its stranglehold on communications technology. Often the stern measures were simply an attempt to mask government failures, such as in Venezuela, where the government sought to silence critics rather than address a spiralling humanitarian crisis. In addition to the direct threats and attacks, there was an insidious chipping away at established civil and political freedoms in the name of security. For example the UK adopted a new law, the Investigatory Powers Act, which significantly increased the authorities’ powers to intercept, access, retain or otherwise hack digital communications and data without any requirement of reasonable suspicion against an individual. By introducing one of the broadest regimes for mass surveillance of any country in the world, the UK took a significant step towards a reality where the right to privacy is simply not recognized. However, the erosion of human rights values was perhaps most pernicious when officials blamed a specific “other” for real or perceived social problems in order to justify their repressive actions. Hateful, divisive and dehumanizing rhetoric unleashed the darkest instincts of human nature. By casting collective responsibility for social and economic ills onto particular groups, often ethnic or religious minorities, those in power gave free rein to discrimination and hate crimes, particularly in Europe and the USA. One variant of this was demonstrated by the escalation, with enormous loss of life, of President Rodrigo Duterte’s “war on drugs” in the Philippines. State-sanctioned violence and mass killings by vigilantes claimed more than 6,000 lives following repeated public endorsements by the President for those allegedly involved in drug-related crimes to be killed. When self-styled “anti-establishment” figures blamed so-called elites, international institutions and the “other” for social or economic grievances, they chose the wrong prescription. The sense of insecurity and disenfranchisement – arising from factors such as unemployment, job insecurity, 14 growing inequality and the loss of public services – demanded commitment, resources and policy shifts from governments, not easy scapegoats to blame. It was clear that many disillusioned people around the world did not seek answers in human rights. However, the inequality and neglect underlying popular anger and frustration arose at least in part from the failure of states to fulfil people’s economic, social and cultural rights. The story of 2016 was in some ways a story of people’s courage, resilience, creativity and determination in the face of immense challenges and threats. Every region of the world saw evidence that where formal structures of power are used to repress, people will find ways of rising up and being heard. In China, despite systematic harassment and intimidation, activists found subversive ways to commemorate online the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. At the Rio Olympic Games, Ethiopian marathon runner Feyisa Lilesa made global headlines with a gesture to draw attention to the government’s persecution of Oromo people as he crossed the finishing line to win a silver medal. And on Europe’s Mediterranean coasts, volunteers responded to the inertia and failure of governments to protect refugees by physically dragging drowning people out of the water themselves. People’s popular movements across Africa – some unthinkable only a year earlier – galvanized and channelled popular demands for rights and justice. Ultimately, the charge that human rights is a project of the elite rings hollow. People’s instincts for freedom and justice do not simply wither away. During a year of division and dehumanization, the actions of some people to affirm humanity and the fundamental dignity of every person shone more brightly than ever. This compassionate response was embodied by 24-year-old Anas al-Basha, the so-called “clown of Aleppo”, who chose to remain in the city to bring comfort and joy to children even after government forces unleashed their horrific Amnesty International Report 2016/17