Restore Status, End Discrimination Against Shias with Iranian Heritage 

(Beirut, June 11, 2026) –The Bahraini government on April 27, 2026 revoked the nationality of 69 citizens, including infants. All were Shia Muslims ofIranian heritage, the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD) and Human Rights Watch said today. BIRD’s research found that at least 46people, more than half of them children, were rendered stateless.   

“Bahraini authorities have long discriminated against the country’s Shia majority population,” said Niku Jafarnia, Bahrain and Yemen researcher at Human Rights Watch. “But stripping people of nationality, claiming that they are citizens of a foreign country where most of them have no legal ties is an extreme escalation.”   

BIRD and Human Rights Watch spoke to nine people affected and two relatives of others affected. Researchers also reviewed the Bahraini government’s related statements and decisions, as well as documents supporting the nationality of some of those affected.  

Of those affected, 33 were children, including 10 toddlers, with the youngest only 19 days old, based on BIRD analysis, underscoring the arbitrary and collective nature of the measure. The majority of Bahrainis are Shia, who have long been oppressed by the Bahraini government.  

The Interior Ministry stated that the people stripped of citizenship are “of non-Bahraini origin.” While all are of Iranian descent, based on BIRD’s analysis – a background shared by up to 14 percent of Bahrain’s population – many of those interviewed said that their families had been in Bahrain for several generations and did not have Iranian nationality. Supporting documents reviewed showed that families had held Bahraini nationality for several generations, one of them for over a century.  

One woman, whose husband and 9-month-old baby had been stripped of citizenship and left stateless, said of her husband: “Four generations [of his family] were born in Bahrain, all of them were born in Bahrain, he is Bahraini by birth. My kid, his father, grandfather, and their great grandfather are Bahrainis.” All of those interviewed said that the authorities had changed their nationality to Iranian. 

On April 28, those stripped of nationality were ordered to go to the Passport and Immigration Authority, where they said they were forced to turn in their passports, IDs, and related papers.   

  One man, who said he was there from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., described the scene: “They were looking at us as if we were their enemies… we waited hours without water, without food.”  

He and others were forced to sign documents stating that their nationalities had been revoked, and that they would leave the country by an unspecified date. He was forced to sign these forms on behalf of his entire family, including other adults. The man added that Passport and Immigration police beat a man who refused to sign to compel his signature.  

Bahraini authorities then began deporting some of them, attempting to send them to Iran but they did not succeed. Other people were sent to Turkey, but Turkish authorities forced them to return to Bahrain. Thereafter, people interviewed said, Bahraini authorities detained them in a hotel and later sent some of them to Oman. 

One man said the Bahraini authorities “treat[ed] us like mafia, like criminals, just wanting to throw us out.” One official directly threatened him with imprisonment, stating “if you come back to Bahrain… you will not see the light of day again.” 

Multiple families with roots in Bahrain reaching back at least two generations have been torn apart. One woman sad: “Now [our] family is separated…[my sister] was crying because she left her child in Bahrain…  three weeks [earlier], we were all gathering at my family house… [Now], we are divided into four countries by force.”   

The government has justified its action by citing counterterrorism efforts and regional tensions amid the US-Israel/Iran conflict. The Interior Ministrystated that officials were acting on the basis of national security, claiming that the targeted individuals “expressed sympathy for, and glorified, Iran’s sinful hostile acts, or engaged in espionage with foreign parties.”  

According to BIRD’s research, five of those stripped of their citizenship were prosecuted in proceedings that reportedly failed to meet international fair trial standards. One defendant was fined and sentenced to five years in prison solely for peaceful social media posts. Two others were sentenced to life imprisonment on espionage-related charges, while two received 10-year prison sentences for allegedly “filming” and “glorifying” the Iranian attacks. The defendants were reportedly denied access to legal counsel prior to appearing before the court, a longstanding concern in Bahrain’s prosecution of political and national security cases. 

 The citizenship revocation comes on the heels of Bahraini authorities’ sweeping arrests of people who were exercising their right to peaceful expression amid the conflict. In some cases, Bahraini authorities have sought the death penalty, accusing the defendants of espionage. 

The Bahraini government has discriminated against its Shia population for years, including by  targeting Shia clerics and arresting and prosecuting human rights defenders of Shia backgrounds.  

In 2019, Bahrain amended its citizenship law to allow officials to revoke citizenship based on a cabinet decision alone, removing the need for a royal decree. The changes also ended a requirement to publish the names and ID numbers of those affected, reducing transparency and making it harder to identify children stripped of citizenship. 

In 2024, the Bahraini government issued a royal decree, amending the citizenship law by removing judicial oversight over citizenship revocations and classifying such decisions as sovereign acts, meaning there is no way to challenge revocation of citizenship.  

Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, widely regarded as reflecting customary international law, states that everyone has the right to a nationality and that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality. Article 13 of the Universal Declaration and article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Bahrain has ratified, guarantee the right to enter one’s own country. In 1999, the Human Rights Committee, which interprets the covenant, stated that, “’The scope of ‘his own country’ is broader than the concept ‘country of his nationality,’” and that it would apply to people who have been stripped of their nationality in violation of international law. 

 A United Nations report from 2013 states that, “International law… obliges States to provide for an opportunity for the meaningful review of nationality decisions, including on substantive issues.” The report states that if the citizenship of a national is revoked, “lodging an appeal should suspend the effects of the decision, such that the individual continues to enjoy nationality – and related rights – until such time as the appeal has been settled.” 

 Article 29 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which Bahrain has ratified, states that, “Every person has the right to a nationality, and no citizen shall be deprived of his nationality without a legally valid reason.” 

 “Close scrutiny of those accused of “threatening national security” reveals that nearly half of them are children, including 10 toddlers who are now stateless,” said Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, advocacy director at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy. “Many families who have lived in Bahrain for generations have been forced to leave their homes and, in some cases, leave their children behind. Bahrain’s rulers have been emboldened to commit these egregious violations of international law and get away with destroying the future of innocent children because of the silence of their backers in London and Washington. They must be held accountable.” 

Their votes angered the King and prompted 37 of their colleagues in Parliament, including the Speaker of Parliament, to sign a petition calling for their removal.

During a parliamentary debate on 28 April, the MPs opposed a royal decree issued in 2024 that removed judicial oversight from all matters related to citizenship, classifying them as sovereign issues, and eliminated the possibility of legal challenge or appeal against citizenship revocations. The debate resulted in the approval of the 2024 royal decree, with 33 votes in favour, three against, three absent, and the Speaker not voting. The three who voted against the decree have since faced serious threats from the King, culminating today in the vote to strip them of their Parliamentary seats.

The vote came just one day after the authorities stripped 69 individuals of their citizenship on national security grounds for the government’s claims that they held “sympathy for and glorifying Iran’s sinful, hostile acts”. The mass revocation extended to the targeted individuals’ families and children, including infants. All individuals stripped of nationality in the revocation are Shia Muslims of Iranian heritage.

Two of the three MPs who later voted against the decree spoke in Parliament.

In a session published on the Parliament YouTube channel, Abdulnabi Salman emphasized the necessity of oversight in a just government, stating that “Always, the existence of oversight over any of the authorities would achieve justice and a sense of fairness and trust.” He also spoke out against collective punishments, adding, “It is true that whoever harms this country must be punished, but punishments must not be collective, God forbid, or be taken as reactions, because the matter relates to the fate, future, and trust of the people in the system and the judiciary.”

Mamdooh Al Saleh argued against the extension of the punishment to family members and stated: “…but what is the fault of the children and the grandchildren? They may have no guilt; they did not participate in their father’s crime or mistake.”

Three days after the debate, and following a meeting with UAE leaders, Bahrain’s King issued remarks to the press accusing the MPs of siding with “traitors” and warning that they must apologise to “the people” or face the same fate as those they were supporting: the stripping of their citizenship and deportation. His furious rhetoric suggests his personal views, in particular regarding the 2024 royal decree that he issued himself, and raises serious concerns of authoritarian abuse of power.

The King’s comments were welcomed by six Arab states, with the UAE and Kuwait expressing support immediately, then followed by Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Jordan.

Also today, Bahrain’s National Press Day, a journalist from Al-Ayyam was barred from entry to the parliamentary session due to a personal objection from the Speaker of the House of Representatives regarding a recent article headline.

Bahrain is ranked among the worst countries in the world for press freedom, placing 170th out of 180 countries in the latest ranking by Reporters Without Borders.

In response to today’s vote, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Director of Advocacy at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy, said:

“No elected representative should face the threat of deportation and citizenship revocation for casting a vote against the King’s wishes. That they were forced to apologise to the King – and that their apology did not save them from destroying their career and future – exposes the reality of political life in Bahrain: under dictatorship, dissent is equivalent to political suicide.”

The head of Bahrain’s Terrorism Crimes Prosecution announced the “verdicts in two separate cases relating to espionage with foreign entities.” Six individuals were tried, including four Bahraini citizens and two Afghan nationals, resulting in the life imprisonment of five defendants and the acquittal of one. The Court also ordered the deportation of the two Afghan defendants upon completion of their sentences.

In a separate post, the Terrorism Crimes Prosecution announced convictions in twenty-two cases resulting in the conviction of twenty-five defendants; twenty-four of whom received sentences from five to ten years in prison and one charged with one year in prison, and fines of 2,000 dinars for all. BIRD has confirmed that one of those convicted was well-known social media influencer and photojournalist Sayed Baqer al-Kamel. Kamel, sentenced to ten years, posted a video of a high-rise building on fire because of an Iranian missile which hit the Seef district of Bahrain on 28 February 2026. The video, in which Kamel also asked his viewers to pray for Bahrain, has since been deleted from his profiles.

According to multiple interviews that BIRD conducted with lawyers and family members, these individuals had no access to legal counsel while in detention or at any time before their trials began, a clear violation of their right to a fair defense. Lawyers also raised concerns regarding access to the Public Prosecution’s evidence, as they were only able to take notes from the prosecution’s documents rather than receiving their own copies.

Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Director of Advocacy at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy, said: “These verdicts represent the first political convictions since the US-Israel/Iran conflict began. The convictions are clear violations of international standards of due process: defendants had no access to legal counsel prior to their appearance before a judge, and lawyers had no access to the government’s evidence against their clients. This is a mockery of justice under the cover of counter-terrorism legislation.”

Background information

These verdicts come against a backdrop of escalating repression in Bahrain in relation to the conflict in Iran. Bahrain’s crackdown on civic space has had fatal consequences, leading to the death in custody by torture of 32-year-old Sayed Mohamed Almosawi on 27 March 2026, who was detained on accusation of Iranian espionage, a claim his family strongly denies. Mr Almosawi’s case is a rare admission of the Government’s culpability following the Special Investigation Unit’s acknowledgement that his death resulted from assault by a security official.

The crackdown has also extended to nationality rights. On 27 April 2026, 69 Bahraini nationals had their citizenship stripped for national security reasons related to the Iran conflict. This followed King Hamad’s announcement on 19 April 2026 that citizenship status would be reviewed for individuals considered to have “betrayed the nation”. This new crackdown takes place alongside similar directives in Kuwait, signalling potential regional coordination amidst the US-Israel/Iran conflict.

This marks the first such mass revocation since 2019, when Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa ordered the restoration of citizenship to 551 individuals.

No information has been provided regarding the identities of those affected, whether they have been arrested, whether they are inside or outside the country, or whether they hold another nationality.

Commenting, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Advocacy Director at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD), said:

The SIU announced that “the conclusion of its investigation into the death of a detainee and the referral of the perpetrator, who remains in custody, to criminal trial on charges of assault resulting in death.” While the statement does not reference the perpetrator’s position, it is clear they are referring to a security official due to the specific mandate of the SIU. The SIU has only charged one individual, and it remains unclear whether other security officials aided or stood by while Mr Almosawi was tortured to death.

Commenting on the SIU’s statement, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Advocacy Director at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD), said:

“The body of Sayed Mohamed Almosawi, marked by torture, has shocked the public and laid bare the continued reality of abuse in Bahrain.

This is a rare admission of torture by a government watchdog. The authorities must now ensure that their findings are fully shared with Almosawi’s family.

This trial must be fully transparent, and those responsible must face justice. Failure to do so will only entrench impunity. The family deserves truth and full accountability.”

While the SIU acknowledged today that Mr Almosawi’s death was caused by a “beating leading to death,” the fate of two others arrested with him remains unknown, raising concerns of another crime under international law, namely enforced disappearance.

Sayed Ahmed Almosawi and Mustafa Yousif have only contacted their families twice and were unable to disclose their place of detention. It is unclear whether the SIU has interviewed them as part of its investigation.

At this point, it is crucial that the SIU investigate the status of Sayed Mohamed’s co-detainees, particularly given the many reports of enforced disappearance cases in which the SIU and other watchdogs have failed to take action.

Background on investigation

On 27 March 2026, following Mr Almosawi’s burial, the Ministry of Interior (MOI) published a public statement. The statement made four claims, including that photographs circulating of his body were “inaccurate and misleading and have been deliberately disseminated to mislead public opinion.”

In a report released on Monday, BIRD and Human Rights Watch shared information gathered through eight interviews, including family members, friends, and human rights activists with knowledge about the case. An expert from New York-based NGO Physicians for Human Rights verified photos of Mr Almosawi’s body, which include metadata confirming the time, date and device used to take the photos.

The medical expert concluded that the injuries were consistent with “repeated blunt force trauma applied over time, possible use of both hands and implements, injuries inflicted in a controlled environment, potentially involving restraint, [and] targeted blunt force trauma to specific anatomical regions (face, torso, feet).” The medical expert said that the evidence from the photos was “highly consistent with alleged torture” and ruled out both accidental injury and cardiac death.

Further information on Mr Almosawi’s disappearance and death can be found in the report here.

On 5 April 2026, the SIU published a statement “initiated extensive investigations” and committed to “determining criminal responsibility and holding accountable anyone proven to be involved in this incident”.

Torture by Bahraini authorities also remains a key issue in the country. In November 2025, concluding observations by the UN Committee against Torture, noted that torture is “routinely used” by security forces and that the authorities have taken no meaningful steps to hold perpetrators accountable. The Committee found “consistent reports” of torture and ill-treatment by authorities used to extract confessions, punish detainees, or intimidate political opponents. It warned that the absence of independent investigations has created a “climate of impunity.”

In the face of Mr Almosawi’s death in custody and the remaining uncertainty regarding his two co-detainees, Bahrain must hold all involved to account through a transparent and fair trial.

(Beirut) – A 32-year-old man who was forcibly disappeared in Bahrain on March 19, 2026, died in custody more than a week later and his body bore signs of torture, Human Rights Watch and the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD) said today.

After Sayed Mohamed Almosawi’s family lost contact with him for over a week, his parents received a call to come to the Bahrain Defense Hospital, a military hospital. When they arrived, they discovered that Mohamed Almosawi was dead and had visible signs of torture. The Interior Ministry subsequently said that the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) had detained him.

“No parents should ever get a phone call telling them to pick up the body of their son after searching for him for nine days,” said Niku Jafarnia, Yemen and Bahrain researcher at Human Rights Watch. “That Almosawi’s death came at the hands of the authorities, and in such a brutal way, makes this all the more horrific. Bahraini authorities should ensure that this never happens again.

Bahraini authorities should immediately and impartially investigate Mohamed Almosawi’s death and make the findings public, the groups said.

Human Rights Watch and BIRD interviewed eight people, including family members, friends, and human rights activists with knowledge about the case. A medical expert from Physicians for Human Rights reviewed photos and videos of the torture marks on Mohamed Almosawi’s body. Human Rights Watch and BIRD also reviewed the official “cause of death” report provided by authorities.

The medical expert concluded that the injuries were consistent with “repeated blunt force trauma applied over time, possible use of both hands and implements, injuries inflicted in a controlled environment, potentially involving restraint, [and] targeted blunt force trauma to specific anatomical regions (face, torso, feet).” The medical expert said that the evidence from the photos was “highly consistent with alleged torture” and ruled out both accidental injury and cardiac death.

Mohamed Almosawi, a small business owner and former political prisoner, was last seen on the morning of March 19 in a cafe in Tubli for suhoor, the meal eaten before dawn during Ramadan. He came there from an event at Imam Mojtaba Mosque in a village in Sanabis, near the capital Manama, with his cousin Sayed Ahmed Almosawi, and a friend, Mustafa Youssef.

A witness saw them leave at around 3:00 a.m., heading in the direction of Sanabis, reportedly to collect Almosawi’s car before returning to Muharraq, where they lived. Between 3:10 a.m. and 3:30 a.m., he was on a phone call with a family member while in the car, but the call was suddenly broken off. This is the last known communication with any of the three men before Mohamed Almosawi’s death.

From about 8:00 to 9:00 a.m., his WhatsApp was turned on briefly. His messages were marked as read, suggesting that the authorities were accessing his phone. The location, family members said, was near the Southern Hamad Town Police Station, Roundabout 17. His family called the station, but the authorities denied that he was there.

The families of the cousins then contacted the Interior Ministry but were told that they were not in custody. One of the families said that they were only able to file a missing person report on March 25 due to the Eid holidays, after which the police called them a few times and asked whether the men had returned home or if the families had heard anything about them.

On the morning of March 27, the family of Mohamed Almosawi received a call from the Bahrain Defense Hospital asking them to go to the hospital without stating the reason. Only when they arrived did the family learn that Mohamed Almosawi was dead.

Authorities said he had been brought there suffering from a heart attack and that they had unsuccessfully tried to resuscitate him. Naji Fateel, a human rights activist who saw the body prior to burial, told Human Rights Watch that the body was “full of bruises” and that “there were deep wounds.” Another person who saw the body said that much of it was discolored, completely black in some places. The death report says that he died at 2:29 a.m., but an individual who helped with burial procedures and saw the body at 1:30 p.m. that day told BIRD that “the body wasn’t fresh, and he had died 24 hours before if not more.” He said that “there is no evidence nor marks on Sayed Mohamed [Almosawi]’s body that suggest he received cardiopulmonary resuscitation, which might indicate that he arrived already dead.”

The Interior Ministry statement at 9:00 p.m. that day said that “the deceased had been detained by the National Intelligence Agency [NIA] on charges of espionage.” Assuming the NIA had detained him on March 19, and authorities had refused to provide information about his whereabouts to his family, this would amount to the crime of enforced disappearance.

His family denied the espionage allegations, saying he had not participated in political activity since being released from prison in April 2024.

Since the start of the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran, Human Rights Watch and BIRD have documented Bahraini authorities’ increased repression of free speech, including by detaining dozens of people for participating in peaceful protests, for protesting against the US and Israeli attacks in Iran, or for posting footage of the attacks on the social media. As of April 10, BIRD had documented the detention of at least 286 people since the beginning of the war.

“Bahraini authorities must be held to account for the death of Sayed Mohamed Almosawi, as well as for the many other violations of international law authorities continue to carry out against detainees,” said Sayed Ahmed al-Wadaei, director of advocacy at the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD). “The Bahraini government and UN human rights bodies should ensure an impartial and independent investigation into the death of Sayed Mohamed that brings justice to his family and hold those responsible to account.”

The Court of Appeal confirmed Mr Sharif’s conviction over comments made during a media interview in Beirut criticising Arab governments’ failure to defend Palestinians and framing their stance as a ‘surrender’. While the court maintained the guilty verdict, it ruled that the remainder of the six-month prison sentence would be replaced with a non-custodial measure, leading to his release from Jau Prison.

Although Mr Sharif is expected to be released, pending approval by the Public Prosecution Office, the court expressly affirmed the underlying conviction and adopted a legal rationale that further entrenches the criminalisation of peaceful political expression in Bahrain. The conviction itself continues to rest on provisions of the Penal Code that are incompatible with international standards on freedom of expression.

Commenting on Mr Sharif’s conviction, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, advocacy director at Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy, stated: “Ebrahim Sharif’s release is a relief, but it does not erase the fact that he was imprisoned for peacefully exercising his right to free expression. His detention was an assault on freedom of speech. Bahrain must abolish its draconian laws criminalising free speech.”

The appeals court’s decision to replace imprisonment with an alternative punishment mitigates the immediate harm of detention but fails to remedy the fundamental injustice of the conviction itself. Mr Sharif was punished for expressing political opinions on matters of public interest, conduct that is fully protected under international law.

Fundamental flaws remain unaddressed

The trial court’s judgment, now left substantively intact by the appeals court, remains flawed in three key respects.

Mr Sharif was prosecuted under Articles 165, 215, and 92 of the Bahraini Penal Code, provisions that are routinely misused to punish peaceful speech. Article 165 criminalises anyone who “expressly incites others to develop hatred or hostility towards the system of government.” Article 215 targets a person who “offends in public a foreign country or on [sic] international organization based in the State of Bahrain or its president or representative.” Both carry a prison sentence and a fine which cannot exceed 200 dinars, and are vaguely worded offences whose misuse to suppress legitimate political expression has been repeatedly identified by United Nations human rights mechanisms. The UN Special Representative on human rights defenders has warned that prosecutions under Article 165 for allegedly “encouraging hatred of the State” or “distributing falsehoods and rumours” frequently risked suppressing lawful expression. In 2018, in its concluding observations on Bahrain’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Human Rights Committee noted its concern for Bahrain’s imposition of serious restrictions on freedom of expression and “the large number of arrests and prosecutions of individuals criticizing State authorities or political figures.”

The judgment’s application of these provisions to Mr Sharif’s case is flawed in three specific respects.

First, the judgment reflects a profound misunderstanding of freedom of expression. Mr Sharif’s comments were political opinions criticising the foreign policy positions of Arab governments in relation to Palestine. The court treated these as criminal acts, applying Article 168’s prohibition on “false news” to what were plainly political value judgments. Calling a government “complicit” or “silent” is a political characterisation, not a factual claim capable of being proven true or false. The court’s reasoning collapses the distinction between opinion and fact, effectively criminalising political criticism itself.

Second, the judgment systematically overstates what Mr Sharif actually said, distorting his words beyond any possible interpretation. Mr Sharif called for boycotts, public pressure, and political change through public opinion, all of which are forms of peaceful civic action. Yet the court characterised these statements as incitement capable of “destabilising security and stability” and “undermining the longstanding social fabric,” and asserted a “direct link” to the likelihood of violence without identifying any evidence whatsoever of actual or threatened violence. The judgment simply assumes that calls for peaceful political pressure are inherently destabilising, a standard that would criminalise virtually all political speech.

Third, the judgment adopts a fundamentally flawed legal premise by asserting that the public and media nature of Mr Sharif’s statements removes them from the protection of freedom of expression. The court held that because the statements were made openly through a media outlet, they acquired a “criminal character” and fell outside constitutional and international safeguards. This reasoning is legally unsustainable. Freedom of expression exists precisely to protect public speech, including speech disseminated through the media. Political opinions expressed in interviews, broadcasts, or publications are at the very core of protected expression, not an exception to it. To treat media dissemination as a basis for criminal liability reverses the logic of free expression law and effectively renders all public political speech vulnerable to punishment, nullifying the right itself. Under international human rights law, the form, platform, or reach of expression cannot justify its criminalisation where the content is peaceful and political in nature.

Mr Sharif’s conviction demonstrates Bahrain’s continued failure to heed international recommendations and to bring its legal framework into line with its obligations.

Pattern of repression and conditions of detention

Mr Sharif’s arrest at Bahrain International Airport marks the tenth time he has faced detention, interrogation, or prosecution since 2011 for exercising his right to free expression. His continued imprisonment reflects a broader pattern in which authorities use vague speech offences to silence opposition figures, journalists, and human rights defenders.

During his pretrial detention at Dry Dock, Mr Sharif was held in appalling conditions marked by severe overcrowding and poor hygiene. Despite his advanced age (68) and medical conditions, his family reported that Mr Sharif was confined in unsanitary, overcrowded cells reportedly infested with bed bugs. Concerns regarding systemic deficiencies within Bahraini prisons have been raised by the UN Committee against Torture, which in 2025 highlighted persistent reports of overcrowding, insanitary conditions, and serious shortcomings in prison medical services, including at Dry Dock Detention Centre. The Committee warned that such conditions pose heightened risks to elderly and medically vulnerable detainees.

Violations of international free expression standards

Mr Sharif’s conviction violates Article 19 of the ICCPR, which protects the right to hold opinions and to impart information and ideas of all kinds. The UN Human Rights Committee has explicitly stated that “imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty for defamation” and has called on Bahrain to decriminalise criticism of governments. Mr Sharif’s case exemplifies Bahrain’s continued failure to bring its laws and practices into compliance with these standards.

Last week, leading human rights organisations filed a request for UK sanctions against Bahrain’s Interior Minister, General Shaikh Rashid bin Abdullah Al Khalifa, under the UK’s Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020. The request and supporting evidence were submitted to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office by Deighton Pierce Glynn solicitors on behalf of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) and the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD). The request is also supported by Human Rights First. It seeks targeted financial and travel sanctions against the Interior Minister for his role in serious rights abuses against the Bahraini people.

The request comes as Bahrain marks the 15th anniversary of its 2011 pro-democracy uprising on 14 February. The impact of the Bahraini Government’s brutal crackdown continues to haunt the country, with leading pro-democracy figures remaining jailed since 2011 following sham trials and confessions made under torture.

The NGO coalition is calling for the Interior Minister to be held accountable for his role in serious and systematic human rights violations in Bahrain, including allegations of torture and arbitrary detention of political dissidents and human rights defenders. Documented abuses include physical beatings, the use of torture devices, sexual violence, and rape. The submission sets out evidence of the Minister’s responsibility for widespread abuses carried out by Bahrain’s Ministry of Interior since 2004, encompassing the violent suppression of the 2011 uprising and the years of systematic persecution that followed.

The evidence, which documents a pattern of torture in Bahrain over the last decade, presents a significant test of the UK Government’s commitment to upholding human rights standards, particularly regarding human rights abuses that are linked to close allies of the UK. It comes amid growing concern that the UK’s deepening security cooperation with Bahrain – despite persistent and credible evidence of human rights violations – risks shielding abusive officials and undermining Britain’s own legal and moral obligations.

In October 2025, Bahrain’s Interior Minister visited the UK and met with Durham Constabulary to strengthen police training partnerships. Accompanied by Ambassador Shaikh Fawaz bin Mohammed Al Khalifa, he met Chief Constable Rachel Bacon to discuss collaboration in forensics, investigation, and rehabilitation programs. The visit raised concerns regarding the UK Government’s engagement with a ministry accused of systematic torture; by providing police training to General Al Khalifa, the UK risks legitimising the Interior Ministry’s practices.

MPs call for sanctions

At the same time, on 09 February 2026, a group of cross-party MPs tabled an Early Day Motion (EDM) supporting the call for sanctions against Bahrain’s Interior Minister and decrying the Government of Bahrain’s crackdown on pro-democracy activists. The MPs decried human rights abuses in Bahrain and called “for the imposition of Magnitsky sanctions against individuals responsible for serious human rights violations, including the Interior Minister, Rashid bin Abdullah Al Khalifa”. They further raised concerns that millions of pounds of UK public funds continue to be spent on technical assistance to Bahrain.

Rights groups calls

Commenting, Khalid Ibrahim, GCHR’s Executive Director, said: “It’s impossible to advance human rights in Bahrain without ending impunity and enforcing accountability for all the massive human rights violations that were committed by perpetrators whose crimes have been well documented by the human rights movement. We always have to remember the plight of our Founding Director Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja who was severely tortured to the level that he needed dozens of medical interventions, yet the perpetrators are not only still free in the streets of Bahrain but some of them were promoted. This culture should be ended and as such we welcome the news of the motion by British MPs to hold the Minister accountable and call on the British government to follow suit and take action.”

Commenting, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, BIRD’s Advocacy Director, stated: “It is hard to mark the 15th anniversary of Bahrain’s pro-democracy uprising without remembering the suffering of thousands of Bahrainis, some of whom continue to languish behind bars after being tortured by Rashid Al Khalifa’s officials at the Interior Ministry in 2011. Under his watch, Bahrainis were murdered under torture while in custody. It is shameful that the red carpet is rolled out for him in Britain while his victims rot in Bahraini jails.”

Commenting, Uzra Zeya, Human Rights First’s President and CEO, said, “Fifteen years after Bahrain’s peaceful pro-democracy protests began, both the U.K. and U.S. governments need to do much more to address the persistence of torture, cruel treatment, and the arbitrary detention of dissidents and human rights defenders in Bahrain’s prisons. These governments must not turn a blind eye to abuses by their close security partner. Targeted sanctions would be an important and long-overdue step toward accountability.”

Bahrain Public Prosecution issued a statement confirming the sentence.

Mr Sharif is a prominent democratic advocate, economist, and former Secretary-General of Bahrain’s National Democratic Action Society.

His conviction arises from a media interview conducted in Beirut, during which he called on Arab peoples and governments to support Palestinians and to end their ties with, and complicity in, Israel’s actions. 

Commenting on Mr Sharif’s sentence, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, advocacy director at Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy: “This sentence sets a chilling precedent: a prominent public figure is being criminalised for standing with Palestine and challenging governments that have normalised relations amid Israel’s genocide. It signals a grave escalation in Bahrain’s assault on free expression and marks a new low for the Bahraini government.”

Sharif was arrested at Bahrain International Airport on 12 November 2025 upon his arrival from Beirut, where he had attended the Arab National Conference. Bahrain’s Interior Ministry published a statement later that day stating that he had been arrested for “spreading false news on social media and uttering phrases offensive to sisterly Arab states and their leadership.” The next day, Bahrain’s Office of Public Prosecution stated on Instagram that they had ordered his detention while the charges against him were investigated.

On 19 November 2025, Human Rights Watch and the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy issued a statement calling for his immediate release.

This is the 10th time that Bahraini authorities have arrested, interrogated, or prosecuted Sharif since 2011, all on the basis of exercising his right to peaceful assembly and speech. 

Yusuf al-Jamri, a blogger, said that the authorities detained Sharif, former secretary general of Bahrain’s National Democratic Action Society, due to comments he made in Beirut to LuaLuaTV calling for Arabs and Arab governments to support Palestinians. The Bahrain authorities should immediately release him and end their long-standing practice of detaining people for their peaceful free speech.

“Governments should be ensuring they are taking action to prevent genocide and other crimes against Palestinians in Gaza, not detaining their citizens who make peaceful comments to support them,” said Niku Jafarnia, Bahrain and Yemen researcher at Human Rights Watch.

Sharif was arrested at Bahrain International Airport on November 12, 2025, upon his arrival from Beirut, where he had attended the Arab National Conference. Bahrain’s Interior Ministry published a statement later that day stating that he had been arrested for “spreading false news on social media and uttering phrases offensive to sisterly Arab states and their leadership.” The next day, Bahrain’s Public Prosecution stated on Instagram that the public prosecution had ordered his detention while the charges against him are investigated.

This is the 10th time that Bahraini authorities have arrested, interrogated, or prosecuted Sharif since 2011, all on the basis of exercising his right to peaceful assembly and speech.

He was sentenced to five years in prison in following his participation in the peaceful 2011 uprising in Bahrain. The authorities held him incommunicado for months, and at times in solitary detention, with no access to family members prior to his first appearance before the special military court. According to BIRD, He was torturedduring his detention, including sleep deprivation, sexual abuse, and beatings.

After being released on June 19, 2015, he was rearrested on July 11—three weeks later—for his peaceful criticism of the government in a speech he gave the day before. Authorities accused him of encouraging the overthrow of the government and “inciting hatred.” He was released one year later and placed under a travel ban.

The authorities rearrested Sharif on November 13, 2016, after he told the Associated Press that Prince Charles’s visit to Bahrain threatened to “whitewash” the Bahraini authorities’ crackdown on dissent. Authorities charged him with “inciting hatred” against the government.

They dropped the charges two weeks later, but then rearrested him in March, 2017, on the same charges relating to a series of tweets he published.

Between his arrest in 2017 and November 12, 2025, Sharif was arrested or prosecuted three more times, in 2019, 2023 and 2024, all for expressing peaceful views in social media posts.

Sharif’s case is not unique in Bahrain. Human Rights Watch has for decadesdocumented Bahraini authorities’ consistent arbitrary detentions of people for exercising their rights to free speech.

According to research by BIRD, an estimated 320 people are currently arbitrarily detained for political reasons in Bahrain, some of whom have been imprisoned since the 2011 pro-democracy uprising. Among them are some of the country’s most prominent human rights defenders and opposition figures, including Hassan Mushaima, Abduljalil Al-Singace, Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, and Abdulwahab Husain.

Twelve of these prisoners are on death row, including Mohamed Ramadhan and Husain Moosa, whose imprisonment was declared arbitrary by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which also called for their immediate and unconditional release.

The UK and the EU have continued to sign trade deals with Bahrain without publicly calling on Bahrain to release the many political activists in detention, including Al-Khawaja and Sheikh Mohammed Habib Al-Muqdad who both are EU citizens. Just a few months ago, the UK signed a partnership agreement with Bahrain worth 2 billion GBP (US$2.6 billion).

“Governments allied with Bahrain should end their whitewashing of Bahrain’s abuses and place real pressure on Bahrain to end their violations against peaceful activists and the political opposition,” said Sayed Ahmed al-Wadaei, advocacy director at BIRD.