GLOBAL STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

2022 IMPACT AND

PROGRESS REPORT
Amnesty International is a global movement of more
than 10 million people who campaign for a world where
human rights are enjoyed by all.
Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights
enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and other international human rights standards.
We are independent of any government, political
ideology, economic interest or religion and are funded
mainly by our membership and public donations.

All rights reserved. This publication is copyright, but may be

reproduced by any method without fee for advocacy, campaigning
and teaching purposes, but not for resale.
The copyright holders request that all such use be registered with
them for impact assessment purposes. For copying in any other
circumstances, or for reuse in other publications, or for translation
or adaptation, prior written permission must be obtained from the
publishers, and a fee may be payable. To request permission, or for
any other inquiries, please contact copyright@amnesty.org
© Amnesty International 2023

First published in 2023 Index: ORG 10/6718/2023

by Amnesty International Ltd Original language: English
Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton Printed by Amnesty International,
Street, London WC1X 0DW, UK International Secretariat, UK

2 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

CONTENTS

1. MESSAGE FROM THE INTERNATIONAL BOARD (IB) 05

2. MESSAGE FROM THE SECRETARY GENERAL (SG) 06

3. INTRODUCTION 09

4. GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS 10

5. PROGRESS AND IMPACT IN 2022 13

5.1. What have we achieved in our strategic priorities? 15

5.2. What have we achieved in our flexible areas of work? 19

5.3. How have we achieved it? Strengthening Amnesty’s core capabilities 23

5.4. Organisational Health 23

5.5. Governance and leadership 26

5.6. Finance and growth 26

6. CONCLUSIONS 30

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 3
Qatar Migrant Workers - An actor poses as a
construction worker while filming - Qatar: World
Cup 2022 forced labour. © Amnesty International

4 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

1. MESSAGE FROM THE
INTERNATIONAL BOARD
Often international human rights groups
are characterised as people who are
contemptuous of ordinary people. Tapping
into deep cultural springs, as local and
international human rights actors, we ignore
this at our peril. As supporters of nationalist
and dictatorial leaders make rational choices
based on values that differ from human
rights, we as an organisation confront this
with alternative narratives starting with hope,
which are equally rooted in local values.
More than a conversation – a mere exchange
of sentiments, observations, and ideas – the
International Board (IB) in the past year has
sought dialogue. A collaborative search for
common ground and a roadmap to aid the
future in surmounting the most pressing
obstacles to upholding human rights. As
the International Board, we grapple with the
ruthless internal calculus of investment, risk,
and benefit to the organisation to ensure
we stay on top. As this impact and progress
report highlights, the context has become
even more challenging.
This report speaks about bold ideas
and positive action, the need for shifts
of emphasis and investment in the way
Amnesty conducts its work. We co-create
acceptable levels of risk and appropriate
mitigations and recognise the long game
where shifting the needle by incremental
progress is something grounded in realistic
optimism and wellbeing.
In pursuit of this impact internally and
externally, and supporting this incredible
organisation to be ready for possible futures,
some of the International Board’s activities
since the last Global Assembly were:
• The IB approved a pilot project for
Amnesty Hong Kong Decentralised
Autonomous Organisation
• The IB set up the LUMEN program
and approved the term of reference,
requesting that at least two seats on
the Steering Committee be allocated
to youth representatives. Lumen is in
response to GA Decision 2021/01 of
Governance reform.
• The IB progressed the work and approved
the Equitable Distribution of Financing
paper shared with the movement.
• The IB sponsored a working group and
steering committee that will co-create
a new and fit for purpose dispute and
conflict mechanism.
• The IB commissioned a review on the
Ukraine Press Release of 4th August,
with learning recommendations and
oversight a continuous process.
• The IB approved the Divestment
from Fossil Fuels working group
paper and principles, welcomed the
recommendations for implementation
and extended the group’s remit in order
to consider a full strategy for
implementation and support to entities
regarding the ethical investment policy.
I thank the Coalition Leadership Team (CLT)
led by the Secretary General Dr Agnes
Callamard for their often around the clock
responses and attentiveness to IB oversight
and queries. To the International Board and
board coordinator: they say a team is not
people you work with, but people you trust.
Thank you for the respect, professionalism,
and warmth in which you carry out your
duties as directors.
My deepest thanks is reserved for the
movement. Don’t be discouraged by the
people who are going to say that the doing
of this work is always far inferior to the
imagining of this work. The people who
make that critique only ever imagine,
but Amnesty makes things happen,
it quite literally changes the world.
On behalf of the International Board,
DR ANJHULA MYA SINGH BAIS
Chair of the International Board
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 5
 2. MESSAGE FROM THE
SECRETARY GENERAL
The climate crisis, a global pandemic and
economic recession, war and conflicts
including that in Ukraine, and increasingly
complex humanitarian emergencies that
transcend borders are all linked — and
made worse — by a multilateral system
that has disintegrated and finally failed us.
The consequences of this, including in the
dangerous rise of global inequality, hunger,
extreme weather, discrimination and attacks
on democracy and human rights, and a fast-
approaching global energy crisis, are being
felt throughout the world.
In 2022 human rights were truly under
siege, and there is no sign of respite in
2023. Arguably, the events of the past year
deeply affected what the world will be like
in the decades to come. Amnesty has been
also affected by this torrent of human rights
violations. The Russian authorities have
closed our office in Moscow and the invasion
had a devastating cost on our presence in
Ukraine and colleagues there. , But when
we think of 2022, let us recall not just
the commonality of human suffering and
erosion of norms, but also iconic acts of
defiance in by women, girls and their allies in
Afghanistan and Iran. Let us also remember
the thousands of people who came together
to write letters and sign petitions in support
of human rights.
I mention those who act in defiance for
they remain the guiding light for us all,
and for global leadership that has largely
failed to respond effectively to conflicts,
address climate change, move decisively
against inequality and hear the plights of the
oppressed. Even when the global community
comes together, as it did to respond to
Covid-19 and the Ukraine war, double
standards remain at the fore. It is therefore
up to us to elevate the voices of those on the
ground and as Peter Benenson wrote in the
Forgotten Prisoners “experience shows that
in matters such as these, governments are
prepared to follow only where public opinion
leads.” So let us generate public opinion that
stands for and leads to justice for everyone
and everywhere.
6 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
We have shown our ability to do just that
in 2022. Amnesty’s work on the apartheid
of Palestinians in Israel has pushed the
realization of the presence of this crime
in the public domain. Our research into
how Meta’s dangerous algorithms and
reckless pursuit of profit contributed to
the atrocities perpetrated by the Myanmar
military against the Rohingya people has
reinvigorated the calls for accountability and
reparations. Millions have heard our calls
for migrants’ rights in Qatar of World Cup
watchers, and they continue to pressure
FIFA and the Qatari authorities to be held
to account. At COP 27, we elevated calls
not just for climate justice but also for the
release of activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah. We
also shed light on systematic racism present
in the treatment of refugees and migrants
in the United States, Spain, Morocco and
Latvia. The above are just some examples
of Amnesty’s leadership made possible
through the support of our members and the
excellent work of our colleagues around the
world. To continue being effective, we must
remain unified and adapt to the challenges
of our times.
INTERNAL DEVELOPMENTS
Only a year ago, I announced the launch
of an action plan to advance anti-racism
in our organisation. With the help of
expert colleagues and the commitment
from all parts of the movement, today
we report encouraging statistics showing
that more than half of the movement
has made progress towards anti-racism
measures. Indeed, by end of 2022, 70%
of IS programmes and regional offices and
87% of national entities had developed
bespoke anti-racism plans. At the IS, we
delivered improvements in the performance
management, recruitment, and procurement
processes and trained staff on diversity,
equality, and inclusion. Our work, however,
is not finished. Becoming an anti-racist and
diverse organisation is an ongoing journey we
must all continue to embrace. At the IS, we
will continue to embed anti-racism principles
into our policies, processes, and practices to
tackle racism at a systems level.
We continue working towards advancing
our well-being agenda. In 2022, 60% of
Amnesty entities (including the IS) reported
progress in well-being, with an increasing
number of staff members having access to
psychological and healthcare support. Higher
response rates to individual surveys also
indicate a higher staff engagement on the
issues of employee experience and well-
being at Amnesty. Looking after ourselves
and becoming more resilient is paramount
to our ability to progress work and is key
to success. It is also at the foundation of
our values. Adopting the Guiding principles
for feminist leadership at the last GA also
provides us with a splendid platform to
advance our organisational values. We are,
too, putting the basics in place for this work.
2022 also saw us moving towards “post-
pandemic” ways of working. At the IS, this
meant defining our principles and practices
for hybrid working. We have done this in
inclusive and participatory ways so that
staff could decide their terms according
to the needs of specific teams. Indeed,
we have also surveyed IS staff about their
experiences of hybrid working so that we can
adapt as a result. For many at the IS, hybrid
working has contributed to improved team
productivity and wellbeing.
2022 also signalled a return to more
in-person meetings following the easing of
travel and other restrictions many countries
imposed during the pandemic. As we
embrace once again the many advantages
of meeting face-to-face across locations,
we do so cognisant of our commitment to
mitigate global warming and to become
carbon neutral by 2035. Indeed, this report
helps us monitor our progress towards this
commitment.
In terms of human rights work, this report
offers an analysis of our progress against
global priorities, including the flexible areas.
It also highlights those areas where we must
continue to invest to ensure we achieve our
goals. But, overall, the report shows that one
year in, we have made progress across the
Global Strategic Framework – proving time
and again the strength of our movement in
advancing justice for victims of human rights
violations and the human rights agenda.
In carrying out our mission in more adverse
and complex contexts, we faced challenges,
which led us to pause and reflect on our
internal practices and ways of working. The
legal and independent reviews undertaken
following the extended Ukraine Press
Release will provide invaluable lessons
learnt to address shortcomings. In 2023, I
will be more committed than ever to driving
Amnesty forward as a learning organisation
to ensure that we, as a movement, become
even stronger, more united, and more
resilient in the face of future challenges.
Finally, I am pleased to report that three
entities were awarded section and structure
status in 2022 - Amnesty Kenya, Amnesty
South Africa, and Amnesty Guinea – with
warm congratulations for such a significant
achievement.
SECRETARY GENERAL AGENDA IN 2022
In 2022 I focused on advancing priorities
which I identified as part of my vision
for Amnesty, alongside amplifying and
supporting critical work across the
organisation.
Given the increasingly hostile environment in
which we work, I focused my attention into
looking at future alternatives for Amnesty to
organise, campaign and govern in response
to shrinking space. In 2022, I started the
groundwork for the Hong Kong Decentralised
Autonomous Organisation (DAO) pilot
project, which aims to explore a different
model of organising in contexts where a
physical presence is no longer viable. In
addition, we launched a thinking piece that
explores ways to adapt ourselves to address
civic space constraints – the “Be Water”
report. In 2023, I will further engage the
movement on ways to enhance Amnesty’s
ability to continue its operations globally.
I also commissioned a review of our
campaigning practices and approaches.
The aim is to ensure that Amnesty’s meeting with staff and learning about their
campaigns practices remain relevant and work and experiences. Each visit was also
impactful in a world that is in constant flux a high-level mission during which I met
and sees social, political, and technological with partners, civil society organisations,
developments affecting human rights. Human Rights Defenders and activists,
The study was possible thanks to the and survivors of human rights violations
participation of IS and movement colleagues and their families. I brought their calls for
and will be ready for implementation in justice in meetings with government officials
2023. Always looking into the future, I also and local authorities in countries such
initiated work to develop a “futures and as Palestine and Israel, Kenya, Zambia,
innovation lab” with some initial research on Ukraine, Mali, Egypt, Mexico, Colombia and
how future trends in technology – including Canada. During these missions, I witnessed
biotechnology – will affect human rights. total dedication from our members and
outstanding professionalism from Amnesty
My work last year also involved supporting staff. Now more than ever, I can see the
critical human rights priorities. In doing so, strength of our movement when it works
I led on the media launch of several reports together in solidarity to advance and protect
to increase the visibility of our calls locally human rights.
and globally. There was strong attention on
our conflict and crisis work with outputs on DR AGNÈS CALLAMARD
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including the
testimony of Russian forces carrying out Secretary General
extrajudicial killings, declaring ‘apparent war
crimes in Bucha, and the extensive Mariupol
report, which made major international
headlines. I also fronted a joint report
with Human Rights Watch documenting
war crimes and crimes against humanity
against Tigrayans in Ethiopia’s Western
Tigray zone, as well outputs on Afghanistan.
Among many successful pieces on corporate
accountability, I supported a report on the
role of Meta in the atrocities perpetrated
by the Myanmar military against the
Rohingya people in 2017 and amplified the
outreach of the report on big aviation fuel
investigation. Less than a week before the
World Cup kicked off in Qatar, I published
an op-ed in Le Monde and El País calling on
FIFA President Gianni Infantino to commit to
compensating migrant workers who suffered
abuses during tournament preparations.
Media work was also leveraged to highlight
our call to justice around other global
events – for example, I led the charge calling
out Egypt’s human rights record, with a
particular focus on Alaa Abdel Fattah, ahead
of COP27, securing extensive coverage.
During the last year, I had the pleasure
of spending considerable time visiting IS
Regional Offices and National Entities,
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 7
A man pushes his bike through debris and destroyed Russian military vehicles on a street
on April 06, 2022 in Bucha, Ukraine. The Ukrainian government has accused Russian
forces of committing a “deliberate massacre” as they occupied and eventually retreated
from Bucha, 25km northwest of Kyiv. Hundreds of bodies have been found in the days since
Ukrainian forces regained control of the town. © Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images

8 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

3. INTRODUCTION
THIS IS THE FIRST REPORT IN THIS NEW STRATEGIC
PERIOD. THIS REPORT BRINGS TOGETHER IN ONE
DOCUMENT MULTIPLE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS TO
THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY (GA) IN A SUMMARY FORMAT,
ENSURING THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT FINDINGS CAN
BE DIGESTED EASILY.
It is based upon a much longer and more
detailed data analysis, which is available for
those wishing to dig deeper into the data
behind this condensed version. The reports
are based on data from national entities
as well as data provided from International
Secretariat (IS) colleagues. This report
can be found on the Amnesty Impact and
Progress Report webspace here.
The report is based primarily on the
requirements of GA Decisions 2021/07,
10, and 11, which ask for reporting on
progress and impact, and on the distribution
of resources towards achieving what
Amnesty has agreed in the Global Strategic
Framework (GSF) 2022-2030. Decision
07 stipulated that, “We will assess our
human rights impact under the 2022-2030
Strategic Framework by monitoring our
progress against concrete targets on an
annual basis in line with 2021 GA Decision
11. This will allow us to establish a baseline
and see how close we are from achieving
the ambitions laid out in our Strategic
Framework and identify key insights and
learnings that will inform our further
implementation”. Decision 07 requires
Amnesty to report on different elements
of the strategy, such as outcomes, flexible
areas of work, and core capabilities.
In addition, this report integrates a set of
key performance indicators (KPIs), which
are being tested this year and will be revised
for the next reporting period. They offer a
way of measuring success in the areas of
human rights impact, finance, growth, and
organisational health.
The report begins with an overview of the
global context for human rights. This is
the arena in which all of Amnesty’s work is
carried out, and it provides an important
background against which Amnesty’s own
impact analysis can be read.
This is followed by an overview of impact in
each of the six outcome areas articulated
by the strategy. The “what” is followed by
the “how,” with a summary of Amnesty’s
performance in strengthening the core
capabilities required to implement its
theory of change. This is followed by brief
assessments of Amnesty’s financial position,
organisational health, and the state of its
governance and leadership.
A set of conclusions address the question
of what the foregoing analysis means for
the strategy and Amnesty’s readiness to
achieve it.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 9
 4. GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS
IN THE TROUBLING CONVERGENCE OF A PANDEMIC, CLIMATE CRISIS,
RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE, NUCLEAR THREAT, ENERGY CRISIS,
AND GROWING ECONOMIC PRESSURES, 2022 GAVE RISE TO THE
IDEA OF A “POLYCRISIS” – A PERPETUAL STATE OF CRISES WHICH
EXACERBATE ONE ANOTHER. IT IS A USEFUL FRAMING FOR THE
INTERLOCKING NATURE OF GLOBAL CRISES BUT MAY OBSCURE AS
MUCH AS IT REVEALS. EACH CHALLENGE HAS ITS OWN DYNAMICS,
INCLUDING POSSIBILITIES FOR POSITIVE CHANGE.
Afghan migrants rest while waiting for transport by
smugglers after crossing the Iran-Turkish border on August
15, 2021 in Tatvan, on the western shores of Lake Van,
eastern Turkey. - The latest chaos in Afghanistan sparked
by the recent gains of territory by the Taliban including
the takeover of the capital Kabul has raised fresh alarm
over an influx of migrants into Turkey through the Iranian
border. Turkey, which shares a 534 kilometre (331 miles)
border with Iran, has beefed up its frontier and started
building a 243 kilometre wall in a bid to prevent any
passage of illegal migrants. (Photo by Ozan KOSE / AFP)
(Photo by OZAN KOSE/AFP via Getty Images)
© AFP via Getty Images
10 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
The global economic situation has singular
importance for the prospects for human
rights. The pandemic generally worsened
global inequality. Serious inflationary
pressures have affected most parts of the
world, although expectations of a global
recession have not (yet) been realised.
However, most economists anticipate
minimal economic growth, with governments
adopting tighter fiscal policies and the
likelihood of debt crises like that which
has afflicted Sri Lanka. Despite egregious
vaccine inequality, Overseas Development
Assistance reached an all-time high in 2021,
yet this may come under increasing pressure
as richer countries cut spending. The fiscal
context for economic and social rights could
hardly be more challenging. This could be a
context ripe for more reactionary populism,
but perhaps also for new economic ideas.
The shape of the US-China relationship
continues to evolve, but we now live in
a new era of great power competition.
While Chinese Communist Party leader Xi
Jinping stood at the apex of his personal
power after the 2022 Party Congress, the
fallout from China’s late abandonment of a
zero-Covid strategy and the unexpectedly
rapid pace of its demographic decline
could weaken the country’s position
relative to the USA. Nonetheless, recent
international interventions suggest that
China is increasingly eager to advance its
global agenda and that Xi intends to play an
increasingly active role on the world stage.
India is poised to overtake China as the
world’s most populous country in 2023,
another moment of prestige in a year when
it also presides at the G20. India has
provided a compelling model of nationalist
authoritarianism taking hold strongly within
an electoral system. Although President Jair
Bolsonaro of Brazil lost after one term and
the subsequent insurrection was quashed,
the global trend toward authoritarian
populism has not abated. A series of major
elections in 2023-24 in countries including
Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa,
and the USA will collectively provide
important indicators of the global health of
democracy and civic freedoms.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has stringently
tested the multilateral system. It is only
one conflict among many but has drawn
vastly more attention for reasons including
geography and the relative rarity of inter-
state conflict. While it has again exposed
the inability of the United Nations (UN)
Security Council to prevent or meaningfully
address conflict, it has galvanised the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The
invasion has also become the subject of an
unprecedented number of investigatory and
accountability mechanisms. Their success
or failure will be a crucial test-case for the
multilateral system. However, the relative
lack of attention to other conflicts such
as in Ethiopia or Democratic Republic of
Congo (DRC) demonstrate a highly selective
approach to accountability.
Russia’s war has also exposed and
exacerbated the volatility of the global
energy market. Energy politics are
likely to remain a major feature of the
global landscape. Countries which have
amassed vast wealth from fossil fuels may
increasingly seek to diversify and seek new
forms of influence. The energy transition will
continue to play out in politically unstable
and conflict-sensitive regions, and there will
be more scrambling over control of resources
such as rare earth elements, where China
currently dominates.
Climate change is now a widely
acknowledged present reality, even if
climate science continues to be contested
in the context of “culture wars”. The
climate crisis itself will increasingly fuel
resource scarcity, conflict, and migration
in areas such as the Sahel, for which the
world is poorly prepared. Climate-induced
migration could begin to test an already
beleaguered refugee protection system
beyond its limits. Climate litigation has seen
some success and continues to spread,
renewable energy production is surging, and
relevant technological advances are reported
frequently. However, scepticism about the
1.5C target threatens to overwhelm any hope
that it can still be achieved.
The exponentially growing influence of
technology is only likely to become more
apparent in coming years, especially as
artificial intelligence becomes mainstream.
But grossly unequal access to technology
risks deepening inequalities, with tech
titans enjoying near-plutocratic status
while billions of people remain locked
out. Big Tech will likely continue to
facilitate the spread of disinformation,
with its damaging consequences for social
cohesion and political pluralism. The
production, distribution, and deployment
of sophisticated destructive technologies
including autonomous weapons systems and
surveillance technology is spreading. More
positively, while tech regulation continues to
lag, the European Union (EU) has embarked
on an ambitious series of legislation which,
though imperfect, has provided some
necessary global leadership in this area.
The multilateral human rights system
continues to grapple with these and other
global challenges. The USA and China
offer different propositions and visions for
the future of the human rights system, but
with no single country dominating there is
arguably space for a more diverse thematic
agenda to be pursued. The North-South
coalition that developed the right to a
clean, healthy, and sustainable environment
demonstrated the potential for normative
innovation, while issues such as racism, the
legacies of colonialism, and inequality could
be ripe for Global South-led action through
the human rights system.
Meanwhile, mass protest and solidarity
remain important potential drivers of change
at the national level. Although the pandemic
brought an abrupt halt to a significant wave
of protests in 2019, highly risky protests
in Iran and China have stood out in recent
months. As economic crisis continues to bite
in many countries, mass protest movements
may again gather strength – and trigger
government backlashes and clampdowns on
fundamental freedoms.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 11
10 December 2022, Warsaw, Palace of Culture and
Science. Amnesty activists unfolded a huge yellow
banner with “FREEDOM” written on it to mark
International Human Rights Day and Write for Rights
annual letter writing marathon. © Grzegorz Żukowski

12 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

 5. PROGRESS AND
IMPACT IN 2022
1.1. Strengthening
freedom of expression
and association
1.2. Securing the right to
peaceful assembly for all
2.1. Promoting gender,
racial and intersectional
justice
2.2. Strengthening rights
to health, housing and
social security
2.3. Securing climate
justice
2.4 Protecting rights
of refugees, migrants,
people on the frontlines
of crises
Flexible areas of work
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL’S SPEND
IN 2022 BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
International Secretariat
National Entities
Total
0% 10% 20%
5.1 WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED
IN OUR STRATEGIC PRIORITIES?
This section sets out the highlights of
Amnesty’s achievements and the challenges
it has faced under each of the six outcome
areas of the GSF, as well as the conclusions
which can be drawn from this analysis.
The distribution of programmatic spend
is an important indicator of the level of
priority accorded by Amnesty entities to
each strategic outcome. Total programmatic
spend in 2022 reached £55.2m, of which
£20.2m was from the IS and £35m from
national entities.
61% of Amnesty entities aligned
expenditure with strategic priorities,
including the IS and 41 national entities.1
The goal is that at least 80% of Amnesty
entities’ programmatic spend is allocated
to the two global priorities in the strategy,
while up to 20% is allocated to flexible
areas of work.
1 Out of 68 national entities, 4 did not provide expenditure data in 2022 and 3 had incorrect
financial coding
Programmatic spend includes all spend related to Amnesty’s human rights
work such as research, advocacy, or human rights education (Data source:
30% 40% 50% 60%
Within the IS, all programmes and regional
offices achieved the target. 20 national
entities did not meet this target, with
Amnesty Iceland, Ireland, and Korea
spending over 70% on flexible areas.
Amnesty USA is spent more than one
million euros on flexible areas of work (24%
flexible areas / 76% priorities).
Out of the overall spend for the Movement,
a quarter went on outcome 1.1 (freedom of
expression and association), whilst 20% and
18% went on outcomes 2.1 (gender, racial,
and intersectional justice) and 2.4 (rights
of refugees, migrants, and people on the
frontline of crises), respectively, with only
7% on outcome 2.3 (climate justice). This
is broadly reflected in the level of impact we
achieved in each of these areas.
Amnesty COCOA and IS Financial System)
70% 80% 90% 100%
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 13
October 5 2022, Rome Campidoglio. Action in solidarity of
women and population of Iran. Activists, students and civil
society act to raise awareness about Mahsa Amini and all the
women of Iran are protesting in defence of their human rights.
© Francesca Maceroni/Amnesty International Italia

14 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

PRIORITY 1 – FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION AND CIVIC SPACE
THE GSF SPECIFIES THAT BY 2030, BENEFITTING FROM EXPANDED CIVIC
SPACE, MORE PEOPLE IN MORE PLACES UNDER MORE CIRCUMSTANCES
– ONLINE AND OFFLINE – ARE SAFELY EXERCISING THEIR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION, UNDER THE SHELTER OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT
PROTECT THEM FROM VIOLENCE, HARASSMENT, AND UNFAIR TREATMENT.
OUTCOME 1.1 – STRENGTHENING
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND
ASSOCIATION
The GSF specifies that states and
corporations, including tech-giant
corporations, will have laws, policies and/or
practices in place that uphold and protect
freedoms of expression and association
online and offline; states’ and corporations’
attempts to bypass their associated human
rights obligations are successfully countered,
while regulations relating to spyware,
artificial intelligence, data protection,
surveillance and access to information are
brought in line with human rights standards.
Worldwide regressions and an adverse
political environment both hampered and
created opportunities for Amnesty’s work in
this area. On one hand the IS and sections
alike reported facing social and political
hostility, on the other hand the obvious
salience of the issues created opportunities
for impact.
The IS and 15 out of 27 national entities
reported progress at least in line with their
expectations. This was a relatively low
figure but reflected the challenging context
that many reported. Most of the successes
under outcome 1.1 were in the areas of
supporting human rights defenders (HRDs)
and regulating technology.
In Amnesty’s work with HRDs, most
successes came through interventions on
individual cases – securing protection,
release from detention, or improved
conditions of detention. This was true
of both IS (especially across East and
Southern Africa and Middle East and North
Africa) and sections (especially in Africa and
Europe). It is also notable that relief funding
under outcome 1.1 benefited 1,438 people,
979 of them in the Americas.
Systemic changes proved much more
difficult to achieve, but there were some
examples. The IS reported that it was able
to influence text by a Council of Europe
Committee of Experts on protecting people
from lawsuits designed to force critics into
submission (known as Strategic Lawsuits
Against Public Participation, or SLAPPs).
There were promising signs that the IS may
be able to influence an expansion of the EU
Temporary Relocation Platform available to
HRDs. Several sections reported positive
outcomes in Africa. Burkina Faso saw the
adoption of a government action plan to
protect HRDs. In Togo, the government
agreed to follow other countries in the
region by enacting a model HRD protection
law, in an example of positive contagion.
The South African president also committed
to reviewing laws protecting HRDs.
There were some limited successes in
preventing regressions, mostly by means
of influencing international bodies or
processes. The IS influenced resolutions at
the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) and
was able to curb some of the worst aspects
of the problematic Delhi Declaration on
technology and counterterrorism.
In the area of tech, Amnesty leveraged
opportunities created by the growing public
and political awareness of tech-related
threats. IS advocacy in the context of a
European Parliament Committee of Inquiry
on Pegasus and equivalent spyware led to
investigations about the legality of Pegasus
in EU countries, with the resulting report
endorsing the idea of a spyware moratorium.
The IS also reported some success in
combating internet shutdowns, social media
blocking, and the criminalisation of “fake
news”. Among sections, Amnesty Kenya
capitalised on widespread public concern
about data protection in the context of
rapid digitalisation of government services
to influence several important steps being
taken by the Independent Office of the Data
Protection Commissioner in response.
However, Amnesty entities themselves were
not exempt from the operational challenges
which outcome 1.1 seeks to address. In
some cases, efforts to build a constructive
relationship between national entities and
governments enabled Amnesty to bring
issues to the attention of relevant officials
(such as in Thailand), but in other contexts
political or social hostility left sections in a
difficult position, with limited influence and
vulnerable to attacks – such as in Morocco
or Hungary. In these situations, a change
of tactics, including playing a behind-the-
scenes role or focusing on regional instead
of national advocacy, partially mitigated the
problem. In the multilateral system, civil
society organisations including Amnesty
continued to experience limited access to
international mechanisms and bodies. It is
likely that Amnesty will need to continue
finding ways to operate effectively in
increasingly challenging circumstances.
At least two lessons emerge from Amnesty’s
work towards achieving outcome 1.1. Firstly,
the biggest determinant of systemic impact
was whether Amnesty could capitalise on
a political window of opportunity, as for
example in Kenya or in its work on Big
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 15
Tech in the EU. Secondly, methodological
flexibility was fruitful, using a range of
approaches such as strategic litigation and
working in coalitions – sometimes in the
background. Only one section identified
external pressure from other governments
as a key factor in bringing about impact. A
key contextual question remains as to how
Amnesty can maximise its influence at a
domestic level in the context of growing
social and political hostility.
OUTCOME 1.2 – SECURING THE RIGHT TO
PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY FOR ALL
The GSF specifies that states will expand and
protect people’s right to peaceful assembly,
including in the digital space, in line with
human rights standards, including through
the legal and policy frameworks that govern
law enforcement practices and accountability,
and protect individuals from arbitrary
detention and unfair trials, and from torture.
In Amnesty’s work on prevention and
accountability around the right to peaceful
assembly, it found receptive audiences
among international bodies and mechanisms
and saw successes achieved through
strategic litigation. Amnesty’s level of
influence over national governments was
less consistent.
The IS and 6 out of 12 national entities
reported making positive progress in
promoting the right to peaceful assembly
for all. This low level of reporting from
national entities (only a total of 12 national
entities reported on this outcome) makes it
difficult to draw definitive conclusions about
Amnesty’s overall success in this area and
the reasons for this. However, out of the
national entities where data is available,
there is a clear overlap between a lot of the
work that national entities and the IS do
on Freedom of Expression and Association
(Outcome 1.1) and on the Right to Peaceful
Assembly (Outcome 1.2).
The IS was able to leverage its good access
to international mechanisms, in some
cases further bolstered by national-level
campaigning. With IS advocacy backed up
by national-level campaigning in Europe,
such as in Spain and in Germany where
the section mobilised the Iranian diaspora,
Amnesty contributed to pressure which
led the HRC to establish a fact-finding
mission on Iran. Other successes include
HRC recommendations on Hong Kong
which were reflective of concerns raised
by Amnesty, a HRC resolution on lethal
autonomous weapons systems, and progress
16 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
in developing international standards around area, so it is not possible to draw strong
law enforcement equipment, with the Group conclusions at this stage. However, the work
of Government Experts’ report ‘Towards on the flagship campaign has benefitted
Torture-Free Trade’ taking up Amnesty’s call Amnesty internally by providing a coherent
for a treaty. approach to campaigning, human rights
education (HRE), and communication on the
Strategic litigation showed real promise. right to protest, and providing a framework
In a case brought by Amnesty and the for entities to develop their own campaigns.
Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, Reported outcomes of the campaign
the New York Supreme Court ordered the include increasing Amnesty’s visibility,
New York Police Department to hand over increasing public engagement and growth,
2,700 documents and emails related to and demonstrating commitment to HRDs
facial recognition surveillance of Black – including Amnesty’s own supporters and
Lives Matter protesters. The International activists – in hostile contexts.
Criminal Court (ICC) included Amnesty’s
findings in its investigations on crimes Overall, most successes under outcome
against humanity in Venezuela. Amnesty 1.2 involved exposing and seeking
made a third-party intervention in the accountability for violations in the context
European Court of Human Rights case on of protests and social unrest. Much of
Switzerland which held that blanket bans this work still has a long way to go, but
on peaceful assemblies are presumptively it was possible to capitalise on moments
disproportionate. The outcome of a of opportunity – sometimes building on
landmark Economic Community of West previous investigatory work, such as in
African States Court of Justice case about Chile or Nigeria. However, the hostile
the killing of peaceful protesters by the political realities and the need to defend
Nigerian military, in which IS and Amnesty against regressions stood in contrast
Nigeria made an intervention, remains to with the proactive ambition laid out in
be seen. this strategic outcome, and served as an
important reality check about the challenge
The potential for impact at the national involved in achieving it.
level was somewhat dependent on levels
of access. Several sections reported that a
lack of access to the government hampered
their prospects for influence, while others
did found access to the government to
be relatively easy. In Chile, the IS used
evidence which it had collected from the
social unrest beginning in October 2019 to
create pressure for criminal investigations
and supported the Attorney General’s
investigation into violations committed by
commanders of the Chilean police force,
while the section contributed to civil society
advocacy which led Chile’s Ministry of
Justice to establish a participatory process
to design a reparations policy for victims.
In Mexico, the section took part in a series
of monthly meetings with the government
of Quintana Roo to address violations
committed by armed forces during protests,
while the government of León, Guanajuato,
accepted a reparations plan proposed
by Amnesty Mexico in collaboration with
victims. Amnesty Thailand reported a
victory with the revocation of the Emergency
Decree imposed in response to rising public
protests. Amnesty Poland and Amnesty
UK focused on domestic advocacy to seek
accountability or prevent regressions.
There were few responses from sections to
the question of whether Amnesty’s flagship
campaign strengthened their work in this
 This 26 October, 2022, dated
image posted on Twitter shows
an unveiled woman standing on
top of a vehicle as thousands
make their way toward Aichi
cemetery in Saqez, Mahsa Amini’s
hometown in the western Iranian
province of Kurdistan, to mark 40
days since her death. © Private

Bernardo Caal Xol, an Indigenous Mayan

environmentalist and prisoner of conscience
in Guatemala, was freed early after being
wrongfully imprisoned for his activism. Here
with with wife Isabel Matzir (left), daughter
Chahim Yaretzi (second from left), 14, and
eldest daughter Nikte (16). Chimaltenango,
Chimaltenango, Guatemala. October 25, 2022.
© James Rodriguez for Amnesty International

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 17
Members of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender)
community take part in the 10th Izmir LGBTI+ Pride March
in Izmir, Turkey, on Sunday, June 26, 2022. (Photo by:
Berkcan Zengin/GocherImagery/Universal Images Group via
Getty Images). © GocherImagery/Universal Images Group

18 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

PRIORITY 2 – EQUALITY AND
NON-DISCRIMINATION
THE GSF SPECIFIES THAT BY 2030, STATES AND CORPORATIONS ARE ADOPTING
AND IMPLEMENTING HUMAN-RIGHTS CONSISTENT LAWS, POLICIES AND
PRACTICES THAT ADDRESS AND PREVENT THE ROOT CAUSES OF INEQUALITY,
EFFECTIVELY COMBAT ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION AND PROVIDE HUMAN
RIGHTS PROTECTIONS TO THOSE AFFECTED BY THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY.
OUTCOME 2.1 – PROMOTING GENDER,
RACIAL, AND INTERSECTIONAL JUSTICE
The GSF specifies that states will have laws,
policies and practices in place that advance
substantive equality and public participation
for those otherwise subjected to multiple,
intersecting forms of discrimination, and
dismantle systems of oppression and promote
justice for those who have been historically
affected non-discriminatory enjoyment of
sexual and reproductive health and rights is
increased; prevention of and protections from
racism, gender-based violence and other hate
crimes is strengthened and human rights-
consistent measures are adopted to promote
public participation of marginalized groups.
Particular attention is given to women
and girls, including women and girls from
racialised communities, indigenous women
and girls, women and girls with disabilities,
and women and girls facing discrimination
based on their sexual orientation or gender
identity.
Outcome 2.1 formed a significantly
large part of Amnesty’s overall portfolio,
accounting for more than a third of
Amnesty’s impact under the second priority
of the GSF, and a fifth overall. Much of the
work was in the area of gender, with a small
increase in the volume of work on racial
justice. The IS and 28 out of 41 national
entities reported impact at least in line with
expectations. The strongest evidence of
impact was in Europe and the Americas.
Most of the racial justice work for the IS
and European sections were concentrated
in the apartheid project on Israel and the
Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). This
accounted for the majority of Amnesty’s
work with inter-governmental organisations,
led by the IS. Amnesty was able to build on
existing momentum generated by others,
with a growing number of organisations,
states, and partners (including the UN
Special Rapporteur on the OPT) recognising
that Israel is committing the crime of
apartheid against Palestinians.
Amnesty also continued its work on the
rights of Muslim ethnic minorities in
Xinjiang (China), on which the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights finally
released her report, which reached strong
conclusions that mirrored Amnesty’s own
findings. The IS also influenced the African
Commission on Human and People’s
Rights to intervene with the governments
of Tanzania and Uganda on the rights of
Indigenous Peoples. Successes reported by
sections include Amnesty Senegal securing
a government pledge to prioritise people
with albinism in its support for persons with
disabilities; Amnesty Australia influencing
the government to announce an increased
budget to reverse the incarceration of First
Nations children; Amnesty Philippines’
community organising and capacity-building
work by combining with pressure from a UN
Special Rapporteur to secure a Certificate
of Ancestral Domain Title to an Indigenous
community.
The work on gender encompassed a range
of issues and methodologies, including
through advocacy, campaigning, litigation,
human rights education, and relief funding.
Most of the outcomes achieved by national
entities were on women’s sexual and
reproductive rights, including significant
steps on women’s right to abortion in
Argentina, Puerto Rico, and Uruguay.
The Let’s Talk About Yes campaign in
Europe continued to deliver results, with
several countries taking positive steps
towards a consent-based definition of
rape – including Belgium, Faroe Islands,
Finland, Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain, and
Switzerland – and services for rape victims
being enhanced in Faroe Islands and
Sweden. In Africa, sections in Ghana and
Sierra Leone developed awareness-raising
programmes on gender-based violence.
Sections in Benin and Burkina Faso were
engaged in advocacy for legislative change,
with the former securing a change to the
country’s Nationality Code.
There were important wins on LGBTQIA+
rights, including a Supreme Court verdict
on gender recognition (in which Amnesty
Korea intervened), and reform of the Trans
Act in Finland – which the section had been
advocating since 2014, but it was able to
capitalise on a 2019 political commitment
by the new government to secure the change.
IS work on gender justice mainly targeted
government actors, with successes
including better protecting the rights of
sex workers in Ireland, strengthening the
UK’s Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict
Initiative, and a new penal policy on
sexual violence in Guinea. Relief funding
and support for individuals was focused
particularly on Yemen.
Across the movement, only 5 national
entities reported work with corporations
under this outcome. Examples of work
include Amnesty Hungary successfully
securing transparency from two companies
on the gender pay gap as part of its
campaign, and Amnesty Korea pushing
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 19
Google to improve reporting for online
sexual violence.
While there was notable impact on gender,
the reporting on racial justice leaves
the impression that Amnesty is building
effectively on previous work but still has
a long way to go. This includes grappling
with the challenge of internal coherence,
implementing Amnesty’s own Anti-Racism
Framework to ensure that the movement
can model the change it wants to see in
the world. Efforts to mainstream work on
gender, racial justice, and intersectionality
have included revising Amnesty’s writing
guidelines and house style manual to ensure
inclusive and neutral language. Over 80%
of national entities have at least begun to
develop or implement anti-racism plans,
but there continues to be an overall lack
of diversity in national boards, operational
leadership, and membership. Many sections
reported limited capacity, expertise, and
resources on anti-racism work. This internal
work will require further attention.
OUTCOME 2.2 – STRENGTHENING RIGHTS
TO HEALTH, HOUSING, AND SOCIAL
SECURITY
The GSF specifies that states will take
concrete measures to uphold the rights
of everyone – without discrimination – to
health, housing, social security as key drivers
of equality – maximising investment of
available resources, removing discriminatory
barriers protecting the rights of people from
deleterious practices of corporate actors and
adopting taxation measures that deliver on
their human rights obligations.
Amnesty’s work on outcome 2.2 was
generally well-aligned with major moments
and political priorities in the world. The
headline was the climax of Amnesty’s
decade-long focus on migrant workers’
rights in Qatar as the men’s football
World Cup took place at the end of 2022.
Amnesty’s impact also included the
culmination of work on global vaccine
inequality, some normative innovation on
social protections, and consolidating a
reputation as a champion of ending forced
evictions. The IS and 20 out of 25 national
entities reported progress that met or
exceeded their expectations. Almost a third
of the work was targeting corporate actors,
with around 80% of the targeted corporate
actors taking action to address at least
some of the issues raised by Amnesty.
Among the most significant impact of the
Qatar project was shaping a narrative.
20 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
Over more than a decade, Amnesty built
a strong case against FIFA for its decision
to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar
without imposing conditions on protecting
labour rights. This contributed to a global
narrative about the responsibility of sporting
bodies to remedy human rights abuses they
failed to prevent and mitigate. Together
with others, Amnesty secured support from
four sponsors and 12 national football
associations to support a call for remedies.
It also put pressure on the International
Labour Organization and other actors to
ensure the newly reformed labour system
would be implemented in Qatar, and on
Qatar’s Supreme Committee Workers Welfare
Standards to help hundreds of workers to
receive their unpaid wages. The challenge
is now to capitalise on the momentum and
bring about systemic changes.
In the area of public health, the TRIPS
waiver agreed in June 2022 was an
important vindication of the work Amnesty
had conducted on vaccine inequality since
the height of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Intellectual property rules have strongly
re-emerged as a global human rights issue
and there has been a growing recognition
from high-income countries at the World
Trade Organization that these intellectual
property rules have been a barrier to
widespread access to Covid-19 vaccines.
In this area, as with migrant workers’ rights
in Qatar, Amnesty’s impact was a kind
of moral leadership, influencing public
discourse. The IS also made written and
oral submissions to the zero draft of a new
pandemic treaty published by the World
Health Organization.
There were also important national-level
victories by sections on public health
issues, including in Ireland, Kenya,
Moldova, and South Africa. Amnesty Kenya
presented the new government with a
scorecard on its predecessor, and the new
president committed to adopting several
recommendations including reforming the
National Health Insurance Fund. This built
on the credibility which the section had
generated working on public health in the
context of Covid-19.
Several sections were able to consolidate
Amnesty’s reputation as a champion of
ending forced evictions, including through
work in the capitals of Nigeria, Portugal,
Slovenia, and Spain. In Nepal, Paraguay,
Senegal, and Sierra Leone, sections
were able to secure access to land for
dispossessed communities. Sections in
Côte d’Ivoire and Sierra Leone held mining
companies to account over protecting the
right to water of local communities.
In response to the economic crisis in Sri
Lanka, the IS developed and clarified policy
on social security, including on universal
social protection and private debt. This
created an important foundation for future
work in these areas.
Overall, Amnesty was able to learn and
to consolidate its reputation on certain
economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR)
issues under this outcome. It gained
valuable experience in how to leverage major
global sporting events and established a
strong global narrative on the right to health.
While forced evictions often demanded a
rapid response, many of the issues under
this outcome are long-term challenges which
Amnesty has begun to build good foundations
to address them in a sustained way.
OUTCOME 2.3 – SECURING CLIMATE
JUSTICE
The GSF specifies that states will phase
out, and require corporations to phase
out, polluting and other environmentally
unsustainable policies and practices that
negatively impact people’s human rights,
adopt human-rights consistent clean energy
policies, and ensure a ‘just climate transition’
that secures racial and gender justice and the
rights of all disadvantaged groups.
Climate justice was the least prioritised
area of work by Amnesty, as it was in 2021.
Work on this theme accounted for only 6%
of outcomes in 2022. Although there has
been some awareness-raising and education
work around climate as a human rights
issue, this is an area in which Amnesty
needs to invest if it is going to make impact
– including in staff capacity and expertise.
The IS’ work on climate justice was
concentrated in one programme and
focused mainly on major UN processes,
where Amnesty has become an established
and credible part of the ecosystem of
organisations and actors working on
climate justice. Amnesty played its part
in securing the historic loss and damage
agreement at COP27 and contributed to the
landmark July 2022 UN General Assembly
resolution recognising the right to a clean,
healthy, and sustainable environment. In
tandem, Amnesty worked to increase the
understanding of its activists, members,
and supporters around the human rights
dimensions of the climate crisis.
 The Climate Justice Camp in Tunisia has
concluded with almost 400 participants
strengthening a movement of solidarity
across more than 65 countries around the
Global South, in the lead-up to the 27th UN
climate summit, in Egypt. Nabeul, Tunisia,
September 2022. © Seddik Boubaker

Amnesty International Germany projection at the

International mRNA Health Conference, calling on
Vaccine manufactures to make vaccine technology
and knowledge available to lower income countries,
Berlin, 9 November 2021. The International
mRNA Health Conference is the premier meeting
destination for industry and academic professionals
to explore the rapidly advancing science and
business of mRNA vaccines and medicines.
© Amnesty International Germany

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 21
Both the IS and sections also secured
successes with corporations through
advocacy and litigation. For example,
Amnesty Sweden successfully pressured
Handelsbanken, a bank, to change its
policies around fossil fuel investments.
Similar successes were achieved by
Amnesty Canada and Amnesty France.
Amnesty Nigeria and the IS continued
to push Shell towards transparency and
improved responses to oil spills in the Niger
Delta. The IS supported a class action
lawsuit against Anglo American South
Africa’s operations in Zambia, which had
caused lead poisoning. Amnesty Norway
pushed Hydro, an aluminium company,
to invest in stakeholder dialogue with a
local community in Brazil. Amnesty South
Africa and Amnesty Indonesia both secured
engagement with affected communities by
mining companies.
In the Americas, the IS focused on
protecting environmental HRDs, including
securing the release of Indigenous Mayan
environmentalist Bernardo Caal Xol in
Guatemala and the Guapinol Eight in
Honduras. There was also a measure of
justice for the 2016 killing of environmental
and Indigenous rights activist Berta Cáceres,
with David Castillo sentenced to prison.
While Amnesty has achieved a small number
of clear successes in this area, there
remains an urgent necessity to strengthen
capacity and expertise, and to invest in
methodologies such as strategic litigation
which appear to be showing promise.
OUTCOME 2.4 – PROTECTING THE RIGHTS
OF REFUGEES,MIGRANTS, AND PEOPLE ON
THE FRONTLINE OF CRISES
The GSF specifies that states will adopt
measures that protect people against
extreme forms of marginalization as a result
of persecution and crises, including those
that flow from or are worsened by the climate
emergency. As part of such protection,
States protect the rights of refugees
and migrants to ensure equal and non-
discriminatory access to rights in countries
of transit and destination and provide safe
and legal routes, including resettlement and
community sponsorship schemes.
The IS and sections addressed crises in
a range of countries, including Ukraine,
Myanmar, Afghanistan, Ethiopia and South
Sudan. They pressed the parties to conflicts
to abide by the principles of international
humanitarian law and demanded that
22 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
governments and international institutions Amnesty provided relief to at least 6,000
take meaningful action to protect civilians, individuals and organisations in the context
including refugees and internally displaced of crisis. Several national entities in the
people. In their work on refugees, the Americas, Europe, and the Pacific engaged
IS and sections had some success with successfully with governments to secure
international bodies and courts. For humanitarian protection or admission.
example, Canada Anglophone worked with For example, the German government
partners on a legal intervention with the established an admission programme for
Ontario Superior Court of Justice which Afghans at risk, advocated by Amnesty
dismissed Canada’s denial of essential Germany among others, and the section
healthcare to a woman with irregular secured protection for at least 500 Afghan
migration status. HRDs whom the IS helped to identify.
With regard to Ukraine, in particular, Amnesty’s Much of the IS work under outcome
efforts helped spur action by a number 2.4 focused on securing justice and
of accountability mechanisms. In other accountability in countries experiencing
contexts, however, international efforts have crisis and war crimes, including Afghanistan,
often remained slow and half-hearted, and the Central African Republic (CAR), DRC,
countries’ treatment of non-Ukrainian refugees Ethiopia, Libya, Myanmar, Niger, South
continue to be unacceptable. Pointing out this Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine. IS advocacy
glaring double standard was an element of contributed to securing a mandate extension
Amnesty’s work on crisis in 2022. for the UN fact-finding mission on Libya,
and a first suspect was brought before the
Amnesty saw substantial success with Special Criminal Court on CAR. The IS
governments (the majority of sections’ work, deployed innovative approaches to research
almost half of IS’ work). Some of this impact that are described under chapter 5.3.
involved preventing or calling out problematic
national policies and plans, such as securing There was little work targeting corporations
an end to immigration detention in three under outcome 2.4, albeit with the notable
provinces of Canada, preventing deportations success of causing Puma Energy to divest
under Denmark’s Rwanda Asylum Plan, and from Myanmar where it had been supplying
preventing certain problematic amendments aviation fuel to the military.
to New Zealand’s National Security
Framework. Tactically, each of these was An external and internal controversy
secured by taking advantage of a political erupted on 4th August 2022 when Amnesty
moment of opportunity. published an extended press release on
violations by Ukrainian forces of international
In other cases, the work under this outcome humanitarian law. In the context of the
was about fulfilling rights for migrants and backlash, Amnesty was criticised for
asylum seekers, such as in Peru where the reporting on violations carried out by
IS and Amnesty Peru secured humanitarian Ukrainian forces because these forces were
migratory status for over 3,000 Venezuelan also the victims in a war of aggression, of
minors, access to vaccinations for refugees playing directly into Russian propaganda, and
and asylum seekers, and extended deadlines of undermining the Ukrainian war effort and
for regularisation processes. Sections in civil society. Amnesty suffered reputational,
Mali and Benin secured protections for financial and membership loss in some
internally displaced persons. countries, largely in the Global North.
INDIVIDUALS AT RISK (IAR) SUPPORTED BY AMNESTY WHOSE SITUATION IMPROVED AS A RESULT
OF AMNESTY’S INTERVENTIONS
2022 saw a decrease in the number of Urgent Actions (UA) but other IAR work saw increase pick up, for
example we had a 14% increase on actions for Write for Rights compared with 2021. The net result was
positive impact for 60 individuals and one organisation, but this was fewer than half the individuals in
2021, when several successes were linked to groups and organisational UAs.
Amnesty spent £2.7m on relief funding via a streamlined process, supporting around 7,500 people with
immediate needs – including legal expenses, medical aid, and relocation costs – which for around a
third of recipients allowed them to continue their human rights work. This was a significant increase on
the previous year (£1.5m), mainly due to the crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine.
5.2 WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED IN OUR
FLEXIBLE AREAS OF WORK?
Under the Global Strategic Priorities,
Amnesty entities may work on human rights
issues additional to those articulated in the
two global priorities, including in response
to pressing local human rights concerns.
There was a strong focus on long-term work
in the areas of justice and accountability as
well as the abolition of the death penalty.
IS advocacy contributed to remarkable
progress against the use of the death
penalty in 2022. Four countries –
Kazakhstan, Papua New Guinea, Sierra
Leone, and the Central African Republic –
abolished the death penalty for all crimes.
While two additional countries – Equatorial
Guinea and Zambia – abolished the death
penalty for ordinary crimes only, Amnesty
International considered these positive
actions partial abolitions due to the death
penalty remaining in the military laws of the
Civilians are seen boarding westbound
trains during the mandatory evacuation
from fighting in Donbas, Pokrovsk, Ukraine
on 7 August, 2022. © Photo by Wolfgang
Schwan/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
two countries. The UN General Assembly
also adopted a ninth resolution on a
moratorium on the use of the death penalty
in December.
Other positive steps to which the IS
contributed included the UN Security
Council voting to renew the arms
embargo on South Sudan, and the UN’s
establishment or renewal of human rights
mandates on Afghanistan, Eritrea, Ethiopia,
Myanmar, Nicaragua, South Sudan, and
Venezuela.
In addition to the IS, 28 national entities
reported engagement in flexible areas
of work. 12 national entities reported
that their progress met or exceeded their
expectations, with examples of success
including progress against the death
penalty in Malaysia and a prime ministerial
commitment for improved prisons in the
Faroe Islands. 11 national entities indicated
that they achieved less than expected.
5.3 HOW HAVE WE ACHIEVED IT?
STRENGTHENING AMNESTY’S CORE
CAPABILITES
Amnesty’s overall theory of change is that
by publicising the findings of systematic
and impartial research into the facts of
individual cases and broader patterns of
human rights abuse, the organisation will be
able to equip its members, supporters, staff,
volunteers, and activists to exert public
pressure on governments, corporate actors,
and others to take the human rights action
needed to prevent abuses and advance the
enjoyment of all human rights for all. Within
the period of the GSF, Amnesty intends to
strengthen the capabilities on which this
theory of change depends.
ENHANCING HUMAN RIGHTS RESEARCH
The ambition is to improve research
methodologies and formats for maximum
impact. Overall, the IS and 15 out of 20
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 23
 Consent demonstration,
Let’s talk about yes,
Museumplein Amsterdam.
© Pierre Crom

Police Officers detain a protestor

during a demonstration against
the Russian military operation in
Ukraine. (Photo by Stringer/SOPA
Images/LightRocket via Getty
Images) © 2022 SOPA Images

24 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT

national entities2 have enhanced research
based on innovation, capacity, and expertise.
Most of the 28 national entities producing
research were concentrated in Europe.3
Amnesty carried out research on several
new thematic areas and adopted innovative
approaches, including the creation of a
mathematical model of the bombed regional
drama theatre in Mariupol (Ukraine) and
broadcast of 3D imagery of destroyed
apartment buildings in Borodyanka
(Ukraine), the use of open-source materials
and evidence in a report on aviation fuel
supply chains in Myanmar, or the use of
forensic methodology to identify spyware
cases in the report on an activist in
Western Sahara. Similarly, a report based
on 3D reconstruction models in Kharkiv
(Ukraine) led the ICC Prosecutor to visit the
documented locations twice and received
a mention from the EU at the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Permanent Council.
Most of the research done by the Movement
was on Rights of Refugees and Migrants,
Gender, Racial, and Intersectional Justice,
and Freedom of Expression and Association.
The IS conducted workshops for research
staff across the IS to share experiences,
challenges, and good practice. The lack
of a centralised system, however, made
it difficult for the IS to track and assess
the quality of all research outputs. There
were research gaps, including on countries
where there is no Amnesty entity nor IS
team covering it, and only well-resourced
IS teams were able to adopt technologically
advanced methodologies.
DELIVERING COMPELLING ADVOCACY
The objective is to improve access to the
right advocacy targets and secure action in
response to Amnesty’s initiatives. Outcomes
are set out in section 5.1. The IS had good
access to international bodies (85% of
targets), less to national governments (65%,
with variable levels of coordination between
IS and national entities as one determining
factor). The IS did not often target local
authorities, but the level of access was high
(82%). Among national entities, there was a
distinction between those able to generate
constructive engagement with governments
(36 out of 47,4 or 77%) and those operating
in an environment of hostility from the
national government. Access to local
government5 was similarly mixed though in
general, they were easier to access than the
national government.
In terms of increasing the range of targets,
one of the ambitions is to strengthen
advocacy with corporate actors. This
remained challenging. The IS reported
having qualified access to 76% of its
corporate targets, while 24 national
entities reported some engagement with
corporate actors but with limited capacity
and expertise to support this. The IS made
efforts to strengthen capacity for corporate
research and advocacy, but the uptake of
capacity building offers was limited.
There is also a need to develop a consistent
and global approach to advocacy on China.
Of 775 outcomes reported by the IS and
national entities, only eight mentioned
China. The China Abroad project continued
to provide an important resource to Amnesty
entities, but there may be more work
required to grapple with China’s growing
influence and proactive agenda within the
multilateral system, and the systemic threat
that it poses to human rights protection
around the world.
MOBILISING HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION
The rationale is to invest in the foundations
for rights-respecting societies. More than
half of the 141 HRE projects were in Europe
due to the number of entities in the region,
with most focusing on outcomes 2.1 and
1.1. While the number of followers (defined
as those reached by an HRE project but
have not provided contact details) declined
from 4.8m in 2021 to 3.4m in 2022,
supporter (who are more engaged than
followers and have taken at least one action)
numbers grew from 595k to 775k.
STRENGTHENING AMNESTY’S
PEOPLE-POWERED MOVEMENT
The ambition is to shift emphasis towards
activists and supporters, improve diversity,
and increase reach and engagement. The
IS provided some support and training for
Amnesty entities in this regard. 40 out of
64 national entities6 (63%) reported having
engaged activists in training, planning, or
implementation of campaigns. The most
difficult aspect of this, reported by sections
in several regions, was to trust activists to
lead human rights actions autonomously –
which suggests a need for honest internal
conversations about the challenging
realities of how Amnesty could realise
its ambition to becoming a more
people-powered movement.
The IS reported increased levels of
reach (13.4% from 220m to 249m) and
engagement (17.1% from 15m to 18m).
International membership grew from
3.2m in 2021 to 4.0m in 2022, with
improved engagement through major
global campaigns. The IS has spent 22%
of its budget on campaigning (14%) and
communications (8%) in 2022. Only 23
out of 62 national entities which provided
information showed an increase improved
engagement through their communications
work, most of them in Africa and some
in Europe.
ENHANCING AMNESTY’S WORK WITH
PARTNERS
The ambition is to find more organic
ways of working with people-powered
movements, including through co-creation,
collaboration, and sharing power and
resources – with a particular focus on
youth movements. In 2022, most partners
reported by national entities were other
NGOs; specific grassroots and people-
powered movements accounted for only
25%. There was an almost even split
between partners in the Global North and
Global South; however, there were very few
examples of partnerships spanning the two.

2 Out of 68 national entities, 28 produced at least one research output, 33 did not produce any research outputs, and 7 did not provide any research data in 2022. Out of
the 28 that produced research outputs, only 20 gave complete information for the calculation.
3 Amnesty produced 219 research documents publicly available in 2022, with 170 of them (78%) led by the IS.

4 Out of 68 national entities, 54 provided data on their advocacy targets (government actors) in 2022. Out of these 54, 47 provided complete information for the
calculation. 14 national entities did not provide data on their advocacy targets (government actors) in 2022.
5 Local government in contrast to national (central or federal) government.

6 Out of 68 national entities, four did not provide data on activist engagement in 2022

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 25
INFLUENCING THE CONTENT OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW
There were generally positive results
influencing norm-setting processes in
relevant international forums and through
strategic litigation across all strategic
outcome areas (summarised in section 5.1),
with Amnesty often working in partnership
with others. Key internal policies,
including on civil disobedience, whistle-
blowers, and less lethal weapons in law
enforcement, were also developed in 2022,
providing foundations for further normative
development in these areas.
5.4 ORGANISATIONAL HEALTH
This assessment is based on two indicators.
The overall picture is that good practice
exists within the organization, but it is
unevenly distributed.
AMNESTY ENTITIES ADOPTING AND
IMPLEMENTING INTERNAL POLICIES,
GUIDELINES, AND OBJECTIVES
This refers to: 1) Information & Technology
(I&T) infrastructure and capabilities that
are fit for purpose; 2) progress towards
Amnesty’s agreed net zero carbon goals;
3) functioning, healthy governance; 4)
identification and mitigation of organisational
risk exposure to avoid significant negative
impact on Amnesty; 5) quality reporting on
progress against the GSF.
Only the IS and 15 out of 64 national
entities7 (25%) reported satisfactory I&T
capabilities, many of them struggling
with cyber-security. In terms of risk
management, there is no comprehensive
mechanism yet to collect and validate
entities’ self-assessments (risk registers),
which hinders Amnesty’s ability to develop
a systemic and movement-wide approach to
common risks such as a hostile operating
environment. Work is under way to address
this as part of the wider assessment of
alignment to the Core Standards.
Data from 2022 will be used as a
benchmark to track Amnesty’s ambition
to reach net zero carbon. The IS was only
able to provide data for the London office,
showing a reduction in gas usage of 5%,
in electricity of 14%, and in water of 46%
7 Out of 68 national entities, four did not provide I&T data in 2022
8 Out of 68 national entities, three did not provide anti-racism and wellbeing data in 2022
9 Out of 68 national entities, three did not provide governance data in 2022
26 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
against 2019 figures. 2022 saw a significant
increase in travel across the IS against
2021 figures as the pandemic receded,
but still 70% lower than in 2019, and with
a higher proportion of rail travel. 60/68
national entities provided data, although
it was not directly comparable across
countries. However, the IS has engaged a
consultancy firm to assist with standardising
data collection and analysis, with a view to
providing more meaningful data in 2023.
54% of Amnesty entities have reported
progresses in implementing anti-racism and
in delivering wellbeing to all.
This includes: 1) improvements (practices,
work environment, and representation) to
become anti-racist, non-discriminatory
organisations, 2) improvements in wellbeing
for staff, boards and volunteers.
The IS and 36 national entities8 (54%)
indicated that they made progress against
both anti-racism work and wellbeing (we do
not have 2022 data on feminist leadership
as the work on it has not started yet in
many entities). The IS and 48 out of 65
national entities (74%) reported progress on
anti-racism, including both attitudinal and
structural changes, but less progress around
BIPOC employee representation (symbolic
changes). The IS and 42 out of 65 national
entities (65%) met most of the wellbeing
criteria, with most progress on having
wellbeing plans, implementing wellbeing
surveys, ensuring staff access to healthcare
and psychological support, providing flexible
working options, and offering sick leave.
However, there is a need for more focus on
supporting the mental health of staff.
5.5 GOVERNANCE AND LEADERSHIP
The IS and 48 out of 65 national entities9
(74%) reported improvements in diversity,
range of expertise, and engagement with the
movement. The dominant pending challenges
were to provide regular training and
development opportunities for boards, and to
carry out evaluations of their performance.
The information on Global Governance
below intends to fulfil accountability
requirements relating to the activities of the
international committees to the movement:
At the global level, our movement is led by
the elected IB, its board committees, and
movement-at-large committees created
through our Statute. Their main activities
since the 2022 Global Assembly (GA) are
described below.
INTERNATIONAL BOARD
The officers of IB are the Chair, Dr Anjhula
Mya Singh Bais; the Vice Chair, Peter Fa’afiu
and Treasurer, Aniket Shah. Two new board
members were elected at the GA 2022. One
co-opted member resigned; a recruitment
process to fill the vacancy is underway. The
Board has recently reviewed and agreed that
the four pillars that underpin its priorities
(strategy, governance, culture, and financial
sustainability, equity & growth) should
remain. Further detailed reporting on the
Board’s priorities and activities can be
found here.
The Board has continued to focus on its
fiduciary and governance responsibilities,
managing its dual role of holding to account
both the International Secretariat (through
the Secretary General) and the Movement
(through Article 34).
The Board is mandated to report on the
implementation of global governance
decisions. In 2022, the GA agreed for the
Board to make recommendations on whether
GA decisions from 2017 onwards could
be closed if they had been superseded
strategically, are no longer relevant or are
unable to be actioned. The GA will have
the opportunity to interrogate the Board’s
recommendations during the accountability
session, before voting on whether it agrees
with the update and proposals to close any
decision. Reporting on the implementation
of GA meeting decisions can be found here.
COMMITTEES
BOARD PAYMENTS COMMITTEE (BPC)
In 2022 the GA agreed to remunerate
the IB and instructed that the BPC be
disestablished. The Finance and Audit
Committee approved the policy for
remuneration in February 2023. The BPC
will be formally disestablished following the
conclusion of an outstanding claim.
A woman reacts as she stands in front of a house burning after being shelled in
the city of Irpin, outside Kyiv, on March 4, 2022. - More than 1.2 million people
have fled Ukraine into neighbouring countries since Russia launched its full-scale
invasion on February 24, United Nations figures showed on March 4, 2022.
© Photo by Aris Messinis / AFP) (Photo by ARIS MESSINIS/AFP via Getty Images

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 27
INTERNATIONAL NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE
(INC)
The role of the INC is to find and assess
qualified candidates to serve on the IB
and Amnesty’s internationally elected
committees. The elected members of the
INC are Marjorie Vázquez (Chair), Jeff
Bachman, Manu Gaspar, Pasang Sherpa,
Larissa Vanderhoudelingen. Nicole Bieske
and Kav Patel are co-opted members. The
IB is represented in a non-voting capacity
by Fabiola Arce.
The INC announces all open positions in a
‘Call for People’, shared with the movement
in February. Elections will be held on 14-
21 July with results announced at the GA
meeting. The INC’s Gaps Analysis paper
outlines the methodology used to assess
and compare candidates. Competency
frameworks define the skills, knowledge,
and characteristics required. They enable
the INC to make a qualified and unbiased
assessment of each candidate. To attract
and find the best talent the INC has
approached its work in different ways
including holding Open House webinars and
targeted external recruitment strategies.
More information about its work can be
found here.
28 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
MEMBERSHIP REVIEW COMMITTEE (MRC)
The MRC is an ad hoc committee
responsible for conducting the process
to review IB decisions on membership
status under Article 34 of the Statute. The
members are Ian Gibson (MRC Coordinator),
Karine Gentelet and Raffaele Piccolo, The
MRC meets only when needed and until
its work is complete; there has been no
requirement to meet since the procedures
were introduced in 2018.
GLOBAL ASSEMBLY PREPARATORY
COMMITTEE (PREPCOM)
The GA PrepCom comprises: Lana
Verran (Acting Chair), Rosslyn Noonan
(Vice Chair), Eva Burger, Malachi Dowru
(co-opted member), Christoph Alberts
(IB representative) and Kyle Ward (CLT
representative). Following the last few years
and uncertainties around the pandemic,
PrepCom was keen to announce that this
year’s meeting will be in-person in Belgium,
making it the first in-person GA since 2019.
As a result of GA Decision 2022/03, this
year’s GA will have no motions but will
instead be focused on taking the movement
on a journey to Connect, Contribute and
Build Solidarity. This year’s meeting will
allow the movement to propose discussion
workshops and will have two capacity building
topics centred on conflict management and
strengthening trust in the movement.
FINANCE AND GROWTH
This section covers the overall distribution
of resources, financial stability in free
reserves, and growth in terms of income
and supporters. Among national entities,
resources remain heavily skewed towards
large fundraising sections in the Global
North. 13 national entities accounted for
60% of expenditure among sections.
8% GROWTH IN GROSS INCOME
Based on the information available from all
entities, the confirmed 2022 total gross income
is €384m (total net fundraising income is
€253m), out of this gross income €18m is
the IS and €366m are national entities. The
€384m gross income is an increase of 8% on
2021 gross fundraising income.
Screengrabs from Protect the Protest campaign video ©
Amnesty Internaational/Pexels
 Activists of Youth Congress protest against the
alleged surveillance operation using the Israeli-built
Pegasus spyware government, burns effigy of
Narendra Modi in Kolkata, India, 02 February, 2022.
© Indranil Aditya/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Net fundraising income (gross income less

fundraising expenditure) was €253m in
2022 and €245m in 2021. The increase
was 3.3%, considerably less than global
inflation (8.8%).

Of the available data, 70% of the total

income is from ten sections (Amnesty
USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Germany,
Switzerland, Australia, Norway, Sweden,
and Spain).

Gross income includes individual

giving (both regular and non-regular),
legacies, Trusts and Foundations, Major
Donations, both restricted and unrestricted
income, and multi-lateral funding. Other
income sources are minor (for example
merchandise, interest and investment
income, rental income, or other revenue
sources) and do not change the overall
fundraising growth.
49% OF AMNESTY ENTITIES REPORTING
INCREASED FREE AVAILABLE RESERVES
AND 58% OF ENTITIES REPORTING
FREE RESERVES EQUIVALENT TO OVER 3
MONTHS’ WORTH OF EXPENDITURE
Overall, 33 out of 68 national entities
and the IS saw an increase in reserves
between 2021 and 2022, which indicates
Amnesty is seeing good progress in financial
sustainability to support our strategic plan.
In 2022, 69% of self-sufficient national
entities and the IS (22 out 32), and 49% of
RAM-funded national entities (18 out of 37)
reported free reserves equivalent to over 3
months of expenditure.
Global free reserves across Amnesty were
€217M, above the upper target of €93m
following continued strong fundraising
performance and the impact of Covid-19
on expenditure plans. The current reserves
position provides operational stability and
a strong platform for bold investment in
achieving the human rights outcomes set
out in the GSF. However, it is important to
note that most reserves are held in the IS
and the largest fundraising sections, while
RAM-funded sections do not have the same data-led approach. The 4th August 2022
access or ability to make investment choices. press release on Ukraine led directly to a
Following a 2021 GA decision there is a reduction of support in several European
project looking into the equitable distribution sections.
of resources among Amnesty entities.
37 entities did not provide active supporter
For the IS, 2021 free reserves increased data. The available data on supporters
in 2022 to £62.9m from £49.5m in showed that 7.3m people globally took
2021. Year-end reserves for the IS in action in 2022, a notable increase from
2022 is equivalent to 7 months’ worth of 2021 (6,055,594). 18 out of 33 entities
expenditure. (55%) reported an increase in supporter
numbers while 15 out of 33 (45%) reported
18% OF AMNESTY ENTITIES REPORT AN a decrease. Encouragingly, the Impact
INCREASE IN AUDIENCE AND AN INCREASE Through Growth Project continued to yield
IN DIVERSE AUDIENCE ENGAGED WITH an increasing number of active supporters in
AMNESTY CAMPAIGNS, ACTIONS, SOCIAL the Global South. Growing multilingualism
MEDIA AND HRE and first steps in accessibility initiatives are
enabling Amnesty to reach new audiences.
Only the IS and 8 out of 68 national
entities10 (13%) reported an increase in
audience engagement, including through
HRE, online content, or equipping activists
with new skills. 27 out of 58 entities
reporting on HRE saw an increase in the
total numbers engaged, while 31 out of 58
entities, including the IS, reported either a
decrease or no change. In terms of online
content, 24 out of 63 (38%) of national
entities reported growth. The IS showed a
strong improvement against 2021, with a
13% rise in reach and a 17% rise in online
engagement, based on an increasingly

10 Out of 68 national entities, 57 provided complete information on audience reached with Amnesty campaigns/actions, social media, and HRE. Ten did not provide
complete information, and one did not provide any information in 2022.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 29
CONCLUSIONS
IN A HOSTILE AND COMPLEX GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT, BOTH
THE RELEVANCE OF AMNESTY’S GSF AND THE OPERATIONAL
CHALLENGES FOR IMPLEMENTING IT ARE CLEAR. THERE IS A
WIDESPREAD GLOBAL SENSE OF IMMOVABLE CRISIS. HOWEVER,
THIS IS NOT ONLY AN OBSTACLE BUT AN INVITATION FOR BOLD
IDEAS AND POSITIVE ACTION.
No adjustments to the content of the GSF
are recommended at this point. The priorities
and outcome areas respond well to prevailing
human rights challenges in the world, and
Amnesty has been able to make progress
across all of them. However, there is a need
for shifts of emphasis and investment in the
way Amnesty conducts its work.
This report offers five main conclusions in
this regard.
First, Amnesty must increasingly find a
way of operating in a context of social and
political hostility. This has already been the
experience of many national entities (and IS
regional offices) and this should be treated
as a new normal rather than an aberration.
Amnesty has to carefully consider its
operating model – including the acceptable
level of risk and appropriate mitigations –
amidst perpetual crisis and hostility.
Second, the impact stories of 2022 show
the value of thinking long-term – but at the
same time seizing the political moment
when it comes. Patience and timeliness have
proven crucial to achieving impact. Long term
attention to particular themes has eventually
yielded fruit, while real-time gathering
of information has enabled meaningful
contributions to accountability processes
months or years later. It is particularly
noteworthy that current economic challenges
in the world have created a context which
may be conducive to ambitious messaging
on ESCR, Amnesty could capitalise on. It is
also important – particularly in relation to
addressing long-term, structural challenges –
to conceptualise impact not as achieving one
large goal but making incremental progress
(possibly in a non-linear way) over a
long period.
30 2022 IMPACT AND PROGRESS REPORT
Third, Amnesty should invest in a flexible
toolkit so that it can apply a range of
different methodologies in the pursuit of
impact and strengthen core capabilities
such as research accordingly. Amnesty
enjoys a strong position to engage with
multilateral institutions, particularly but
not exclusively through the IS. Influence
over national governments is highly variable
depending on context, but local authorities
have regularly shown themselves to be
responsive. In addition to these traditional
areas of strength, Amnesty has begun to see
increasingly strong results from strategic
litigation, a methodology which benefits
from Amnesty’s long-term investment in
setting normative and legal standards. This
stands out as an area requiring a decision on
possible further investment.
Alongside the work in the realm of law
and policy, Amnesty should strengthen
its capability to enhance its work through
partners/ people-powered movements and
vice versa. There is justifiable ambivalence
among entities about handing over power to
activists, and the extent to which Amnesty is
able to act as a people-powered movement
is also open to question. Fresh and bold
thinking may be required in this area,
including whether and how Amnesty is able
to serve as a gateway for people-powered
movements to access formal mechanisms of
power. Amnesty also has strong capabilities
to invest in building popular support for
human rights, including through HRE.
Fourth, Amnesty might want to consider
a systematic and global approach to
adapting to power shifts in the world.
Work targeting corporations is widely
recognised across Amnesty as important,
but there is a lack of capacity and expertise
across all Amnesty entities in this regard.
There is also insufficient attention paid to
China and the systemic threat which it poses
to human rights – including the international
human rights system itself. Amnesty should
consider investing in developing a global
strategy on China.
Fifth, while Amnesty is currently in a strong
position to advance its work, there are
several ways in which it could optimise this
through various internal shifts. Amnesty’s
financial position is strong, including high
levels of reserves, but there is a need to
invest in further diversification of income
sources. There is also an important question
about whether the resources are held in
the right places to maximise Amnesty’s
impact during this strategic period. Amnesty
continues to deliver strong research, but
there is a need for a more systematised
approach to ensure quality and integration
between research and other methodologies.
The burgeoning work on anti-racism needs to
be anchored in strong internal commitments
to this agenda, which have only just begun to
show progress. A more integrated approach
between the IS and national entities on
becoming an anti-racist organisation would
be desirable, focusing on diversity and
representation, and structural changes
around organisational policies and practices.
Finally, Amnesty should take a systematic
approach to building skills in particular
areas, including in addressing corporate
advocacy and climate justice.
These are all complex challenges, and they
do not capture everything which emerges
from the review. However, there is reason
to be optimistic that Amnesty can make
meaningful progress on each of them
during the remaining seven years of this
strategic period.
 AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
IS A GLOBAL MOVEMENT
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS.
WHEN INJUSTICE HAPPENS
TO ONE PERSON, IT MATTERS
TO US ALL.

CONTACT US JOIN THE CONVERSATION

info@amnesty.org www.facebook.com/AmnestyGlobal

+44 (0)20 7413 5500 @AmnestyOnline

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 31
Amnesty International is a Our vision is for every We are independent of
global movement of more person to enjoy all the rights any government, political
than 7 million people who enshrined in the Universal ideology, economic interest
campaign for a world Declaration of Human Rights or religion and are funded
where human rights and other international mainly by our membership
are enjoyed by all. human rights standards. and public donations.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL e: contactus@amnesty.org Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton

INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIAT t: +44-20-74135500 Street, London, WC1X 0DW,
f: +44-20-79561157 United Kingdom

www.amnesty.org Index: ORG 10/6718/2023, English, May 2023