South Africa
How well is South Africa respecting people's human rights?
Use the tabs below to explore the scores.
South Africa at a glance
Quality of Life
Economic and Social Rights
(2023)
Summary score
66.0%
How well is South Africa doing compared to what is possible at its level of income?
Right to
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Summary score
64.8%
How well is South Africa doing compared to the best in the world?
Right to
0
% of global best benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Safety from the State
Civil and Political Rights
(2025)
Summary score
7.1
How well is South Africa's government respecting each right?
Right to freedom from
0
Score
10
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Empowerment
Civil and Political Rights
(2025)
Summary score
8.8
How well is South Africa's government respecting each right?
Right to
0
Score
10
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Quality of Life
South Africa scores 66.0% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Income adjusted' benchmark.
Compared with the other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark).
South Africa scores 64.8% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Global best' benchmark.
Compared with the other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa is performing better than average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Global best' benchmark).
Safety from the State
South Africa's Safety from the State score of 7.1 out of 10 suggests that some people are not safe from one or more of the following: arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance or extrajudicial killing.
For civil and political rights, we don't have sufficient data across Sub-Saharan Africa countries to allow for a regional comparison. However, when compared to the other countries in our sample, South Africa is performing close to average on the right to be safe from the state.
Empowerment
South Africa's Empowerment score of 8.8 out of 10 suggests that while most people are enjoying their civil liberties and political freedoms (freedom of speech, assembly and association, and democratic rights, and religion and belief), some are not.
For civil and political rights, we don't have sufficient data across Sub-Saharan Africa countries to allow for a regional comparison. However, when compared to the other countries in our sample, South Africa is performing better than average on empowerment rights.
Quality of Life - overview
(2023)
How well is South Africa doing compared to what is possible at its level of income?
Summary score
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
How well is South Africa doing compared to the best in the world?
Summary score
0
% of global best benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Income adjusted benchmark
Global best benchmark
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Quality of Life rights (or 'economic and social rights') include the rights to food, health, education, housing, and work. HRMI gives two scores, measuring against two different benchmarks.
South Africa scores 66.0% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Income adjusted' benchmark. This score takes into account South Africa's resources and how well it is using them to make sure its people's Quality of Life rights are fulfilled.
This score tells us that South Africa is only doing 66.0% of what should be possible right now with the resources it has. Since anything less than 100% indicates that a country is not meeting its current duty under international human rights law, our assessment is that South Africa has a very long way to go to meet its immediate economic and social rights duty.
When measured against the Global best benchmark, comparing South Africa to the best performing countries in the world, South Africa's score is 64.8%, indicating that it has a very long way to go to meet current Global best standards for ensuring all people have adequate food, education, healthcare, housing and work.
Compared with the other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark).
Compared with the other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa is performing better than average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Global best' benchmark).
Quality of Life - full details
See more detail on how South Africa performs on the
?Right to
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
By sex
How does South Africa perform by sex for
?By sex
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
To see how South Africa's performance by sex has changed over time for a specific indicator, use the Over time graph below and select the indicator from the menu.
Over time
How does South Africa perform over time for
using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark and 'Low and middle income' assessment standard?Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk
(2025)
Which people in South Africa were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their
violated?Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
When asked to provide more context about who was particularly unlikely to enjoy their right to education in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Safety from the State - overview
(2025)
How well is South Africa's government respecting each right?
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to freedom from
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
South Africa's Safety from the State score of 7.1 out of 10 suggests that some people are not safe from one or more of the following: arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance or extrajudicial killing.
For civil and political rights, we don't have sufficient data across Sub-Saharan Africa countries to allow for a regional comparison. However, when compared to the other countries in our sample, South Africa is performing close to average on the right to be safe from the state.
Over time
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk
(2025)
Which people in South Africa were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their Safety from the State violated?
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Right to freedom from arbitrary arrest
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to arbitrary or political arrest and detention by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to freedom from forced disappearance
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to disappearance by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to freedom from the death penalty
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to death penalty executions by government agents in 2024, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to freedom from extrajudicial execution
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to extrajudicial killing by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to freedom from torture and ill-treatment
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Empowerment - overview
(2025)
How well is South Africa's government respecting each right?
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
South Africa's Empowerment score of 8.8 out of 10 suggests that while most people are enjoying their civil liberties and political freedoms (freedom of speech, assembly and association, and democratic rights, and religion and belief), some are not.
For civil and political rights, we don't have sufficient data across Sub-Saharan Africa countries to allow for a regional comparison. However, when compared to the other countries in our sample, South Africa is performing better than average on empowerment rights.
Over time
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk
(2025)
Which people in South Africa were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their Empowerment violated?
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Right to assembly and association
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their rights to assembly and association by the government or its agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to opinion and expression
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their rights to opinion and expression by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Right to participate in government
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their political participation by the government or its agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Which people are most at risk?
We asked human rights experts to choose from a list of options for which people were particularly at risk of having this right violated. The images below show their answers.
Highlight
in the word clouds below.Quality of Life
People at risk for
Right to education
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
Right to food
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
Right to health
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
Right to housing
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
Right to work
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Safety from the State
People at risk for
Safety from the State
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Empowerment
People at risk for
Empowerment
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Behind the numbers
Quality of Life
Under the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which China has signed, all countries agree to devote their maximum available resources to making things progressively better for their people in these areas.
HRMI has calculated what China could be achieving at its current level of income. The scores are given as a percentage of that realistic potential achievement. China’s best score is for the right to work, where its score of 99.2% means it is doing 99.2% of what it possibly can given its current level of income.
China also has good scores for the right to health (97.8%), and the right to food (96.5%). For these rights, China is doing nearly as well as it possibly can, given its income. Its right to housing score of 94.6% is at the top of the ‘fair’ range.
One of China’s lowest scores is for the right to quality education, where it scores 66.2%, which falls in the ‘very bad’ range. Among 17 East and Southeast Asian countries with data, this score puts China in the bottom half for quality education, just below Mongolia and just above Malaysia.
Right to Quality Education in East and Southeast Asia
Score
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Our low- and middle-income assessment standard further breaks the right to housing down into scores for the right to sanitation and the right to water.
With a per capita income of US$ 12,951 in 2023, China has the resources to ensure all of its people have running water and toilets in their homes.
However, China’s right to sanitation score of 94.9% shows that it could afford to do better. If China efficiently used its available resources, it could achieve a score of 100%, which would mean that 39.2 million more people could have access to basic sanitation.
When it comes to the higher standard of safely managed sanitation, China’s score of 73.6% means that if China effectively and efficiently used its available resources an additional 350 million people could have access to safe sanitation.
If China improved its performance on the right to water from its current score of 94.3% to 100%, 59.8 million more people would have water on their premises.
The good news is that China’s scores for the right to housing have improved steadily over the past decade. China’s score on the right to basic sanitation increased by 20.5 percentage points and that of the right to water by over 9.2 percentage points. The gains have been even greater for safe sanitation. Here China’s score rose from 50.8 to 73.6, an increase of nearly 23 percentage points.China’s improvements in income adjusted scores means the country’s policies have become more effective at turning resources into good human rights outcomes.
When it comes to the right to food, if China lifted its current score of 96.5% to 100%, around 1.2 million more children under five years old would have enough nutritious food to grow well – that would mean all children in China under five would have enough nutritious food to grow well. This is an achievable goal.
With a current score of 96.5%, China has improved in respecting people’s right to food over the last 20 years, with its score increasing markedly from 84.1% in 2000.
On the right to work, China has made dramatic progress in eliminating absolute poverty. Its score on ensuring people enjoy at least a subsistence income (that is, income above the absolute poverty line of $4.20 per day, measured in 2021 PPP$), has risen from 37.4% in 2002 to 99.2% in 2022, nearly absolute poverty.
The bigger challenge China currently faces, however, is eliminating relative poverty.That is, ensuring people enjoy at least half the median income and so can enjoy a decent life. China’s score on a fair (relative) income stood at only 37.5% in 2018 (the most recent year with data). Projecting the relative poverty rate forward to 2023, this means that while nearly 1,124 million people have enough money to enjoy decent lives, over 213 million are unnecessarily denied this right.
The bigger challenge China currently faces, however, is eliminating relative poverty. That is, ensuring people enjoy at least half the median income and so can enjoy a decent life. China’s score on a fair (relative) income stood at only 37.6% in 2018 (the most recent year with data).Projecting the relative poverty rate forward to 2022, this means that while 1,115 million people have enough money to enjoy decent lives, 210 million are unnecessarily denied this right.
China comes second in the world in ensuring people’s right to health is fulfilled, with a score of 97.8%.This is the right where China is most constrained by resources. An increase in income will be necessary to make significant further improvements.
As to where gains are most needed, for the right to health, expert respondents noted inequities in access to healthcare, including regional differences, and differences in access according to wealth and political influence.
At its current income level, China should already be able to do as well as any country in the world in meeting the rights to food, housing, and work as assessed by the low- and middle-income standard.
People at risk
While China has room for improvement in all the rights we measure, a further consideration is inequity. There are several groups of people who experts identified as being at higher risk of missing out. These include:
-
People with lower social or economic status, including farmers and people in rural areas,remote,mountainous or underdeveloped areas
-
Human rights advocates, protesters, activists, and anyone who criticises the government; and their family members
-
People from ethnic minorities
-
People in Xinjiang, especially Uyghurs
-
People in Tibet
-
Disabled people
-
Older people
-
People in prison
-
People from religious minorities
-
People who are stateless or are not in the household registration system
See the people at risk tab on the Rights Tracker for the full lists. The data also show a strong connection between political activity, especially criticism of the government, and lack of enjoyment of economic and social rights.
Room for improvement
China has made outstanding progress in ensuring all people enjoy at least a subsistence income. However, all of China’s other Quality of Life scores show that China could still make significant improvements to its people’s lives, even without more resources.
If China were using its resources more efficiently to ensure its people’s wellbeing, it could achieve 100% for all the rights we measure.Yet, while its best score nearly reaches that goal – 99.2% on right to a subsistence income – its worst score using the low- and middle -income country assessment standard – 66.2% on the right to quality education – is far from that level.
If China better upheld its rights obligations and achieved a full 100% score on all the rights we measure, we would see millions more Chinese people living lives of dignity, even without income growth. For example, if China’s scores reached 100% we would see the following number of extra people benefitting:
-
If China were to operate at its full potential given its current resources, we would expect an additional 1.219 million children under five to grow well and not be stunted.
-
If China were operating at best practice, each year we would expect an extra 12,600 newborn baby girls and 13,400 newborn baby boys to survive until their fifth birthday.
-
If China were to operate at its full potential given its current resources, we would expect an additional 92,300 newborns to be born at a healthy birth weight.
-
If China were reaching its full potential, given its income constraints, an extra 159,000 15-year-old girls and 419,000 15-year-old boys could eventually reach the age of at least 60.
-
If China used its resources efficiently, an additional 39.25 million people could have access to basic sanitation at home, 350 million could have access to safe sanitation at home, and an extra 60 million people could have access to water in their homes.
-
If China were operating at its full potential given its current resources, it could lift 213 million people out of relative poverty.
Safety from the State
China scores 2.3 out of 10 for our overall Safety from the State category, telling us that a great many people are at risk of arbitrary or political arrest or detention, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance, execution, or extrajudicial killing. This is one of the lowest scores in our sample of 37 countries.
China’s worst score in this category is 1.0 out of 10 for freedom from the death penalty, the lowest score among all the countries we measure.
The human rights experts we surveyed said that people protesting against or criticising the government, and people from ethnic and religious minorities, were at extra risk of being executed.
Respondents overwhelmingly agreed that human rights advocates, protesters, journalists, and people who criticised the Chinese Commumist Party were at particular risk of a wide range of rights violations, especially arbitrary arrest and detention, forced disappearance, and torture and ill-treatment. Respondents particularly noted risks to political dissidents, detainees, and people supporting democracy.
Detainees, human rights defenders, and people who protest or engage in non-violent political activity were at extra risk for all five Safety from the State rights.
Other vulnerable groups include:
-
Detainees and those accused of crimes, especially people suspected of terrorism
-
Anyone criticising the government
-
Journalists
-
People in Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong
-
Muslims, Christians, and people following other religions such as Falun Gong
Among other East and Southeast Asian countries and territories where we measure these rights, China has the lowest scores for all five Safety from the State rights.
Right to Freedom from Arbitrary Arrest and Detention in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Freedom from Forced Disappearance in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Freedom from Death Penalty in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Freedom from Extrajudicial Execution in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Freedom from Torture and Ill-treatment in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Empowerment
The Chinese government limits civil liberties and political freedom, with China scoring a very low 1.9 out of 10 in empowerment rights. This is one of the lowest scores in our sample of 37 countries.
For the rights to assembly and association, opinion and expression, participation in government, and freedom of religion and belief all of China’s scores fall into the ‘very bad’ range. For all four rights, the human rights experts we surveyed agreed overwhelmingly that ‘all people’ were at risk of violations of these rights.
When it comes to the right to assembly and association, China scores 2.1 out of 10, and human rights experts identified a wide range of people not enjoying their rights, including human rights advocates, protesters, and people criticising or opposing the government, as well as those from ethnic and religious minorities.
China’s score for the right to opinion and expression is a very low 2.4 out of 10, with no improvement over the four years we have measured this right. Respondents noted that online expression is also restricted.
China also scores in the ‘very bad’ range for the right to participate in government, with a score of 2.2 out of 10. Respondents noted that pro-democracy supporters, including those in the New Citizens' Movement, the China Democracy Party, and independent candidates were not free to participate in goverment.
For the right to freedom of religion and belief, China scored 2.5. Respondents noted that the government restricts all religious practices, and is particularly repressive towards people following unregistered minority religions such as Christians, Uyghur Muslims, Falun Gong members, and people who attend house churches.
Groups that are particularly vulnerable to empowerment rights violations include:
-
Human rights advocates, protesters, and anyone who criticises the government;and their families, including children
-
Pro-democracy supporters
-
Journalists
-
People from ethnic and religious minorities
-
Detainees and those accused of crimes
-
Women's rights and labour rights activists
Right to Assembly and Association in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Opinion and Expression in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to Participate in Government in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to freedom of religion and belief in East and Southeast Asia
Summary score
0
Score
10
Transnational repression
The Chinese government engaged in transnational repression in a number of ways in 2024.
Transnational repression is activity that violates the human rights of people outside a government’s own territories.
Where is China engaging in transnational repression?
According to 90 human rights expert respondents whose work focuses on China and Hong Kong, in 2024 the Chinese government or its agents targeted people for transnational repression in the following places:
In which countries were people targeted?
Graph shows how many respondents identified each country.
0
Percentage of respondents
100%
0
20
40
60
80
100
How many people were targeted?
Graph shows how many people were targeted in each country, from ‘none’ to ‘a very large number'.
< Less people
Number of people targeted
More people >
None
Very small
Small
Medium
Large
Very large
Experts also gave the following additional information on where the Chinese government or its agents engaged in transnational repression in 2024:
-
Anywhere there is opposition to the Chinese government
-
Anywhere that has Chinese immigrants, diaspora communities, and/or people in exile from China
-
Any country that has signed onto the Belt and Road Initiative
-
Specific regions, including Central and South America, Africa, Europe, Tibet, Pacific Islands, Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean Rim countries
People at risk
According to human rights expert respondents, in 2024 the Chinese government or its agents targeted the following kinds of people for transnational repression:
Who was targeted?
Graph shows how many respondents identified each group of people.
0
Percentage of respondents
100%
Experts gave the following additional information on some of the groups the Chinese government or its agents targeted for transnational repression in 2024:
-
People from China or Hong Kong who are in exile
-
Chinese citizens who are seeking political asylum in other countries
-
Relatives of Hong Kongers living in China or Hong Kong
-
Hong Kongers who are ethnic Chinese living abroad, particularly activists
-
Tibetans, Falun Gong followers, and Uyghurs
-
Chinese citizens acting abroad who promote democracy
-
Chinese citizens who criticise the Chinese government, especially those living in non-democratic countries that have close ties to China
-
Hong Kong activists and dissidents
-
Tibetans advocating abroad for Tibetan independence
-
Uyghurs advocating abroad for Uyghur independence
-
Human rights activists
-
Members of the Safeguard Defenders organisation “保护卫士”
-
Family members of political dissidents
Human rights violations
According to human rights expert respondents, in 2024 the Chinese government or its agents targeted people for transnational repression in the following ways:
Killing, physical harm, and coercion
-
Assassinations
-
Physical attacks
-
Arrest warrants with bounties
-
Secret arrests
-
Public beatings and assault
-
Beatings
-
Harassment and intimidation
-
Stalking
-
Bribery
-
Threats
-
Intimidation
-
Attacking people participating in protests in support of Hong Kong and Taiwan
Repatriation and overseas law enforcement activity
-
Attempted repatriation, including when Chinese citizens renew their passports at embassies
-
Overseas ‘police stations’, including concerted operations such as ‘Skynet’ or ‘Fox Hunting Operations’ in the United States and elsewhere, with reports that Chinese police arrest and attempt to forcibly repatriate Chinese nationals
-
Reports of kidnapping
-
Local authorities overseas working with Chinese state agents to arrest and detain targets
-
Chinese police training local police forces in other countries
-
Reports of establishing overseas procuratorates
-
Threatening harm or imprisonment to individuals speaking out against the Chinese government in other countries
-
Risk of extradition from Hong Kong to mainland China
Surveillance and digital activity
-
Spying
-
Monitoring individuals through digital surveillance and on social media
-
Monitoring social media activities, phones, and emails of Chinese nationals living abroad
-
Chinese soldiers attending anti-Chinese Communist Party protests in the United States to surveil protest attendees, including soldiers who illegally enter the United States
-
Infiltration, such as Chinese government spies contacting and collecting data on overseas activists
-
Remote data harvesting
-
Pressuring foreign companies to compile data on targets and to engage in censorship
-
Cyberattacks
-
Creating generative AI images and videos of targets
-
Online doxxing
-
Digital repression
-
Propaganda from the United Front Work of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party
-
Economic coercion to divest and intimidate
-
Manipulating property sales in China, where people overseas are prevented from obtaining the required documentation or where property prices are modified to the detriment of victims or their families
-
Causing self-censorship
-
Harassment of targets and their relatives in China
-
Online threats
-
Threatening relatives of targets, including targeting their pensions, medical insurance, jobs, and ability to start businesses
-
Coercing family members to pressure targets to return or to stop criticising the government, including by saying that the family members will be in danger otherwise
-
Confiscating passports of Chinese citizens who have criticised the government while overseas
-
Online smear campaigns
-
Online intimidation
-
Intelligence gathering
-
Surveillance and tracking
-
Using pro-communist groups to track and target Chinese dissidents
Country details
(South Africa)
Population
64m (2024)
GDP/capita
$6,267 (2024)
current US dollars
$13,598 (2024)
2021 PPP dollars