Enforced disappearance is one of the most serious forms of violations affecting journalists and media workers in Yemen during the years of conflict. This is not only because it entails an unlawful deprivation of liberty, but also because it is accompanied by the denial of the detention or the concealment of the journalist’s fate or whereabouts, placing the person outside the protection of the law and leaving their family and colleagues in a state of continuous uncertainty.
This report, issued by the Yemeni Media Freedoms Observatory (Marsadak) affiliated with the Studies and Economic Media Center (SEMC), focuses on enforced disappearance as a distinct pattern of violations against press freedom in Yemen during the period from March 26, 2015, to August 15, 2026. It draws on the Marsadak’s database, as well as documents, testimonies, and other information that it collected, verified, and classified in accordance with its established monitoring and documentation methodology.
The documented cases indicate that enforced disappearance often follows a pattern that begins with the arrest or detention of a journalist or media worker from their home, workplace, or a public place, followed by cutting off communication with their family and lawyer, and the failure to register them at a publicly known or official place of detention. Their families are then confronted with denials of detention or conflicting information about the person’s fate and whereabouts. This situation may continue for days, months, or years. It may also end with the disclosure of the person’s location while arbitrary detention continues, or with the initiation of judicial proceedings.
According to Marsadak’s database, the report documented 235 cases involving elements of enforced disappearance among 540 cases of arbitrary detention affecting journalists and media workers, representing 43.5% of the total documented cases of arbitrary detention. These figures reflect cases that the Marsadak was able to access and verify and do not constitute a comprehensive record of all cases, particularly given the difficulty of accessing information, the multiplicity of detention authorities, and the fear among some victims and families of reporting violations.
The cases were recorded across a number of Yemeni governorates, with Sana’a accounting for the largest number, at 99 cases (42.1%), followed by Hodeidah with 30 cases, Taiz with 26 cases, and Aden with 23 cases. The four governorates collectively accounted for 75.7% of all documented cases, while the remaining cases were distributed across other governorates.
The largest number of cases was attributed to Ansar Allah (the Houthis), with 167 cases (71.1%), followed by the Yemen’ IRG with 37 cases, and the dissolved Southern Transitional Council (STC) with 17 cases. The party responsible could not be determined in 10 cases, while 4 cases were attributed to Al-Qaeda. The attribution of cases to these parties reflects the outcome of Marsadak’s monitoring and verification process and does not constitute a final judicial determination of responsibility.
The year 2015 recorded the highest number of cases, with 76, followed by 2017 with 48 cases. Together, cases recorded in those two years accounted for 52.8% of the total documented cases. Although the number of cases declined after the early years of the conflict, new cases continued to be recorded, including 15 cases in 2025 and four cases between the beginning of 2026 and mid of August 2026.
The cases selected for this report illustrate different forms of enforced disappearance. The fate of journalist Waheed Al-Soufi has remained unknown since April 2015, constituting an ongoing disappearance that has lasted for more than 11 years. In the case of Naseh Shaker, his detention was officially documented, but his whereabouts remained concealed for at least 441 days before his presence in a prison operated by Security Belt Forces was verified. Despite a court ruling ordering his release in January 2026, he remained detained, according to information collected by Marsadak, until the monitoring period ended.
The report also documents the collective disappearance of six journalists in Hodeidah, during which their families received conflicting information about their whereabouts before their detention at the Hodeidah Security and Intelligence prison was verified. Four of them were subsequently released, while Waleed Ali Ghalib and Hassan Ziyad remained in detention as of August 15, 2026. The report also documents shorter or repeated cases, including those of woman journalist Hala Badhawi and journalist Hamoud Hazaa, demonstrating that disappearance is not measured by its duration, but rather by the combination of deprivation of liberty with concealment of the person’s whereabouts or fate and denial of legal protection.
The cases demonstrate that the impact of enforced disappearance extends beyond the direct victim to their family, the media community, and society as a whole. Families have borne the burdens of searching, traveling, pursuing mediation efforts, and following up through legal channels, while living through prolonged periods of anxiety and uncertainty. Some families have also been subjected to threats or defamation because they demanded information about the fate of their relatives.
These practices have also contributed to increased self-censorship, prompting some journalists to avoid sensitive issues, reduce their professional activities, or use pseudonyms. Others stopped practicing journalism altogether after their release. This has affected media institutions and sources of information and weakened the ability of the press to document violations, expose corruption, and hold influential actors accountable, thereby undermining the public’s right to access information.
The report uses the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance as a legal reference for defining enforced disappearance, while considering that Yemen is not a party to the Convention. Accordingly, the report uses the definition contained in Article 2 as a descriptive and analytical framework for the elements of the violation, rather than as a basis for imposing obligations under a Convention to which Yemen has not acceded.
Where acts are attributed to entities that do not have the status of official state institutions but exercise effective control as de facto authorities or organized parties to the conflict, the application of this definition is by analogy and is intended to analyze the structure of the violation, namely, deprivation of liberty, concealment of fate, and deprivation of legal protection. It does not imply that such entities are subject to the Convention as a treaty. The attribution of actual legal responsibility to these entities is instead based on the rules of customary international humanitarian law applicable to parties to non-international armed conflicts, specifically the prohibition of enforced disappearance.
Accordingly, the report classifies such acts pursuant to the customary rules of international humanitarian law applicable to non-international armed conflicts, not merely as violations, but as war crimes under Rule 98 of customary international law. Enforced disappearance is also considered a continuing crime that is not extinguished by the passage of time. The crime of disappearance does not end merely because the location of detention becomes known, so long as the journalist continues to be deprived of legal safeguards.
The report’s analysis also draws on the rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture, both of which are binding on Yemen, as well as the rules of international humanitarian law applicable to the parties to the conflict.
The report distinguishes between enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention, and incommunicado detention. Detention does not amount to enforced disappearance unless it is accompanied by a denial of the deprivation of liberty, or concealment of the person’s fate or whereabouts in a manner that places the person outside the protection of the law. The subsequent disclosure of the detainee’s whereabouts does not negate the occurrence of enforced disappearance during the preceding period, nor does it legitimize the continuation of the detention.
The report concludes that enforced disappearance has become one of the methods used to pressure journalists and remove them from the public sphere or has effectively produced this result. It also reveals shortcomings in the registration of detainees, enabling them to communicate with their families and lawyers, bringing them before judicial authorities, investigating allegations of torture, and enforcing judicial rulings. The absence of accountability increases the risk of repeated violations and undermines freedom of expression and the public’s right to know.
The report calls on local and international actors to take effective measures to establish the fate and whereabouts of disappeared persons, end secret detention, release detainees held without a legal basis, enforce judicial rulings, and ensure that all detainees are registered and able to communicate with their families and lawyers. It also calls for independent and effective investigations, accountability for those responsible, protection for victims, their families, and witnesses, meaningful remedies and reparation, strengthened protection for journalists, and legal and institutional measures to prevent the recurrence of enforced disappearance.
To read the full Report, click here
COMMENTS