ successes and challenges across diverse contexts. The summit’s activist spirit prioritises voices often excluded elsewhere: women and girls, LGBTQI+ communities, Indigenous peoples, and those resisting surveillance and authoritarian rule.

Holding RightsCon in Zambia was a deliberate choice by Access Now intended to lower barriers to participation. For people from Global Majority countries, visa requirements and travel costs to Europe or North America are routinely insurmountable, and increasingly restrictive visa policies are making access evermore difficult. Equality Now staff have been unable to attend UN gatherings in New York for exactly this reason.

The impacts of widespread exclusion from attending consultative and decision-making settings cannot be overstated. That Zambia’s government sought to justify postponing RightsCon on visa grounds, saying some speakers and participants were “subject to pending administrative and security clearances”, is a stark illustration of how bureaucratic levers can be wielded to stifle dissent.

Tech-facilitated gender-based violence

In an increasingly digital world, women and girls face distinct and escalating threats to their rights, safety, privacy, and freedom. The rapid advance of technologies is opening new frontiers for human traffickers, coercers and abusers, but existing legal systems everywhere are ill-equipped to handle these multi-jurisdictional harms.

At RightsCon 2026, we were going to jointly explore legal solutions to the explosion of tech-facilitated gender-based violence. Online violence is rarely, if ever, confined to a ‘virtual’ space; it follows women and girls into their homes and workplaces, and often involves real-world harm including physical violence.

Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence risk deepening existing inequalities and amplifying misinformation and bias, while expanding surveillance and online exploitation and abuse place fundamental rights and freedoms at risk.

Without civil society-led convenings that centre human rights in digital technologies, it becomes harder to build the intersectional, integrated, responsive movements needed to defend online rights, especially for marginalised communities.

That is precisely why losing this moment hurts so much, and why the issues that RightsCon sought to elevate, including those that governments seek to suppress, must be debated in the global spotlight. At Equality Now and AUDRi, we are planning alternative ways to hold conversations with even wider audiences than a conference format allows. We will not be deterred.

Standing against the pushback on human rights

Equality Now has been tracking the pushback against human rights advocates globally, particularly those working on gender equality and against misogyny and gender-based violence. Even knowing how organised that pushback has become, it is devastating to watch RightsCon become a casualty of it.

The cancellation and the speed of it set a worrying precedent for future international human rights convening. No forum is truly safe from political scrutiny, interference, or silencing.

This is the moment for a coordinated response. Funders must step up to prioritise digital rights and engage with organisations at the convergence of human and digital rights and development. Regional gatherings and alternative spaces need resourcing to replace this year’s RightsCon.

Democratic governments need to defend the right to assemble across borders and scrutinise international pressure that may have shaped RightsCon’s cancellation.

To our peers across the digital rights community: we stand with you. Silencing one convening will not silence the movements behind it. We will continue to organise, collaborate, and defend the freedoms and human rights at stake, because the price of allowing authoritarian pressure to determine who gets to participate, speak, and assemble is simply too high.

S. Mona Sinha, Chief Executive Officer, Equality Now, and Mrinalini Dayal, Global Coordinator of the Alliance for Universal Digital Rights (AUDRi)

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

  

 

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

In den vergangenen Jahren wurde das Fachkräfteeinwanderungsgesetz schrittweise reformiert, um die Anwerbung internationaler Arbeitskräfte zu erleichtern. Wenig politische Beachtung findet bislang, dass damit ein erhöhtes Risiko ausbeuterischer Arbeitsverhältnisse einhergeht – vor allem weil Ausbeutung häufig schon bei der Anwerbung im Herkunftsland entsteht. Die Bundesregierung sollte daher ihre Bemü­hungen zur internationalen Fachkräftegewinnung durch einen effektiven Regulierungsrahmen für private Vermittlungsagenturen, den Ausbau grenzüberschreitender Kooperationen sowie eine gezieltere Nutzung migrationsbezogener Entwicklungs­zusammenarbeit in wichtigen Herkunfts- und Transitländern flankieren.

Raphaël Enthoven, co-lauréat du prix Jean-Pierre-Bloch décerné par la Licra, a déclaré dans son discours que l’antisémitisme « n’a jamais été aussi virulent qu’aujourd’hui ». Tout d’abord, cette affirmation est historiquement fausse. Ensuite, dans son discours, Raphaël Enthoven associe l’antisémitisme à la critique de la politique d’Israël, instrumentalisant ainsi la lutte contre l’antisémitisme afin de protéger la politique israëlienne de toute critique.

Cet amalgame est à l’origine du silence de nombreuses personnes sur la situation à Gaza, de peur d’être taxées d’antisémitisme et d’être mises à l’écart du débat.

Ce prix met en lumière le « deux poids deux mesures » qui existe dans le débat public français concernant la question de l’antisémitisme, alors que l’islamophobie en pleine explosion est invisibilisée. Évidemment, la remise d’un prix similaire pour le soutien à la cause palestinienne serait impensable.

Mon analyse dans cette vidéo.

L’article Lutte contre l’antisémitisme et invisibilisation de la question palestinienne est apparu en premier sur IRIS.

This study examines the relationship between the green transition and female employment in Rwanda’s construction sector, influenced by sustainability policies such as the Green Building Code. Using a firm-level survey conducted in Kigali in 2024, we analyze data from 545 firms across the construction value chain, employing a Green Index to quantify firms’ sustainability practices. The empirical analysis relies on OLS IV estimation to address potential endogeneity concerns. Our findings indicate a positive association between green practices and female employment shares, particularly in permanent roles, suggesting that sustainability-driven transformations can contribute to more equitable labor market outcomes. The study further highlights sectoral heterogeneity, with supplier and construction firms showing the strongest employment gains for women. Government initiatives enhance these effects, highlighting the importance of coherent policy frameworks. However, the role of managerial attitudes remains unclear, indicating a need for further research on organizational dynamics. The analysis also highlights disparities in access to green training, with female-managed firms less likely to receive training, potentially limiting their ability to benefit from green transitions. These findings provide insights for policymakers aiming to align green transition policies with gender-inclusive economic development in Rwanda and the broader context of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

This study examines the relationship between the green transition and female employment in Rwanda’s construction sector, influenced by sustainability policies such as the Green Building Code. Using a firm-level survey conducted in Kigali in 2024, we analyze data from 545 firms across the construction value chain, employing a Green Index to quantify firms’ sustainability practices. The empirical analysis relies on OLS IV estimation to address potential endogeneity concerns. Our findings indicate a positive association between green practices and female employment shares, particularly in permanent roles, suggesting that sustainability-driven transformations can contribute to more equitable labor market outcomes. The study further highlights sectoral heterogeneity, with supplier and construction firms showing the strongest employment gains for women. Government initiatives enhance these effects, highlighting the importance of coherent policy frameworks. However, the role of managerial attitudes remains unclear, indicating a need for further research on organizational dynamics. The analysis also highlights disparities in access to green training, with female-managed firms less likely to receive training, potentially limiting their ability to benefit from green transitions. These findings provide insights for policymakers aiming to align green transition policies with gender-inclusive economic development in Rwanda and the broader context of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

This study examines the relationship between the green transition and female employment in Rwanda’s construction sector, influenced by sustainability policies such as the Green Building Code. Using a firm-level survey conducted in Kigali in 2024, we analyze data from 545 firms across the construction value chain, employing a Green Index to quantify firms’ sustainability practices. The empirical analysis relies on OLS IV estimation to address potential endogeneity concerns. Our findings indicate a positive association between green practices and female employment shares, particularly in permanent roles, suggesting that sustainability-driven transformations can contribute to more equitable labor market outcomes. The study further highlights sectoral heterogeneity, with supplier and construction firms showing the strongest employment gains for women. Government initiatives enhance these effects, highlighting the importance of coherent policy frameworks. However, the role of managerial attitudes remains unclear, indicating a need for further research on organizational dynamics. The analysis also highlights disparities in access to green training, with female-managed firms less likely to receive training, potentially limiting their ability to benefit from green transitions. These findings provide insights for policymakers aiming to align green transition policies with gender-inclusive economic development in Rwanda and the broader context of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

Le Monténégro a conclu un partenariat économique stratégique avec la France. Ce mécanisme, déjà établi avec la Chine et les Émirats arabes unis, permet d'accorder des marchés publics avec des entreprises françaises sans procédure d'appel d'offres. On évoque une coopération à un milliard d'euros.

- Articles / Monténégro, Relations internationales, Economie, Questions européennes, Monitor (Monténégro)

The global energy crisis has given a new momentum to relations between Moscow and the 11-nation Southeast Asian bloc.