Bias allegations include the organization's being influenced by United States government policy, particularly in relation to reporting on Yugoslavia, Latin America, and the misrepresentation of human-rights issues in Eritrea and Ethiopia.
[13] In a June 12, 2023 interview published on Muwatin, Nabeel Rajab revealed that during his imprisonment, he shared a cell with ISIS prisoners and maintained good relations with them even after his release.
"[16] Its founder, Robert Bernstein, accused the organization of poor research methods and relying on "witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers.
"[17] In October 2009, Bernstein said that the organization had lost critical perspective on events in the Middle East:[17] "[T]he region is populated by authoritarian regimes with appalling human rights records.
"[16] HRW has been accused of being unwilling (or unable) to perceive threats posed by Islamic extremism because their leftist ideology leads them to see criticism of Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda and similar groups as "a dangerous distraction from the real struggle.
The letter was signed by Nobel Peace Laureates Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Corrigan, former UN Assistant Secretary-General Hans von Sponeck, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Richard A. Falk, and over 100 scholars and cultural figures.
The letter highlighted a number of Human Rights Watch officials who had been involved in foreign policy roles in the US government, including Washington advocacy director Tom Malinowski, formerly a speechwriter for Madeleine Albright and a special adviser to Bill Clinton, and subsequently Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor to John Kerry, and HRW Americas advisory committee members Myles Frechette (a former United States Ambassador to Colombia) and Michael Shifter (former Latin America director for the US government-funded National Endowment for Democracy).
[22] Left-wing academic and labour organizer Immanuel Ness writes that HRW rarely criticizes human rights abuses by the United States and its allies, and almost always reaches conclusions consistent with Western foreign policy positions.
[25] Human Rights Watch work in Venezuela became controversial in September 2008, when the country's government expelled two HRW staff members accused of "anti-state activities".
"[31] Tom Porteous, Human Rights Watch's London director, said that O'Shaughnessy " ... not only fails to provide any evidence for these allegations", but " ... more seriously, he misrepresents HRW's positions in his apparent determination to undermine our well earned international reputation for accuracy and impartiality.
"[32] On 21 August 2009, 93 academics and authors from the UK, the US, Canada, Australia, Mexico, Colombia and other countries published an open letter criticizing HRW's "absence of statements and reports" on human-rights violations in Honduras after 8 July 2009, following the 28 June coup d'état.
[24] The letter's signers said that the Obama administration was supporting the de facto Roberto Micheletti government by providing "aid money through the Millennium Challenge Account and other sources", training Honduran military students at the School of the Americas and ignoring Honduras' human-rights situation.
In a 2005 speech to the Anti-Defamation League former Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said, "NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International pay little attention to anti-Semitism.
[42][43] Robert Bernstein wrote that by focusing on Israel and neglecting human rights violations by less free states in the Middle East that HRW had cast "aside its important distinction between open and closed societies.
"[17] In response, Aryeh Neier HRW co-founder and former executive director said, it "is wrong to suggest that open societies should be spared criticism for human rights abuses".
[44] Writing in the Wall Street Journal in 2009 about a controversial fundraising event that HRW held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Noah Pollak stated that the organization displayed a strong bias against Israel.
The real activity of this organization today is a far cry from what it was set up 30 years ago to do: throw light in dark places where there is really no other way to find out what is happening regarding human rights.
According to Roth, "By failing to hold those responsible to account, Israel increases anger and resentment among the Palestinian population and in the wider Arab world and undercuts moderates who wish to pursue peace.
[47] In a November 2012 The Wall Street Journal article, David Feith said that there has been "bitter debate" within HRW about whether Iran's alleged call for annihilation of Israel is a violation of human rights.
"[48] In an analysis published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Ron Kampeas criticized HRW reports: "Reconstructions of the horrific death of civilians replete with painstakingly gathered evidence are coupled with bewildering omissions of context and blended into a package that assumes an inherent Israeli immorality" and denounced "efforts to turn criticism of individual officers and soldiers into a wholesale indictment of Israel's military establishment and the decision to resort to military force.
"[62] Helena Cobban (a fellow analyst on the Human Rights Watch Middle East advisory board) said that Garlasco engaged with "people who clearly do seem to be Nazi sympathizers," which she called "extremely disturbing".
[71] According to the organization its work in Saudi Arabia, including "coverage of women's rights, the juvenile death penalty, domestic workers, and discrimination against religious minorities", was discussed at the receptions.
Jabarin has been called "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" by the Israeli Supreme Court for his roles in the militant Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the human-rights organization Al Haq.
[77] HRW program director Iain Levine said in August 2009, "If the Israeli government wants to silence critics, it should fully investigate allegations of wrongdoing and take action to end the abuses.
According to Roth, the "problem is not the messenger carrying news of that misconduct, whether Judge Goldstone or the human rights groups that have been the target of a disinformation campaign launched by the Israeli government and some supporters.
[20] In the wake of the 2009 Goldstone report, HRW accused Israel and its supporters of an organized campaign of false allegations and misinformation designed to discredit the group over its findings concerning the Gaza War.
"[81] However, in an official statement from the State Information Service, the government of Egypt criticized HRW, alleging that the organization's report lacked transparency, ignored violence by protesters, and that it was biased in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood.
[84] In the early 2010s, the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) took issue with the credibility of Roth's accusations that Ethiopia's government is corrupt and uses international aid funding for "repressive purposes".
In 2024, commenting about racial bias allegations that were said associated to the 2023 Đắk Lắk attacks, the nation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticized and condemned HRW for "the factually inaccurate and fabricated information in their reports".
The newspaper also accused HRW for backing anti-socialism organizations, aiming to execute color revolutions against existing states, while also inappropriately advocating and praising unlawful dissidents and extreme activists against the government in Vietnam.