On 4 July 2025, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) voted by wide margin against the resolution by Eritrea to end the mandate on the human rights situation in Eritrea. It was a clear indication that the world will not allow one of the long-running human rights crises in Africa to go unnoticed as the 25-4 vote was passed with 18 abstentions.
The Council’s decision also reinforced the credibility of its mechanisms. A country-specific resolution has been defeated in its history only three times, so this rejection is quite important. Eritrea, the European Union (a sponsor of the counter-resolution) termed the motion as:
“A bad-faith attempt to dismantle independent scrutiny.”
Strengthening the mandate for accountability
The resolution that is adopted instead of scaling back increases the scope of the Special Rapporteur. Resolution L.7 manifested condemnation to unfair arrest, forced disappearance, torture, and prolonged national service. It also discussed transnational repression there and the lack of democratic rule such as the lack of elections since 1993.
The vote did not only confirm the current scrutiny but entrenched international alarm regarding systematic maltreatments. The reinforced authority makes the world focus more on a government, which is still working in almost total shadow.
Eritrea’s rights record remains among the world’s worst
Indefinite conscription as a tool of control
The foundations of global concern over Eritrea’s governance lie in its notorious national service program. Mandatory for all citizens, it is widely considered to be indefinite in practice. Military and civil conscripts are generally used and hung in the line of duty decades with meager or no compensation at all.
In 2016, the UN commission of inquiry reflected that the program constituted a kind of “enslavement” and involved more than 400,000 people. Although it has been called to reform several times, this policy is still in force and it can be considered as one of the means of population control on the one hand and a tool of repression on the other hand.
Systematic detentions and repression of dissent
The Special Rapporteur’s June 2025 report confirmed that arbitrary arrests and incommunicado detentions continue on a broad scale. It is estimated that thousands are detained without any form of trial or charge in most cases in secretive places devoid of any legal representation.
There is no religious and speech freedom. Since 2001 there has been eradication of independent media, ban on civil society organizations and the government has never shown any interest in the existence of political pluralism. Eritrea is one of the few nations across the world that have no constitutional regime and electoral body.
Eritrea’s defiance and rhetorical offensive
The claim of capacity constraints
Eritrean authorities maintain that their governance challenges stem from limited institutional capacity. They argue that the mandate is biased, unnecessary, and fails to consider the country’s security concerns and development context.
This stance has however been labeled as a diversion. It has never allowed the Special Rapporteur to access the country, something that casts doubt in the commitments of the Eritrea government to real engagements. In their rejection of cooperation and in the same breath denouncing the findings of the mandate, the government is shooting itself in the foot.
Accusations of Western interference
Subsequent to the vote, the UN ambassador of Eritrea referred to a “neo-colonial paternalism” by the European Union in view that human rights questioning is a political ploy masquerading as moral protection. It referred to the mandate as an insult to African sovereignty and that it would never cooperate with the Special Rapporteur.
And such assertions have been reiterated by few nations which backed the ineffective resolution in Eritrea, which nations shall include Russia, Iran, Sudan and China, who also are under international spotlight due to their own track records. This partnership highlighted the geopolitics which tend to cause human rights arguments.
The importance of sustained international pressure
Diaspora voices and civil society advocacy
The Eritrean diaspora and human rights organizations have welcomed the UNHRC’s stance. Elizabeth Chyrum, director of Human Rights Concern – Eritrea, called the vote a “rare victory for the truth.” She emphasized that continued scrutiny is one of the few avenues available for victims to seek recognition and justice.
Human Rights Watch noted that the renewal of the mandate “delivers a strong message that impunity must end.” The group also warned that abuses are likely to intensify without sustained external attention.
Documentation as a form of resistance
The Special Rapporteur plays a vital role in collecting testimonies, exposing patterns of abuse, and preserving evidence that may one day support legal action. While the office lacks enforcement power, its function as a watchdog is essential.
The reports serve not only as documentation but also as a deterrent—however limited—against further violations. In an environment where accountability is virtually absent, the visibility provided by these reports is often the only shield victims have.
This person has spoken on the topic in an interview, noting,
“The renewal of the mandate is a lifeline for Eritrean victims who have nowhere else to turn for justice.”
Excellent news to all Eritrean justice seekers!The Eritrean Regime lost in the fight against the adoption of the human right violation in Eritrea which is very sad to the regime&wonderfull news to all Eritrean justice seekers!Our success is imbedded in our unity! Keep it up!!! pic.twitter.com/MkZQZC0CJ5
— G Ghebremicael (@GhezaeGhebremi1) July 6, 2025
A regime entrenched by secrecy and fear
Transnational repression escalates
In addition to domestic repression, Eritrea’s government has increased its efforts to silence critics abroad. Reports from diaspora communities in Europe and North America describe surveillance, harassment, and threats by individuals linked to the regime.
Human rights defenders, including refugees who fled conscription or political persecution, are often targeted through family members back home. The government has used consular services to intimidate and control citizens even after they leave Eritrea’s borders.
The politics of fear and isolation
Eritrea’s leadership operates under a siege mentality, claiming that external enemies seek to destabilize the country. This narrative is used to justify indefinite military service, closed borders, and extreme state control.
But decades of such rhetoric have done little to improve living conditions or governance. Eritrea remains one of the poorest and most isolated countries globally, with chronic shortages of food, healthcare, and basic infrastructure.
The international community at a crossroads
Mechanisms exist, but will they be used?
The voter is moving in a positive direction to renew the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, but the process is close to meaningless, unless the implementation is monitored and reported on. The Eritrean government has demonstrated its ability to resist the international pressure with no repercussions.
The bigger issue is whether the UN and the member countries are ready to employ the other sources of power against the rogue nations; whether the use of the other resources, like the application of targeted sanctions, the international criminal referral system, or diplomatic isolation can be employed to pressurize the rogue nations into change.
Lessons for the global human rights system
Eritrea’s case also tests the efficacy of international institutions more broadly. When a regime pretty much ignores United Nations mechanisms of control and sanction with impunity over more than ten years, what does that mean to more abusive governments?
Rejection of the resolution by Eritrea reads a message, but it should be supported with stable diplomatic, legal, and financial approaches going beyond condemnation.
Watching Eritrea, and what comes next
It is quite possible that the continued vote at the UNHRC did not make any ground change overnight in Eritrea. However, it confirmed the importance of international oversight and the abiding power of the victims and the activists who are unwilling to keep silent. Whether Eritrea tortures or not is settled, but whether the world has the political appetite to chase it is another question.
As world politics are changing and interest level is falling short, the challenge to the human rights institutions will be how to attract momentum. Eritrean people have been waiting decades to get justice. How this latest vote plays as a turning point or delayed reckoning will depend upon the next steps that are taken.