SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
June, 11 2020, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
AIUSA media office,Email:,media@aiusa.org,Phone: 202-544-0200 x302
Global Use of Tear Gas Fuels Police Abuses Share
WASHINGTON
The shadowy and poorly regulated global trade of tear gas is fueling police human rights violations against peaceful protesters on a global scale, Amnesty International said today as it launched a new resource analyzing the misuse of the riot control agent around the world.
Tear Gas: An investigation is the organization's interactive, multimedia site looking into what tear gas is, how it is used and documenting scores of cases of its misuse by security forces worldwide, often resulting in severe injuries or death.
The site is especially relevant today. It comes on the anniversary of the Hong Kong Police Force beginning its months-long barrage of tear gas against peaceful demonstrations - which has recently been renewed.
"Security forces often lead us to believe tear gas is a 'safe' way to disperse violent crowds, avoiding having to resort to more harmful weaponry. But our analysis proves that police forces are misusing it on a massive scale," said Sam Dubberley, Head of the Evidence Lab on Amnesty International's Crisis Response Programme."We documented police forces using tear gas in ways that it was never intended to be used, often in large quantities against largely peaceful protesters or by firing projectiles directly at people, causing injuries and deaths."
United States use of tear gas
Just one of several video clips that were reviewed of police use of tear gas depicts officers in the city of Philadelphia on June 1, 2020 firing repeated volleys of tear gas at dozens of protesters trapped on a steep highway embankment with no safe escape route. Following public outcry over the incident, Philadelphia's police commissioner reportedly changed her department's use of force policy the next day, showing that reform is possible.Amnesty International has been monitoring police forces in cities across the country using tear gas and other crowd control agents in the recent protests, in many instances against apparently peaceful protesters."The use of tear gas and other crowd control weapons against protesters as they flee up a highway embankment or people peacefully demonstrating on the doorstep of the White House, demonstrates that something has gone seriously wrong with how law enforcement agencies across the country are policing peaceful protests," said Justin Mazzola, deputy director of research at Amnesty International USA.
"Time after time, in city after city, we have seen the reckless and unnecessary use of tear gas to disperse protests following the killing of George Floyd. Law enforcement is violating people's human rights daily out on the streets and must investigate how they used these chemical irritants in reacting to nationwide protests and review their policies on the use of these dangerous crowd control measures. They should be used only used in exceptional circumstances, when no other measures could suffice and should never be a measure of first resort. Police need to immediately de-escalate relations and stop meeting protestors with violence and excessive force. The use of tear gas, rubber bullets and militarized weapons against peaceful protesters should end immediately."
Open source investigation
Over the past year, Amnesty International's Crisis Evidence Lab has been researching tear gas misuse around the world, primarily through videos posted to social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
Using open source investigation methods, the organization verified close to 500 videos and highlighted almost 80 events in 22 countries and territories where tear gas has been misused, confirming the location, date, and validity. The analysis was carried out by Amnesty International's Digital Verification Corps - a network of students at six universities on four continents trained in sourcing and verifying content from social media.
Alongside interviews with protesters themselves, this analysis exposes a disturbing global trend of widespread, unlawful use of tear gas.
The site includes a video done in collaboration with SITU Research, which analyzes the performance characteristics of tear gas, explains the inner workings of the munitions and shows how their misuse can maim and kill.
Types of misuse
Tear gas has been fired through the windshield of a passenger car, inside a school bus, at a funeral procession, inside hospitals, residential buildings, metros, shopping malls, and - strangely - in virtually empty streets.
Security forces have also fired canisters directly at individuals, leading to fatalities; and from trucks, jeeps and drones whizzing by at high speeds. Those on the receiving end have included climate protesters, high school students, medical staff, journalists, migrants and human rights defenders, such as members of the Bring Back Our Girls movement in Nigeria.
Doctors in Omdurman, outside Sudan's capital Khartoum, told Amnesty International that security forces and troops raided a hospital emergency room last year, filling it with noxious gas, further injuring 10 patients. One doctor said: "The soldiers fired tear gas and live ammunition inside the hospital, then some came to the emergency room and fired four tear gas canisters; thank God only one exploded." A tear gas canister was thrown under the bed of a 70-year-old man who was a cardiac arrest patient. He died 10 minutes later.
A video from Venezuela shows a tear gas canister punching a hole in a makeshift wooden shield a protester used to defend himself from police use of the weapon in Caracas. A close miss: just a few centimeters off and it could have caused a life-threatening injury.
Amnesty International documented police abusing tear gas in multiple ways:
- Firing into confined spaces;
- Firing directly at individuals;
- Using excessive quantities;
- Firing at peaceful protests; and
- Firing against groups who may be less able to flee or more susceptible to its effects, such as children, older people and people with disabilities.
The site includes video interviews with a range of external analysts - from an emergency physician to experts in policing, and business and human rights - about why tear gas is so harmful when used incorrectly.
Amnesty International joins the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture in equating the use of tear gas in certain situations as amounting to torture or other ill-treatment.
Poorly regulated trade
Despite its widespread misuse, there are no agreed international regulations on the trade in tear gas and other riot control agents. Few states provide public information on the quantity and destination of tear gas exports, hampering independent oversight.
Amnesty International and the Omega Research Foundation have campaigned for over two decades for greater controls on the production, use and trade in tear gas and other less lethal weapons. As a result, the UN and regional bodies such as the EU and the Council of Europe have recognized the need to regulate the export of less lethal weapons.
Following high level diplomatic advocacy by the 60 plus states of the Alliance for Torture-Free Trade, supported by Amnesty International and Omega, the UN is now exploring potential development of international trade controls on less lethal weapons and other goods to prevent their use in torture, other ill-treatment and the death penalty. Amnesty International and Omega are now pressing for such measures to include tear gas and other riot control agents.
"Part of the problem with tear gas is simply that some police forces misunderstand how and when it can be used lawfully, while others choose to ignore such guidance and some have weaponized it," said Patrick Wilcken, Researcher, Arms Control, Security & Human Rights.
"But part of the solution also needs to be greater scrutiny of the poorly regulated global trade in tear gas and other riot control agents. Tear gas should be covered by the international controls on less lethal weapons and restraints, currently being discussed at the UN."
Background
Countries and territories covered:
Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, DRC, Ecuador, France, Guinea, Hong Kong, Honduras, Haiti, India (Indian-administered Kashmir), Iraq, Iran, Kenya, Lebanon, Nigeria, Israel-OPT, Sudan, Turkey, the United States, including the U.S./Mexican border, Venezuela, Zimbabwe
Manufacturers of tear gas and related launchers covered:
Cavim; Condor Non-Lethal Technologies; DJI*; Falken; PepperBall; The Safariland Group; and Tippmann Sports LLC. Amnesty International approached all seven companies for comment and only one responded.
*produces commercial drones which have been used to launch tear gas in Gaza.
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400LATEST NEWS
'Unconstitutional Animus': Federal Judge Blocks Trump Mass Deportation Effort
"The government," said the judge, "has failed to identify any real countervailing harm in continuing [temporary protected status] for Venezuelan beneficiaries."
Apr 01, 2025
An effort by the Trump administration to unilaterally strip the temporary protected status (TPS) of approximately 350,000 Venezuelan refugees living in the United States was blocked Monday night by a federal court judge who described the order by Secretary of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as being "motivated by unconstitutional animus."
In a 78-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco said Noem's rescinding of an order made under the Biden administration "threatens to: inflict irreparable harm on hundreds of thousands of persons whose lives, families, and livelihoods will be severely disrupted, cost the United States billions in economic activity, and injure public health and safety in communities throughout the United States. At the same time, the government has failed to identify any real countervailing harm in continuing TPS for Venezuelan beneficiaries."
The ruling puts a pause on the Trump administration's action, which would have stripped the humanitarian protections next week and opened the door for immediate deportations of those previously granted the right to live in the U.S. due to the economic and political instability in their home country.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit argued Trump's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to follow necessary rules, set by Congress, in reaching its decision to end the protections. "Until now, no administration had ever moved to rescind a grant of TPS protection," said the Haitian Bridge Alliance (HBA), which is among the groups that helped bring the challenge in court.
Chen said the TPS holders who acted as plaintiffs in the case—represented by the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), the ACLU Foundations of Northern California and Southern California, the Center for Immigration Law and Policy (CILP) at UCLA School of Law, and HBA—were likely to prevail on the merits, showing that Noem's order was "unauthorized by law, arbitrary and capricious, and motivated by unconstitutional animus."
Jose Palma, coordinator of the National TPS Alliance, welcomed the decision.
"In the face of adversity, we stand united," Palma said in a statement after the ruling.
"This is not just a legal win," Palma continued, "but a testament to the strength of the TPS community and all who fight alongside us. We will continue this fight with unwavering resolve, not only to protect the future of 350,000 Venezuelans, but to defend all TPS holders in this country. Together, we will ensure that the voices of those who seek safety and opportunity are heard, and that no one is unjustly torn from their families."
Jessica Bansal, an attorney with NDLON, said "the Venezuelan TPS holders, like all TPS holders, are living and working lawfully in this country pursuant to a humanitarian program created by Congress 30 years ago. Today's decision to pause the Trump administration's unlawful attempt to strip them of protection provides them and their families with much-needed relief."
One of the plaintiffs, identified by the initials M.H. and due to lose her status within days, also expressed relief.
"My daughter and I rely on TPS to live here," she said. "Without TPS, I would risk being separated from my husband and young son, both of whom are U.S. citizens. I am beyond elated to know that the judge has granted protection while we continue this fight to protect my family and hundreds of thousands of others."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pro-Voter Coalition Sues Over Trump Trying to 'Declare Election Rules by Executive Fiat'
"This executive order, based on nothing but years of disinformation, is blatantly unlawful and a naked attempt to suppress the votes of targeted communities," said LULAC's national president.
Mar 31, 2025
A pro-voter coalition on Monday sued to block U.S. President Donald Trump's recent executive order that critics warn would make it harder for tens of millions of eligible citizens to cast their ballots in state and federal elections.
The Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and State Democracy Defenders Fund (SDDF) sued the executive office of the president and members of Trump's administration in a Washington, D.C. federal court on behalf of three advocacy groups: the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Secure Families Initiative (SFI), and Arizona Students' Association (ASA).
"The president's executive order is an unlawful action that threatens to uproot our tried-and-tested election systems and silence potentially millions of Americans. It is simply not within the president's authority to set election rules by executive decree, especially when they would restrict access to voting in this way," said Danielle Lang, senior director of voting rights at CLC.
"Donald Trump is attempting to wrongfully impede voting by millions of Americans with this latest unlawful executive order."
As the complaint puts it: "Under our Constitution, the president does not dictate election rules. States and Congress do... Through the order, the president attempts to exercise powers that the Constitution withholds from him and instead assigns to the states and to Congress. The order violates and subverts the separation of powers by lawlessly arrogating to the president authority to declare election rules by executive fiat."
Trump's order includes provisions enabling the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Department of Homeland Security to subpoena voting records for "list maintenance," restricting mail-in voting, and requiring the Election Assistance Commission to include documentary proof of citizenship on the federal voting form.
"Donald Trump is attempting to wrongfully impede voting by millions of Americans with this latest unlawful executive order. But it will not work. In America voters get to pick their president—presidents don't get to pick their voters, declared SDDF co-founder and executive chair Norm Eisen. "We are proud to stand up for the ability of every American voter to cast their ballots freely and fairly through this litigation."
Advocacy group leaders detailed how provisions in Trump's order would impact various communities if the directive isn't struck down.
"Military families, veterans, caregivers, and overseas voters deserve secure access to the very democracy we serve to protect—no matter where we're stationed or how we serve," said SFI executive director Sarah Streyder. "This new order would mean that the veteran who is a full-time caretaker at home, who has done everything right, may now be shut out of the ballot box due to outdated paperwork."
"This new order would mean that the military family stationed on the other side of the world from home, who crossed every t and dotted every i—their military ID will no longer suffice, and due to mail delays outside of their control, their ballot will never count," Streyder warned.
Roman Palomares, LULAC's national president, declared that "this executive order, based on nothing but years of disinformation, is blatantly unlawful and a naked attempt to suppress the votes of targeted communities—disproportionately impacting the Latino community."
"We are proud to join this coalition seeking to stop the effort to silence the voice and votes of the U.S. electorate—and particularly of voters of color," Palomares continued. "Our democracy depends on all voters feeling confident that they can vote freely and that their vote will be counted accurately."
Trump orders states to open voter files to Musk. Exec Order will cost 21 million their vote. ▶️ Get the full story: www.gregpalast.com/trump-execut...
[image or embed]
— Greg Palast (@gregpalast.bsky.social) March 30, 2025 at 1:19 PM
Kyle Nitschke, co-executive director of Arizona Students' Association, highlighted that some states have imposed voter suppression laws similar to Trump's executive order (EO).
"The Arizona Students' Association has seen firsthand what these egregious citizenship requirements really are, an attempt to suppress the vote. In Arizona we have a dual-track federal registration system, and the voters being affected by citizenship requirements are college students registering to vote for the first time, unsheltered voters, and Native voters, Nitschke said. "There are already extensive citizenship checks in place when registering to vote, Trump's EO is a clear attack on our voting rights. Our student members believe we should live in a country where it's accessible and convenient to be a part of democracy."
The Associated Pressnoted that "Monday's lawsuit against Trump's elections order could be just the first of many challenges. Other voting rights advocates have said they're considering legal action, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Democratic attorney Marc Elias. Several Democratic state attorneys general have said they are looking closely at the order and suspect it is illegal."
Monday evening, the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Governors Association, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) announced that they also filed a suit against the order in the D.C. court. They are represented by Elias Law Group.
"This executive order is an unconstitutional power grab from Donald Trump that attacks vote by mail, gives DOGE sensitive personal information, and makes it harder for states to run their own free and fair elections," they said in a joint statement. "It will even make it harder for military members serving overseas and married women who have changed their name to have their votes count."
"Donald Trump and DOGE are doing this as an attempt to rationalize their repeatedly debunked conspiracy theories and set the groundwork to throw out legal votes and ignore election outcomes they do not like," they added. "It's anti-American and Democrats are using every tool at our disposal—including taking Trump to court—to stop this illegal overreach that undermines our democracy."
The pro-voter lawsuits are also among several legal challenges to Trump's long list of executive actions since January 20. As Common Dreamsreported earlier Monday, the National Treasury Employees Union filed a federal suit in the same D.C. court over Trump's recent order that aims to strip collective bargaining rights from hundreds of thousands of government workers.
It's not just the Trump administration that's working to make it more difficult for Americans to participate in democracy. Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are also planning to hold a vote on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act this week.
"If the bill passes, more than 21 million Americans could be blocked from voting," the Brennan Center for Justice warned on social media Monday. "The SAVE Act would be the first voter suppression bill ever passed by Congress. Lawmakers should be protecting the freedom to vote—not restricting it. We urge Congress to reject the SAVE Act."
This article has been updated to include the Democratic lawsuit.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Arkansas Faith Leaders Urge Lawmakers to Reject Bill Forcing Schools to Display Ten Commandments
"We do not need to—and indeed should not—turn public schools into Sunday schools."
Mar 31, 2025
A group of 42 Arkansas faith leaders on Monday called on the General Assembly to reject Republican-led legislation that would force every classroom in the state to display the Ten Commandments and the national motto, "In God We Trust."
"We are faith leaders from across Arkansas who value religious freedom for all. We urge you to vote against S.B. 433, which would require the display of a government-selected version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom of all elementary, secondary, and postsecondary schools and in every other public building or facility maintained with taxpayer funds," a letter to lawmakers signed by the 42 clerics states. The bill was passed by the state Senate on March 19 by a vote of 27-4.
"A government mandate that the Ten Commandments be displayed in all government buildings demeans religious freedom."
State Sen. Jim Dotson (R-34), one of the bill's primary sponsors, called the Ten Commandments "a historical reference point... that has basic things like you shall not kill, steal, commit adultery, those basic foundations of life that is good for everybody to keep front of mind so that we are hopefully living good lives."
However, the faith leaders—41 Christians and one Jew—said that "S.B. 433 is a misguided effort that undermines the faith and freedom we cherish."
"A government mandate that the Ten Commandments be displayed in all government buildings demeans religious freedom," their letter asserts. "The government oversteps its authority when it dictates an official state-approved version of any religious text. The government must respect the rights of individuals and faith communities to make decisions about the sacred texts that inform our religious understandings and practices."
"We do not need to—and indeed should not—turn public schools into Sunday schools," the signers continued. "We remain steadfast and united in affirming the values of religious freedom that are foundational to our democracy and will continue to push back against attempts to impose a singular religious viewpoint into our public institutions."
"Finally, we recognize that the Ten Commandments hold no religious meaning for thousands of Arkansans," the letter acknowledges. "The Ten Commandments are held in a different light for Arkansans who are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Unitarian Universalist, or who practice other religions or no religion at all."
Rev. Brittany Stillwell, associate pastor with students and families at Second Baptist Church in Little Rock, said in a statement that "as a Christian, I understand the Ten Commandments as holy and worthy of contemplation and I take them very seriously."
"They do not, however, belong in schools and other public spaces as a kitschy symbol of a shallow faith," she added. "I don't want the students I pastor to become desensitized to the holiness and reverence they are due. Religious liberty protects scripture from the whims of the government so that it might remain the elevated word from God we hold so dear."
Cooperative Baptist Fellowship director of advocacy Rev. Jennifer Hawks said that "growing up, I spent Easter weekends at my family's homestead in Bearden. My Arkansas aunts, uncles, and cousins played a crucial role in my spiritual formation and never needed the government to define for them Christian teachings or practices."
"When the state writes a CliffsNotes version of a religious text and mandates its use, we all lose," Hawks added, referring to the once-ubiquitous series of student study guides. "The state should not waste time trying to usurp our families and religious institutions. Leave religious instruction to us and don't turn public schools into Sunday schools."
Other Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed or introduced bills requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in schools or other government buildings. Last year, Louisiana became the only state to fully enact such legislation. However, last November, a federal judge blocked the law, calling it "unconstitutional on its face and in all applications."
Groups including the ACLU and Freedom From Religion Foundation oppose such bills, and faith leaders in other states including Missouri and Texas have also urged lawmakers to reject bills similar to Arkansas' S.B. 433.
While campaigning last year, U.S. President Donald Trump—who critics say has violated at least half of the commandments—expressed support for mandatory classroom display of the divine dicta.
In June 2017, a Ten Commandments monument was installed on the grounds of the Arkansas State Capitol. A day later, Michael Tate Reed II drove his car into the granite slab, destroying it. The monument was rebuilt with concrete bollards added for protection. Reed—who hads previously wrecked a similar monument at Oklahoma's Capitol—was later acquitted on mental health grounds.
In response to the Arkansas monument, the Satanic Temple fought for and won the right to install a statue of Baphomet, a goat-headed, winged being, on the state Capitol grounds. The statue—which contains two children fawning over Baphomet—was unveiled in 2018.
"If you're going to have one religious monument up then it should be open to others," Satanic Arkansas co-founder Ivy Forrester
said at the time, "and if you don't agree with that then let's just not have any at all."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular