The 55th Session of the PPT on Women of Afghanistan, whose public hearings took place in Madrid from 8 to 10 October 2025, came to a close with the public reading of the Judgement that took place on 11 December 2025 at the the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS) in The Hague.
[WATCH THE VIDEO OF THE PRESENTATION]
The significant presence of representatives from international organisations, including Richard Bennett (UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan), Reem Alsalem (UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls), Ivana Krstic (Vice-Chair of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls), Professor Mustapha Sheikh (University of Leeds, School of Languages, Cultures and Societies), Professor Rebecca Cook (University of Toronto, Faculty of Law), Baroness Helena Ann Kennedy (Member of the UK House of Lords) and Dr Shirin Ebadi (Iranian Nobel Laureate), who agreed to comment on the PPT’s panel of judges’ decision, is an important sign of the institutional relevance of this event. The announcement was preceded by an intense period of research and mobilisation that has brought together an extensive network in the Afghan community, academia and civil society in many countries (here the videos of the Madrid session)
Without delving into the specific factual and doctrinal content of a decision that can undoubtedly be considered a reference point for achieving a comprehensive and critical understanding of the situation of women in Afghanistan, it is pertinent to emphasise some aspects that render this Judgement one of the most exemplary manifestations of the political and cultural significance of the PPT’s working methodology and tangible role during a period of crisis and profound uncertainty in all areas of international law.
Classifying the repression of Afghan women’s rights as the most severe legal offence, highlights the gravity of the situation and its implications, which have been obvious for years in Afghanistan. The existence of women as subjects with individual and collective human rights is blatantly denied. This is even more dramatic given that this is happening in a country whose current form of government is also the product of a tragic geopolitical history in which the ‘great powers’ have played a particularly negative role. International law seems impotent. This is exacerbated by recent developments that are more interested in recognising the de facto authorities for various reasons, while avoiding ‘interference’.
And this is happening in a region where, at the same time, another group of women in Rojava has promoted and realised a model of democratic society that is struggling to be recognised as the only possible future for Syria. In this sense, today’s Judgement should be considered alongside that on Rojava’s Judgement.
The mission and practice of PPT’s intervention is based on the belief that the right of peoples is centred on guaranteeing their plans for the future. This is the permanent challenge that peoples have been posing to international law, which has its roots in the past of State and economic powers that view the life and creativity of peoples as a disturbance, in the most diverse ways for 50 years now, since the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples in Algiers. This is particularly pertinent when political and legal categories are intertwined with the numerous forms of patriarchy.
Gianni Tognoni
Secretary General
