Methodology

Last updated: 16 October 2026.

This page explains how we research and check what we publish. It complements our Editorial policy. If you think we have fallen short of these steps, please tell us through our Contact page.

What we cover

We follow human rights in three regions: Iran, the United States and Africa, plus global accountability questions that affect them, such as the work of international courts. We also publish explainers on the law and on how to read human rights information. We do not have researchers on the ground in these regions; we work from published, checkable material.

Where our information comes from

We rank sources by how close they are to the facts and how open their methods are:

Primary documents: court judgments and orders, UN reports and resolutions, treaty texts, official statements, legislation and government data.
Investigations with published methods: reports by UN commissions and established human rights organisations that explain how they gathered and verified evidence.
Specialist monitors: organisations that document specific issues, such as the death penalty or press freedom, and say how they verify cases.
News organisations with editorial standards and corrections policies, used for events that primary sources have not yet covered and always attributed by name.
Social media and unverified material: used only when an established organisation has verified it, or labelled clearly as unverified.

We prefer the highest available tier. When we cite a news report about a document, we try to link the document itself as well.

How we check a claim
We open and read every source we cite. We do not cite a source we have only seen summarised by someone else, unless we say so.
We check dates, names, numbers and quotations against the original.
For important or surprising claims we look for a second, independent source.
We record when we last checked a page and show it at the top as “Last checked” or “Last updated”.
Before publishing, we test every link. Some official sites block automated checks; we then confirm the page by other means and keep the link.
Numbers and counts

Counts of executions, arrests, deaths or displaced people come from organisations with different definitions and verification rules. We name the source and date for each figure, say whether it is a verified minimum, a reported total or an estimate, and show differing figures side by side rather than choosing one silently. We do not calculate our own totals by adding figures from different sources.

Legal characterisation

We distinguish international human rights law, international humanitarian law (the law of armed conflict) and international criminal law, and we state which body applied a legal label and at what stage. We never describe a person as guilty of a crime unless a court has convicted them, and we note when a judgment is under appeal.

Responses and balance

For each country page we look for the government’s public response to the main findings and include it with its source. When we cannot find one, we say so.

Updates and corrections

Country pages are living documents. When facts change, we update the page, change the “Last updated” date, and note substantive changes. Dated news posts are not rewritten after the fact; we add a dated update note instead. See our Corrections policy.

Tools

We use AI tools to help with research, drafting, translation and checking, as described in our Editorial policy. AI output is never treated as a source.

Limits

Our work depends on what others document and publish. Situations with little access for monitors, such as internet shutdowns or closed detention systems, are under-reported, and our pages will reflect those gaps. When we do not know something, we say so in a “What we don’t know” section.