NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Speech on foreign affairs and trade

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Kia ora and good morning everyone.
    Before I start, can I acknowledge the Wellington Chamber of Commerce for the opportunity to speak to all of you this morning.
    It comes at a difficult time for the global economy, with rising rhetoric, escalating tariffs, and the prospect of further retaliation to come.
    I had originally planned to take this opportunity to speak about my Government’s plan for economic growth – to create jobs, lift incomes, and put more money back in the wallets of Kiwis.
    I will still touch on that.
    It’s my Government’s top priority and it frames just about every decision we take here in Wellington as we focus on improving the lives of all New Zealanders.
    But with markets rocked and exporters facing uncertainty, I know there’s one topic front of mind for many businesses and many households.
    So this morning I want to take some time to speak to those events and make the case for free trade and the rules-based international order.
    Trade is the lifeblood of the New Zealand economy.
    Whether it’s our incredible farmers and growers, our outstanding tourism industry, or our burgeoning tech sector, Kiwis businesses thrive when we compete on the world stage.
    Our success isn’t an accident – and it didn’t happen overnight.
    Successive generations of trade negotiators and political leaders have invested in relationships offshore, and worked hard to complete deals like CER, the China FTA, the CPTPP, and the more recent EU, UK, UAE and GCC FTAs.
    Business leaders have moved rapidly, too – finding fresh opportunities for growth in emerging markets, and developing outstanding products back home that put New Zealand on the map.
    Our rural economy in particular represents the very best of open and competitive trade – selling into difficult markets, with no direct financial support, and consistently coming out on top.
    I could – and often do – speak at length about the contribution exporters make to the domestic economy.
    But trade goes both ways.
    Yes, export growth will be critical to improving New Zealand’s economic prospects in the coming years.
    But the removal of New Zealand’s own trade barriers and embrace of goods and services imported from offshore has also led to a major improvement in our quality of life in recent years.
    Our clothing is more affordable, our cars are more reliable, our diets are more diverse, and our holidays in Bali and Europe are a nice contrast to summers at the lake or the beach.
    Free trade of goods purchased from offshore has also supported growth in productivity.
    Kiwi exporters rely on the trucks, tractors, jet engines, computers, and smart phones we buy from overseas that make their businesses tick.
    And it’s not realistic to expect that in a country of just five million people, we could make everything we need here at home.
    Political leaders have tried that before in New Zealand – and it didn’t end well.
    Older generations will remember the efforts we went to.
    Governments imposed strict import controls and encouraged cars and televisions to be assembled here at home.
    And like today, conflict offshore occasionally helped to send prices spiralling – but the response looked very different.
    In the late 1970s, politicians imposed “carless days”, with stickers on your vehicle dictating which days you could drive to work, and which days you caught a ride with a friend or just walked into town instead.
    There was no “work from home” in 1979.
    Agriculture, today the backbone of our economy, was heavily subsidised and much less productive, much less diverse than the efficient and entrepreneurial sector thriving in New Zealand today.
    Those failed policies weren’t just foolish economics.
    They reflected the best efforts of political leaders to insulate New Zealand from an era of major social and geopolitical change.
    History shows those best efforts were a mistake, that required years of difficult choices and careful recovery.
    New Zealanders paid the price then.
    I don’t intend for them to do so again.
    Which brings us to today.
    The events of recent days are the most significant challenge to the rules-based trading system since the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was formed in 1947.
    Action, reaction, and response have shocked financial markets.
    As the Minister of Finance highlighted earlier this week, the direct impact on the New Zealand economy from the US tariffs announced last week is likely to be around $900 million or roughly 0.2% of GDP.
    But the second order consequences of a region and a world retreating from trade and increasingly uncertain about its economic future will be more significant, despite the welcome news of de-escalation this morning.
    I know for many businesses keeping an eye offshore and for those New Zealanders watching their KiwiSaver accounts, that could be confronting.
    The exporters I’ve spoken to in recent days remain buoyant, rightly confident in the quality of their product, and their ability to navigate choppy waters.
    But for countries whose prosperity is underpinned by global trade, the months ahead will be challenging for their economic interests.
    Many commentators will see these events as just the next step in a longer-term trend towards economic security and national resilience, as countries insure themselves against emerging geopolitical threats.
    Others have gone further, declaring an end to the era of free markets, free trade, and free people, and the rules-based international order underpinning it.
    For my part, I’m not ready to throw in the towel quite yet. Kiwis have worked too hard and for too long, to give up on the values and institutions which have seen our country and the region we live in thrive.
    So, for as long as I am Prime Minister, New Zealand will keep making the case for trade as a cornerstone of our prosperity.
    Yes, we are a small country – but stature has never been a barrier to our success.
    Take the P3 – a proposed trade agreement which began life under negotiation at APEC between New Zealand, Singapore, and Chile in the early 2000s.
    Three small countries, practicing what we preach – and doing everything we could to create opportunity for our people through trade.
    Today, that agreement lives on as the CPTPP and covers a dozen countries, including New Zealand and Australia, Canada, much of Asia, and most recently the United Kingdom.
    In total, that’s roughly 15% of global economic activity, or $13 trillion USD – a long way from where we started just over twenty years ago.
    The United Kingdom might be the most recent accession, but I expect they won’t be the last.
    New Zealand will continue to work with like-minded countries to promote free trade as a path to prosperity and explore the role of the CPTPP in strengthening that vision.
    One possibility is that members of the CPTPP and the European Union work together to champion rules-based trade and make specific commitments on how that support plays out in practice.
    My vision is that includes action to prevent restrictions on exports and efforts to ensure any retaliation is consistent with existing rules.
    Collective action, and a collective commitment, by a large portion of the global economy would be a significant step towards preserving free trade flows and protecting supply chains.
    Clearly though, efforts at collective action won’t be enough to support New Zealand’s economic interests.
    As Prime Minister, I have a responsibility to do everything I can to both bolster the existing rules-based order and to further strengthen New Zealand’s position offshore.
    It’s why I have put so much emphasis on deepening our relationships with partners around the region, with visits throughout South-East Asia, Korea and Japan, the United States, and to India last month as we commenced negotiations for a free trade agreement.
    It’s why my Government has worked so hard to close out fresh agreements with the UAE and GCC that enable additional trade and investment.
    It’s why we hosted an Investment Summit in Auckland, making the case both for New Zealand as an outstanding place to do business and for the opportunity to enter long-term infrastructure partnerships.
    It’s why on Monday this week the Minister of Defence and I launched the Government’s Defence Capability Plan, that lifts defence expenditure to 2% of GDP and ensures New Zealand pulls its weight for many years to come.
    It’s why I will be on the phone later today to world leaders comparing notes on world trade, and testing what we can do together to buttress the rules-based trading system.
    And it’s why I will be heading to the United Kingdom later this month to meet Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, to talk trade, security, and the geopolitical backdrop in Europe and the Indo-Pacific.
    We can’t make the case for New Zealand sitting at home.
    We have to position ourselves as advocates both for our own economic interests and the institutions that underpin them.
    I’m very lucky to lead a Government with so many Ministers dedicated to that task, whether that’s the Foreign Minister, the Minister of Trade, or the Minister of Defence, each of whom having already made a number of significant achievements supporting New Zealand’s interests offshore.
    Back home, the volatility offshore is a fresh reminder of just how important our focus on economic growth will be in the coming years.
    As I said recently at our Investment Summit in Auckland, New Zealand can be a shelter from the global storm.
    That brings a serious opportunity from ensuring our business environment is as welcoming as possible for investment and growth.
    We are making serious inroads into that task.
    Earlier this year, Minister for Economic Growth Nicola Willis published our Government’s Going for Growth Agenda, which outlines a range of actions we are taking to get the New Zealand economy moving and realising its vast potential.
    Each of those actions fits into one of five pillars we have identified as critical to lifting economic growth and improving New Zealanders’ standard of living:

    Developing talent,
    Encouraging innovation, science, and technology,
    Introducing competitive business settings,
    Promoting global trade and investment,
    And delivering infrastructure for growth.

    Across each of those pillars, we have Ministers working day and night to drive through reform – in transport, tourism, aquaculture, construction, advanced aviation, mining, energy, agriculture, and horticulture.
    In just the last few weeks, we have presented our plans to replace the Resource Management Act, fix our broken health and safety laws, and make nation-shaping investments like the Northland Expressway.
    We have introduced the Fast Track regime, streamlining the consenting process for projects of regional and national significance.
    We are re-writing the Overseas Investment Act, so major investments from offshore are consented faster and more reliably.
    We are tearing down the barriers to fresh investment in renewable and non-renewable energy, by repealing the oil and gas ban and ushering in new consenting rules for wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal.
    And we are doubling down on efforts to showcase New Zealand to the world, promoting our tourism and international education sectors offshore so we can attract even more people to spend their money here.
    I know there’s more we can do.
    Growth has now returned, and the economy has turned the corner, but our reform agenda will need to continue at pace for us to out-run the challenges to growth facing us from offshore.
    The challenges to the rules-based international order are intense and the strategic environment my government has inherited is more difficult than it has been for many years.
    For New Zealanders who grew up watching events unfold in Europe and the Middle East, it will be confronting to watch strategic competition and the deterioration of rules-based trade come to our neighbourhood, the Indo-Pacific.
    But the response for New Zealand cannot be retreat.
    New Zealanders are at our best when faced with adversity and we thrive when we compete on the world stage.
    To quote my friend the Foreign Minister, this isn’t our first rodeo.
    Our export sector is jam-packed with talented, sharp New Zealanders who make great products – and create jobs here at home while they do it.
    Farmers, growers, wine makers, and start-ups from all around the country investing in our nation’s future because they have confidence that better days lie ahead.
    I’m not ready to call time on the rules-based trading system.
    And I’m not ready for New Zealand to give up on our efforts to advocate for it on the world stage.
    We’re not in this alone.
    The same institutions that have served New Zealand so well for so long, also underpin the prosperity of so many of our friends and partners, many of whom are also continuing to make the case for free and open trade in recent days.
    My government will keep making the case – overseas, here at home, with a strong voice and a consistent message.
    Free trade works.
    It lifts incomes.
    It creates jobs.
    It builds partnerships.
    And it secures peace.
    I think that’s worth fighting for – and I’m up for that fight.
    Thank you.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: ISIS Supporter Sentenced to Over 19 Years in Prison for Recruiting for ISIS, Obstruction, and Attempting to Flee Justice

    Source: US State Government of Utah

    Sinmyah Amera Ceasar, also known as ‘Umm Nutella,’ Initially Cooperated with Law Enforcement, but then Secretly Contacted ISIS Supporters, Deleted Evidence, Lied to Investigators, and Tried to Flee the Country Rather than Face Prison

    A Brooklyn woman, Sinmyah Amera Ceasar, 30, a U.S. citizen, was sentenced today to serve 230 months in prison for three separately charged crimes: conspiring to provide material support and resources to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a foreign terrorist organization; obstructing justice while released on bail pending sentencing; and failing to appear for court as required when she attempted to flee the United States. Ceasar pleaded guilty to the material support charge in February 2017, to the obstruction of justice charge in March 2019, and to the failure to appear charge in October 2022.

    “Today’s re-sentencing marks the end of a righteous journey that began a decade ago,” said Sue J. Bai, head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “Terrorist organizations like ISIS rely on recruiters like Ceasar to attract, indoctrinate, and enlist new followers. The Department is committed to holding accountable those who seek to follow a similar path. Today was made possible by our prosecutors, staff, and members of the Joint Terrorism Task Force. We are grateful for their tireless pursuit of justice in this case.”

    “With today’s sentence, Sinmyah Amera Ceasar, an unrepentant ISIS recruiter, will be incarcerated for a significant period of time to protect Americans here and abroad from her violent extremism,” said U.S. Attorney John J. Durham for the Eastern District of New York. “Even after pleading guilty to providing material support to ISIS, the defendant continued to support terrorists, obstructed justice and fled from prosecution. This office, together with the FBI, the NYPD, and all the members of the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, works tirelessly to pursue and hold accountable all those who support terrorism.”

    “Ceasar pleaded guilty to helping ISIS, yet she continued on the same path by communicating with other ISIS supporters, “said Assistant Director David J. Scott of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division. “Her actions demonstrate a failure to truly accept responsibility for her actions, and she ultimately cut off her electronic monitoring device and went on the run. Ceasar’s efforts failed and with today’s sentencing she is being held accountable for her criminal actions.”

    Between January 2016 and November 2016, Ceasar used numerous social media accounts to praise, promote, and support ISIS and violent jihad and to disseminate ISIS propaganda. Ceasar posted under a variety of names, including her nom de guerre, or war name, “Umm Nutella,” which translates to “Mother of Nutella.” Ceasar developed contacts with ISIS members overseas, recruited individuals in the United States to travel overseas to join and fight for ISIS, and used her contacts with ISIS facilitators to attempt to help at least five people from the United States join ISIS abroad. Ceasar also expressed her own desire to travel to ISIS-controlled territory to join the group and die as a martyr.

    In November 2016, Ceasar was arrested at John F. Kennedy International Airport as she prepared to board an international flight, which was to be the first leg of her journey to join ISIS. Ceasar pleaded guilty in February 2017 to conspiring to provide material support and resources to ISIS and agreed to cooperate with the government’s investigations of ISIS members and supporters.

    In April 2018, Ceasar was released on bail, subject to court-ordered conditions of release. However, she violated those conditions, and her cooperation agreement with the government, by reconnecting with individuals she had identified to the government as supporters of ISIS. Ceasar attempted to conceal these communications from the government and the court, attempted to delete more than 1,000 electronic communications, and lied to the government about her conduct. The court revoked Ceasar’s bail in July 2018. Ceasar pleaded guilty to obstructing an official proceeding in March 2019.

    In June 2019, the late U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein sentenced Ceasar to 48 months in prison for the material support and obstruction offenses, and the government appealed. In August 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the sentence imposed by Judge Weinstein, calling it “shockingly low, and unsupportable as a matter of law,” and sent the case back to the district court for resentencing.

    While the appeal was pending, however, Ceasar completed serving this 48-month sentence in July 2020, and began serving an eight-year term of supervised release. Almost immediately after her release, Ceasar began to repeatedly violate the conditions of her supervision by downloading and using phone apps that she failed to report to the Probation Department, recontacting and communicating with ISIS supporters, soliciting funds from ISIS supporters, communicating with convicted felons, using extremist language, and deleting the evidence of her violations of these conditions of supervision.

    In August 2021, after the Second Circuit issued its decision remanding her case for resentencing, Ceasar fled. On the day she was scheduled to appear before the Court, Ceasar removed her ankle bracelet location monitoring device, and fled New York City on a cross-country bus trip to New Mexico, setting off a nationwide fugitive investigation that led to her arrest in New Mexico two days later. The evidence established that Ceasar intended to escape the United States and travel to Russia, and that, while fleeing, she used an internet-based messaging application to contact an individual in Afghanistan to seek assistance to travel there. She sought assistance from the individual in Afghanistan in the hours after ISIS Khorasan carried out a bombing at Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul that killed hundreds, including 13 members of the U.S. Armed Forces. In connection with her flight from prosecution, Ceasar ultimately pleaded guilty to her third separate felony offense, a charge of failing to appear before the court as required, in October 2022.

    After being returned to custody at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons’ Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn to await sentencing, Ceasar routinely violated Bureau of Prisons institutional rules, circumvented telephone and email monitoring and use restrictions, and continued to communicate and associate with other ISIS supporters.

    The government’s case is being prosecuted by Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Ian C. Richardson, currently of the National Security Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew D. Reich of the Eastern District of New York’s National Security and Cybercrime Section.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Global Generics Pharma Leader Selects Kneat

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LIMERICK, Ireland, April 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — kneat.com, inc. (TSX: KSI) (OTCQX: KSIOF), a leader in digitizing and automating validation and quality processes, is pleased to announce that a multinational producer of generic pharmaceuticals (“the Company”) has signed a Services Agreement with Kneat to digitalize its drawing management process. Drawing management supports engineering and validation processes by digitalizing and organizing all technical drawings, eliminating paper-based errors, maintaining traceability of revisions, and controlling access.

    Headquartered in Europe and operating over a dozen manufacturing facilities around the world, the Company is a leading provider of generic and biosimilar pharmaceuticals to patients in over 100 countries. With more than 20,000 employees, the Company will initially use Kneat for management of all its engineering drawings at its largest manufacturing site in Europe. Subsequently, the Company can leverage Kneat to streamline and automate all its validation workflows, ensuring efficiency, accuracy, data integrity and adherence to good manufacturing practice.

    “Today’s announcement adds another global leader to our customer community. It also showcases the versatility of the Kneat platform, which can be leveraged to deliver additional adjacent functions.”
    – Eddie Ryan, Chief Executive Officer of Kneat

    Strong customer retention has emerged as a defining characteristic for Kneat as it has grown over the past ten years to become the validation software of choice for the life sciences industry, serving the majority of the top 20 largest life sciences companies in the world. Net revenue retention, which measures the expansion from existing customers for the previous 12 months, was 151% at December 31, 2024. Kneat is proud of its customer support where 97% of customers rate it as ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’.

    About Kneat

    Kneat Solutions provides leading companies in highly regulated industries with unparalleled efficiency in validation and compliance through its digital validation platform Kneat Gx. As an industry leader in customer satisfaction, Kneat boasts an excellent record for implementation, powered by our user-friendly design, expert support, and on-demand training academy. Kneat Gx is an industry-leading digital validation platform that enables highly regulated companies to manage any validation discipline from end-to-end. Kneat Gx is fully ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 certified, fully validated, and 21 CFR Part 11/Annex 11 compliant. Multiple independent customer studies show up to 40% reduction in documentation cycle times, up to 20% faster speed to market, and a higher compliance standard.

    Cautionary and Forward-Looking Statements

    Except for the statements of historical fact contained herein, certain information presented constitutes “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Such forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, the relationship between Kneat and the customer, Kneat’s business development activities, the use and implementation timelines of Kneat’s software within the customer’s validation processes, the ability and intent of the customer to scale the use of Kneat’s software within the customer’s organization, and the compliance of Kneat’s platform under regulatory audit and inspection. While such forward-looking statements are expressed by Kneat, as stated in this release, in good faith and believed by Kneat to have a reasonable basis, they are subject to important risks and uncertainties. As a result of these risks and uncertainties, the events predicted in these forward-looking statements may differ materially from actual results or events. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, given that they involve risks and uncertainties.

    Kneat does not undertake any obligation to release publicly revisions to any forward-looking statement, except as may be required under applicable securities laws. Investors should not assume that any lack of update to a previously issued forward-looking statement constitutes a reaffirmation of that statement. Continued reliance on forward-looking statements is at an investor’s own risk.

    For further information:

    Katie Keita, Kneat Investor Relations
    P: + 1 902-450-2660
    E: investors@kneat.com

    The MIL Network –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: NEWS: Sanders Statement on Trump Tariff Announcement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Vermont – Bernie Sanders

    WASHINGTON, April 9 – After Trump posted on social media yet another change to his sweeping global tariffs, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today released the following statement: 

    As someone who strongly opposed disastrous unfettered free trade deals with China, Mexico and other low-wage countries, I understand that we need trade policies that benefit American workers, not just large corporations. Targeted tariffs can be a powerful tool to stop corporations from outsourcing American jobs. They can help level the playing field for American autoworkers or steelworkers to compete fairly against companies who have moved production to countries where they can pay starvation wages. 

    But Trump’s chaotic across-the-board tariffs are not the way to do it. 

    Imposing steep tariffs on countries like Germany or France will not bring jobs back to America. These are not low-wage countries. Corporations are not shutting down plants in America and moving them to Switzerland. Trump’s blanket tariffs will just raise prices for American consumers and hurt our relationships with allies, undermining our global position. 

    Trump’s trade chaos – changing policy from day to day – is rapidly undermining our economy and making it impossible for households and small businesses to function. How can you plan for next week, let alone next year, when the rules might change tomorrow? People in my home state of Vermont are hurting. 

    This is exactly why the Constitution gives Congress sole authority to raise taxes and “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,” not the President. What Trump is doing is unconstitutional. Trump has claimed supposed “emergency” powers to bypass Congress and impose unilateral tariffs on hundreds of countries. The last president to try something like this was Richard Nixon, and his overreach prompted Congress to pass the law Trump is now abusing. This is another step toward authoritarianism. 

    And let’s be clear about why Trump is doing all this: to give massive tax breaks to billionaires. These tariffs will cost working families thousands of dollars a year, and Trump plans to use that revenue to help pay for a huge tax break for the richest people in America. That is what Trump and Republicans in Congress are working on right now: If they have their way on the tariffs and their huge tax bill, most Americans will see their taxes go up, while those on top will get a huge tax break. 

    Enough is enough. We need a coherent trade policy that puts working people first. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses Risks from Chris Krebs and Government Censorship

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    RESTORING TRUST IN GOVERNMENT: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum revoking any active security clearance held by Chris Krebs and his associates.
    The Order directs the head of every federal agency to immediately revoke any active security clearance held by Krebs.
    The Order also suspends any active security clearance held by individuals at entities associated with Krebs, including SentinelOne, pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest.
    Furthermore, the Order calls for a review of Krebs’ activities as a government employee, including his leadership of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
    The review will include a comprehensive evaluation of all of CISA’s activities over the last 6 years and will identify any instances where Krebs’ or CISA’s conduct appears to be contrary to the administration’s commitment to free speech and ending federal censorship, including whether Krebs’ conduct was contrary to suitability standards for federal employees or involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information.

    ENDING GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP: President Trump is committed to ending government censorship of Americans and believes that those who engage in such conduct should not have access to our nation’s secrets.
    Krebs, the former head of CISA, is a significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his government authority.
    Krebs, through CISA:
    Suppressed conservative viewpoints under the guise of combatting purported misinformation, and recruited and coerced major social media platforms to further its partisan mission.
    Covertly worked to blind the American public to the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop.
    Promoted the censorship of election information, including known risks associated with certain voting practices, and falsely and baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, including by inappropriately and categorically dismissing widespread election malfeasance and serious vulnerabilities with voting machines.
    Skewed the bona fide debate about COVID-19 by attempting to discredit widely shared views that ran contrary to CISA’s favored perspective.

    ENSURING LOYALTY AND ACCOUNTABILITY: President Trump has made clear that loyalty to the United States must come before personal or partisan agendas, taking decisive action against those who misuse their undeserved influence to deceive the American public.
    President Trump already revoked the security clearances held by intelligence officials who falsely claimed Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation during the 2020 election.
    On Day One, President Trump signed an Executive Order to restore freedom of speech, dismantling federal programs that censored dissenting voices under the guise of combating misinformation, ensuring government serves the people—not partisan narratives.
    That same day, President Trump signed an Executive Order ending the weaponization of the federal government.
    These decisive actions underscore President Trump’s pledge to ensure a transparent government that is loyal and accountable to the people.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: New measures to put neighbourhood bobbies back on beat

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    New measures to put neighbourhood bobbies back on beat

    Communities will be safer and trust in local policing will be restored under plans to put police officers back in our neighbourhoods.

    • Prime Minister unveils plan to restore confidence in policing and deliver security for working people
    • New measures mean named and contactable officers for every neighbourhood and guaranteed police patrols in busy areas at peak times, such as town centres, ending years of postcode lottery
    • For the first time in fifteen years, working people across the country will be entitled to the same standards from the police, no matter where they live 
    • This forms part of the government’s Plan for Change and Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee, putting 13,000 more neighbourhood officers on our streets, up more than 50% across the country

    Communities will be safer and trust in local policing will be restored under plans to put police officers back in our neighbourhoods, announced by the Prime Minister today, as he delivers manifesto pledge to roll out the Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee.

    New measures will ensure every community will have dedicated and specialist neighbourhood policing teams, ending the postcode lottery on law and order.

    Announcing the plan, the Prime Minister will make clear that security is the bedrock on which working families build their lives, but that in recent years visible policing has fallen dramatically, with the number of people who regularly see officers patrolling in their local area halving in the past decade. 90% of crime has been left unsolved and there were one million incidents of antisocial behaviour last year alone, including big increases in street crime.

    The measures will put prevention at the heart of policing. Under the government’s Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee, crimes like vandalism or antisocial behaviour will be less likely to turn into more serious and violent offences, boosting confidence and security in local communities across Britain. 

    The Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee will put 13,000 more officers into neighbourhood policing roles by 2029, an increase of more than 50%. The early focus of the plan will be to establish named local officers, target town centre crime and build back neighbourhood policing, meaning hard working people can feel safer and more secure in their daily lives.

    The measures, announced today, will transform communities across Britain and will deliver the security communities deserve:

    •                 Each neighbourhood will have named, contactable officers to tackle the issues facing their communities, helping to restore trust that policing is working to keep people safe and meaning no community feels ignored when they need help. 

    •                 Every neighbourhood in England and Wales will have dedicated teams who will spend their time on the beat with guaranteed police patrols in town centres and other hotspot areas at peak times such as Friday and Saturday nights.  

    •                 There will be a dedicated antisocial behaviour lead in every force, working with residents and businesses to develop tailored action plans to tackle record levels of antisocial behaviour, which is blighting communities.

    Under these plans, communities across the country will, for the first time in 15 years, be able to hold forces to account and expect a minimum standard of policing in their area.

    The government’s new Police Standards and Performance Improvement Unit will ensure police performance is consistently and accurately measured, so the government can narrow the gap between the best and worst performing forces. 

    This will make clear that everyone across the country, no matter where they live, can expect the same standards from the police,  with a new online tool so the public are able to check how their local force is performing and hold forces to account.

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: 

    Everyone deserves to feel safe and secure on the streets they call home. It is just about the most basic right that anyone would expect. Yet for years crimes such as shoplifting and antisocial behaviour have wreaked havoc on our neighbourhoods. Policing has become reactive, picking up the pieces after crimes have occurred.

    Britain deserves better. It should not matter where you live – everyone deserves local, visible policing they can trust, and with our Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee we will end this postcode lottery, putting prevention back at the heart of policing and ensuring police are back on the streets.

    That’s why our Plan for Change is delivering security for working people in their communities with a return to neighbourhood policing, putting thousands of bobbies back on the beat and keeping people safe.

    Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said:

    The heartbeat of our Great British policing tradition is seeing bobbies on the beat, but for too long, too many communities have been feeling abandoned as crime soared and neighbourhood police disappeared, even when local crimes like shop theft, street theft or blatant drug dealing rose sharply.

    That’s why this government is determined to get police back on the beat and into our town centres. 

    It should not matter where you live – everyone deserves local, visible policing they can trust, and with our Plan for Change and Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee we will tackle this postcode lottery and restore policing to our communities.

    Today’s announcement is just one part of the government’s commitment to keep communities safe.

    Through the Crime and Policing Bill, new powers will be given to police so they can better tackle crimes that matter most to communities. This includes bringing in Respect Orders to clamp down on persistent antisocial behaviour and giving police the power to seize vehicles that cause havoc to communities. The Bill will also scrap the effective immunity of theft of goods below £200 and help police go after phone thieves by removing the warrant to search properties where stolen items have been electronically geolocated.

    Through the Plan for Change and mission to keep our streets safe, this government will restore confidence in local policing and making towns and communities safer places to live, work and visit.

    Chief Constable Sir Andy Marsh, CEO of the College of Policing, said:  

    We welcome the government’s Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee, which builds on the bedrock of British policing. Our evidence shows that good neighbourhood policing reduces crime and builds trust with communities, and it remains a top priority for the College. 

    We also know how important neighbourhood policing is to the public. That’s why, this June, we’ll be rolling out the Neighbourhood Policing Pathway training for neighbourhood officers and staff in police forces right across the country. Our training will ensure these teams have the specialised knowledge and skills to tackle anti-social behaviour, engage with communities and build relationships that support intelligence gathering and crime reduction. 

    We will also continue to use our position as a national source of best practice to help forces to constantly improve how they approach neighbourhood policing. Through our Practice Bank and Smarter Practice examples, the College will continue to evaluate and share initiatives and interventions to help police forces provide the best possible service for their communities.

    Emily Spurrell, Chair of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners and PCC for Merseyside, said:

    Neighbourhood policing is vital for building trust, preventing crime and fostering community engagement. It ensures that local officers, with their unique knowledge, can swiftly address the specific needs of their communities, creating safer and more connected neighbourhoods. Residents and businesses have made it clear, time and again, that they want an accessible local policing team, with local knowledge, dealing with the unique problems in their communities.

    Police and Crime Commissioners and Deputy Mayors have echoed their communities’ voices in setting the priorities for their Chief Constables and made neighbourhood policing a priority in their Police and Crime Plans. The Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee is an opportunity to reconnect policing with the communities they serve, helping to restore the trust and confidence that is vital if we are to continue policing by consent.

    The APCC welcomed the additional neighbourhood policing funding announced in January by the government, to enhance policing’s ability to deliver with additional officers and Police Community Support Officers. However, there remains significant pressure on police budgets and we will continue to work with the government to ensure policing has the resources it needs to effectively deliver neighbourhood policing for the public.

    Kurtis Christoforides, Chief Executive Officer of Police Now, said: 

    Police Now was founded to help transform communities through outstanding neighbourhood policing and brilliant public sector leadership, so it’s tremendously exciting to be working even more closely with government and police forces to do just that.

    The Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales, Baroness Newlove, said:

    I welcome the return of dedicated neighbourhood policing and the introduction of named ASB leads in each area. Persistent anti-social behaviour blights lives and communities, and these new roles will be vital in ensuring victims’ concerns are taken seriously by officers they know and trust.

    Some of the most harmful and enduring anti-social behaviour takes place in residential communities – away from the town centres and out of sight. The Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee has real potential, but its impact will depend on trained officers who have the support and skills to be able to respond to every report – whether from a busy high street or a quiet cul-de-sac.

    Matt Hood, Co-op Managing Director said:

    Creating healthy, safer high streets within resilient and durable communities is absolutely essential. We have effective partnerships with local police in several communities across the UK and we see first-hand the benefits of working together to target high impact offenders. At Co-op we have recently seen an encouraging improvement in police response and attendance, however the offenders keep coming and as retailers, we do all we can to prevent crime in our shops, but along with our communities, we need this support from the police to make it count.  We welcome this new Government commitment on increasing neighbourhood policing and our store colleagues will definitely be pleased to see a higher police presence.

    Kate Nicholls, Chief Executive of UKHospitality, said: 

    It cannot be overstated how important it is for businesses and communities to feel confident in their own safety on the streets, and knowing their neighbourhood police officers engenders that confidence. Utilising local knowledge and relationships is critical to providing safe high streets. 

    Hospitality and our high streets are critical for driving economic growth and regenerating our towns and cities, and we want them to be thriving hubs of activity. The government’s Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee is an important way of ensuring that.

    John Hayward-Cripps, Chief Executive of Neighbourhood Watch said: 

    The advantage of having a named officer is that it humanises the relationship between the police and the community. People report greater trust and confidence in the police when they can reach out to an officer who knows their area, and the communities who live there. Evidence suggests that patrols alone don’t make a significant difference to cutting crime, what is effective is combining them with community engagement. 

    Our members regularly work with the police, partners and the local people to adopt a problem-solving approach to crime and antisocial behaviour. And yet, nearly a third of people who responded to our community survey told us they lack a feeling of safety. It is especially important for younger people; they are the age group least likely to feel safe in their neighbourhoods.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 9 April 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Kelly, Strickland, Harrigan, Williams announce relaunch of House Small Brewers Caucus

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Kelly (R-PA)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Representatives Mike Kelly (R-PA), Marilyn Strickland (D-WA), Pat Harrigan (R-NC), and Nikema Williams (D-GA) announced the reintroduction of the House Small Brewers Caucus in the 119th Congress. These members will serve as caucus co-chairs.

    “Small breweries are also small businesses. They employ thousands of people across Pennsylvania and contribute more than $5 billion to the commonwealth’s economy,” said Rep. Kelly. “As Co-Chair of the House Small Brewers Caucus, I look forward to working on policy that keeps Pennsylvania’s beer industry brewing for years to come.”

    “Small brewers are a critical part of the Washington and South Sound economy,” said Congresswoman Strickland. “Relaunching this caucus means that this industry, small businesses, and their workers are supported across our region, and our country.” 

    “North Carolina is home to some of the most innovative and hard-working brewers in the country,” said Congressman Harrigan. “These small businesses create jobs, attract investment, and strengthen the fabric of our communities. I’m proud to support them and to help lead this caucus as we work to cut red tape and keep this industry growing.”

    “In Georgia’s Fifth District and across the country, small brewers are making a big splash. With a market value of $715 million in Georgia, small brewers demonstrate the impact small businesses can have on a community. These establishments create jobs, engage with their local neighborhoods, and promote economic and structural development. I am proud to help small brewers grow everywhere,” said Congresswoman Williams.

    BACKGROUND

    The House Small Brewers Caucus advocates for the 9,736 small and independent breweries in the United States. Craft breweries are vital small businesses and focal points of the communities in which they reside. In 2024, craft breweries supported nearly 460,000 jobs nationwide and contributed $77.1 billion to the U.S. economy, according to the Brewers Association.

    Pennsylvania ranks third nationally with 530 craft breweries calling the Keystone State home.

    Previously, as Co-Chair of the House Small Brewers Caucus, Rep. Kelly led the Craft Beverage Modernization and Tax Reform Act. This legislation would make permanent the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act’s (TCJA) excise tax reduction on breweries, wineries, and distilled spirits producers.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Two Men Sentenced in Largest-Ever Bird Mount Trafficking Case

    Source: US State of Vermont

    $900,000 Fine is One of the Largest Ever Ordered for an Endangered Species Act Case

    A federal judge in Brooklyn today sentenced two men for trafficking protected birds and eggs into the United States in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

    Dr. John Waldrop of Cataula, Georgia, was ordered to pay a $900,000 fine — one of the largest-ever for an ESA case — and serve three years of probation. Toney Jones of Eufala, Alabama, was sentenced to six months of probation. Waldrop pleaded guilty in August 2024 to conspiracy to smuggle wildlife and ESA violations, while Jones pleaded guilty to an ESA charge.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, Waldrop amassed an extensive collection of 1,401 taxidermy bird mounts and 2,594 eggs which included:

    • Four eagles protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act,
    • 179 bird and 193 egg species listed in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and
    • 212 bird and 32 egg species covered by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This included incredibly rare specimens like three eggs of the Nordmann’s Greenshank, an Asian shorebird with only 900 to 1,600 remaining birds in the wild; no North American museum has any Nordmann Greenshank eggs in their collection.

    “Waldrop’s gigantic and rare bird collection was bolstered in part by illegal imports, where he and his enlisted co-conspirators intentionally avoided permit and declaration requirements,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). “We applaud the efforts of the various federal and state law enforcement entities in investigating and prosecuting this case.”

    “The scale of this investigation underscores the critical importance of protecting our natural resources,” said Assistant Director Douglas Ault of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Office of Law Enforcement. “Waldrop’s collection included thousands of bird specimens and eggs, many of which are among the rarest in the world. This is one of the largest bird trafficking cases in history, and the commercialization of species protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and CITES highlights the conservation impact of Waldrop’s crimes. We at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement are unwavering in our commitment to safeguarding wildlife for future generations. We will remain vigilant and will continue to hold accountable those who exploit our shared natural resources for personal gain.”

    Photo of birds and other mounts, from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
    Photo of a portion of Waldrop’s egg collection, from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

    Between 2016 and 2020, Waldrop imported birds and eggs without the required declarations and permits. After USFWS inspectors at John F. Kennedy International Airport and elsewhere intercepted several shipments, Waldrop recruited Jones, who worked on his Georgia farm, to receive the packages. Jones also deposited approximately $525,000 in a bank account that Waldrop then used to pay for the imports and hide his involvement. Waldrop and Jones used online sales sites such as eBay and Etsy to buy birds and eggs from around the world, including Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and Uruguay.

    Waldrop forfeited his collection. The USFWS National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Lab examined the items and determined it to be the largest seizure of bird mounts in their 37-year history. The ESA requires that all wildlife imports be declared to USFWS and have required permits, including species protected by CITES.

    Photos of a freshly killed Roseate Spoonbill (left) and mount from Waldrop’s collection (right), from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

    The USFWS Office of Law Enforcement in Valley Stream, New York, conducted the investigation as part of Operation Final Flight. The operation focused on the trafficking of protected birds into the United States. The U.S. Postal Inspection Service, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources assisted with the investigation.

    Senior Trial Attorney Ryan Connors of ENRD’s Environmental Crimes Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Anna Karamigios for the Eastern District of New York prosecuted the case.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to the BARCODE1 trial assessing the use of a polygenic risk score in screening for prostate cancer

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    April 9, 2025

    The results of the BARCODE1 trial, published by The New England Journal of Medicine assesses the use of a polygenic risk score in screening for prostate cancer.

    Prof Michael Inouye, Professor of Systems Genomics & Population Health, University of Cambridge, said:

    “This study is the strongest evidence to date on the clinical utility of a polygenic score for prostate cancer screening. It shows that a polygenic score can improve early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, including those warranting radical treatment. A large proportion of prostate cancer cases detected using a polygenic score would not have been detected using the current diagnostic pathway. The authors appropriately discuss the study’s limitations and further research required (e.g. cost effectiveness). Taken together, I suspect we will look back on this as a landmark study that really made the clinical case for polygenic scores as a new tool that moved health systems from disease management to early detection and prevention.”

    When asked how long it would take to know if this could be used clinically?

    “This is a big step along the path to clinical implementation, but it is still a long road. Realistically, it will likely be years for the NHS to use polygenic scores routinely. It will require investment in infrastructure, generation of genomic data, training for healthcare practicians and potentially access to counselling for patients. There are more targeted ways to use polygenic scores clinically which may make for good next steps. To me, the study really makes me start to believe that these investments are worth it.”

     

    Mr Ben Lamb, Consultant Urological and Robotic Surgeon, Barts Health and UCLH NHS Trusts, and Clinical Senior Lecturer, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), said:

    “This is a very interesting study that assesses the utility of polygenic risk score in the detection of prostate cancer. The population may not be representative of those most at risk of prostate cancer, or of poorer health outcomes in general (e.g. black men, men in areas of deprivation), and further research is needed to test the results in these populations. Further research is also needed to understand longitudinal risk for men with a higher polygenic risk score i.e. their risk of developing cancer over time.

    “Interestingly, the best rate of detection of significant prostate cancer arose when the saliva test, PSA test and MRI tests were all positive. The saliva test may help to direct resources to those men most likely to have significant prostate cancer, but at present it does not replace these investigations, which we know are powerful tools in reassuring some men and recommending biopsy (and performing a better biopsy) in others.

    “The saliva test is less invasive than a blood test, or an MRI, and may be more acceptable for larger populations.”

    Dr Oliver Pain, Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, said:

    “This study uses solid data and analyses and its findings fit nicely with the previous literature suggesting that polygenic scores can improve estimation of prostate cancer risk. It goes a step further than previous research in this area by providing a direct comparison with the current diagnostic pathway, showing that stratifying individuals by their polygenic score helped to identify people with clinically significant prostate cancer who would have otherwise been missed. As stated by the authors, the main limitation of this study is that it is restricted to individuals of European ancestry. Previous research has shown that the polygenic score they have used performs worse in non-European individuals, limiting the generalisability of this study’s conclusions. However, this is a common limitation of the field, not just this study, and there is progress being made with polygenic scores performing better across ancestral populations as the training data (GWAS) becomes more ancestrally diverse and polygenic scoring methods develop to improve their ability to be transferred across populations. There is evidence that progress is being made in this area for prostate cancer specifically, although there is a lot more work to be done (https://elifesciences.org/articles/78304, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011990).

    “In general, this study fits with others coming out for other diseases, and it is great step forward, but I would say we need research demonstrating the predictive utility of polygenic scores for prostate cancer in a more representative sample before we can start implementing them in the clinical setting.”

    Dr Chantal Babb de Villiiers, Senior Policy Analyst at PHG Foundation, said:

    “The BARCODE study results contribute valuable insights into the use of polygenic scores for risk stratification of prostate cancer, and how they can supplement risk prediction with known risk factors. The follow-up of the entire cohort will provide crucial data for evaluating the clinical and economic impact of using polygenic scores. Whilst some polygenic scores are showing promise in very specific scenarios, it is important to approach their implementation with caution and ensure thorough validation. We need further research to determine the best combination of these risk factors as well as how to effectively implement stratified screening.”

    Professor Rhian Gabe, Professor of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), said:

    “The test evaluated in this high quality study has exciting results in terms of detection, the hopes for an optimal future prostate cancer screening strategy and deserves larger-scale evaluation. Excitingly, this will happen in the TRANSFORM trial of prostate cancer screening where the test will also be evaluated in terms of acceptance, impact on prostate cancer deaths and incidence by comparing it with other promising strategies involving PSA testing and MRI.”

    Dr Samuel Lambert, Assistant Professor of Health Data Science, University of Cambridge, said:

    “The results of the BARCODE1 study are a major achievement, clearly illustrating the value of targeting prostate cancer screening to individuals defined as high-risk using a polygenic risk score. Targeting screening to the high-polygenic score population identified significant cancers that would not have been detected using existing thresholds, a comparable rate to previous trials targeting screening to individuals with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants.

    “A current limitation is that the polygenic risk score in this study could only be used in individuals of European ancestry due to limitations in the diversity of available genome-wide association study data. This limitation is likely to be overcome in the long term, with data from new studies like Our Future Health in the UK that have prioritised diversity in their recruitment and linked health records to genetics data. Diverse studies like Our Future Health will allow researchers to better identify the variants associated with disease in all ancestries.”

     

    Prof Dusko Ilic, Professor of Stem Cell Sciences, King’s College London (KCL), said:

    “Polygenic risk scores (PRS) offer moderate discriminatory power when used alone. The study used a score based on 130 SNPs and showed that men in the top 10% of the PRS distribution had significantly higher risk. However, when added to established factors like age, PSA level, and MRI findings, the predicting clinically significant prostate cancer improved only modestly. Notably, further stratification within the top decile (e.g., 90th vs. 99th percentile) did not significantly improve predictive accuracy, suggesting diminishing returns at extreme PRS levels.

    “Furthermore, there is no direct evidence yet that using PRS improves long-term outcomes such as mortality or quality-adjusted life years. Modelling suggests benefit, but empirical confirmation is needed.

    “While the results are promising, especially in identifying significant cancers that would otherwise be missed, major caveats remain:

    • Population limitations: The cohort was self-selected, highly educated, and entirely of European ancestry.
    • Unclear generalizability: The PRS used was only validated in men of European descent.
    • No mortality data: The study doesn’t demonstrate reduced prostate cancer mortality or improved overall survival.
    • Cost-effectiveness: Not yet fully evaluated.

    “So, while PRS could supplement existing screening in high-risk individuals, the evidence is insufficient to recommend a standalone screening program based solely on PRS at this time.”

     

    Dr Britta Stordal, Associate Professor in Cancer Research, Middlesex University, said:

    “McHugh et al show that through the use of their BARCODE1 genetic risk score they are able to identify men who are at a higher risk of prostate cancer. 74 men had their prostate cancer diagnosed as a result of participating in this clinical trial that would not have been detected with current standard care on the NHS. This work is possible due to extensive previous research into genetic risk for prostate cancer in European populations. A similar risk score for men of Black African or Caribbean ancestry is urgently needed as we know that these men have a much higher prostate cancer risk than those of European ancestry.”

     

    ‘Assessment of a Polygenic Risk Score in Screening for Prostate Cancer’ by J.K. McHugh et al. was published in The New England Journal of Medicine at 22:00 UK time Wednesday 9 April 2025. 

    DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2407934

    Declared interests

    Prof Michael Inouye: Trustee of the Public Health Genomics (PHG) Foundation, Scientific Advisory Board of Open Targets, and research collaborations with AstraZeneca, Nightingale Health, and Pfizer. All of these are not related to the study. It’s also worth noting that, while the study is obviously driven by the Institute of Cancer Research in London, one of the coauthors (Pashayan) is a colleague at Cambridge.

    Prof Dusko Ilic: I declare no interest.

    Prof Rhian Gabe: I am Co-Lead of the TRANSFORM trial of prostate cancer screening, we are collaborating with Professor Eles to evaluate her PRS test.

    Dr Samuel Lambert: No conflicts of interest to disclose.

    Dr Britta Stordal: No conflicts of interest to declare.

    For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Two Men Sentenced in Largest-Ever Bird Mount Trafficking Case

    Source: United States Attorneys General 7

    $900,000 Fine is One of the Largest Ever Ordered for an Endangered Species Act Case

    A federal judge in Brooklyn today sentenced two men for trafficking protected birds and eggs into the United States in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

    Dr. John Waldrop of Cataula, Georgia, was ordered to pay a $900,000 fine — one of the largest-ever for an ESA case — and serve three years of probation. Toney Jones of Eufala, Alabama, was sentenced to six months of probation. Waldrop pleaded guilty in August 2024 to conspiracy to smuggle wildlife and ESA violations, while Jones pleaded guilty to an ESA charge.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, Waldrop amassed an extensive collection of 1,401 taxidermy bird mounts and 2,594 eggs which included:

    • Four eagles protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act,
    • 179 bird and 193 egg species listed in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and
    • 212 bird and 32 egg species covered by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This included incredibly rare specimens like three eggs of the Nordmann’s Greenshank, an Asian shorebird with only 900 to 1,600 remaining birds in the wild; no North American museum has any Nordmann Greenshank eggs in their collection.

    “Waldrop’s gigantic and rare bird collection was bolstered in part by illegal imports, where he and his enlisted co-conspirators intentionally avoided permit and declaration requirements,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). “We applaud the efforts of the various federal and state law enforcement entities in investigating and prosecuting this case.”

    “The scale of this investigation underscores the critical importance of protecting our natural resources,” said Assistant Director Douglas Ault of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Office of Law Enforcement. “Waldrop’s collection included thousands of bird specimens and eggs, many of which are among the rarest in the world. This is one of the largest bird trafficking cases in history, and the commercialization of species protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and CITES highlights the conservation impact of Waldrop’s crimes. We at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement are unwavering in our commitment to safeguarding wildlife for future generations. We will remain vigilant and will continue to hold accountable those who exploit our shared natural resources for personal gain.”

    Photo of birds and other mounts, from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
    Photo of a portion of Waldrop’s egg collection, from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

    Between 2016 and 2020, Waldrop imported birds and eggs without the required declarations and permits. After USFWS inspectors at John F. Kennedy International Airport and elsewhere intercepted several shipments, Waldrop recruited Jones, who worked on his Georgia farm, to receive the packages. Jones also deposited approximately $525,000 in a bank account that Waldrop then used to pay for the imports and hide his involvement. Waldrop and Jones used online sales sites such as eBay and Etsy to buy birds and eggs from around the world, including Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and Uruguay.

    Waldrop forfeited his collection. The USFWS National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Lab examined the items and determined it to be the largest seizure of bird mounts in their 37-year history. The ESA requires that all wildlife imports be declared to USFWS and have required permits, including species protected by CITES.

    Photos of a freshly killed Roseate Spoonbill (left) and mount from Waldrop’s collection (right), from the sentencing memo in United States v. John Waldrop, et al., 1:23-cr-00378 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

    The USFWS Office of Law Enforcement in Valley Stream, New York, conducted the investigation as part of Operation Final Flight. The operation focused on the trafficking of protected birds into the United States. The U.S. Postal Inspection Service, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources assisted with the investigation.

    Senior Trial Attorney Ryan Connors of ENRD’s Environmental Crimes Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Anna Karamigios for the Eastern District of New York prosecuted the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Our ancestors didn’t eat 3 meals a day. So why do we?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rob Richardson, Senior Lecturer in Culinary Arts & Gastronomy, Auckland University of Technology

    Shutterstock

    Pop quiz: name the world’s most famous trio? If you’re a foodie, then your answer might have been breakfast, lunch and dinner. It’s an almost universally accepted trinity – particularly in the Western world.

    But how did it come about?

    The first meals

    Early humans were nomadic. Forming small communities, they would travel with the seasons, following local food sources.

    While we can only guess what daily mealtimes rhythms looked like, evidence dating back 30,000 years from the South Moravia region, Czech Republic, shows people visited specific settlements time and again. They gathered around hearths, cooking and sharing food: the first signs of human “commensality”, the practice of eating together.

    One of the best-preserved hunter-gatherer sites we’ve found is Ohalo II – located on the shores of the modern-day Sea of Galilee (also called Lake Tiberias or Lake Kinneret) in Israel, and dating back some 23,000 years.

    In addition to several small dwellings with hearths, it provides evidence of diverse food sources, including more than 140 types of seeds and nuts, and various birds, fish and mammals.

    The development of agricultural knowledge some 12,000 years ago gave rise to permanent settlements. The earliest were in the Levant region (across modern-day Iraq, southwestern Iran and eastern Turkey), in an area called the “Fertile Crescent”.

    The fertile crescent covers the rich, biodiverse valleys of the Tigris, Euphrates and Jordan rivers.
    Shutterstock

    Permanent agriculture led to the production of a surplus of food. The ability to stay in one place with food on-hand meant the time it took to cook no longer mattered as much.

    It quickly became common to eat one light meal early in the day, followed by a larger hearth-prepared meal later on. The specific timings would have varied between groups.

    Eating together as a rule

    The communal nature of foraging and hunting, and later farming, meant humans almost always ate their meals in the company of others. In the ancient city-state of Sparta, in the 4th century BCE, these practices were codified as common main meals called syssitia (meaning “eating together”).

    These meals were consumed at the end of the day in communal dining halls. Food was served by young boys to tables of 15 or so men who lived together and fought in the same military division. The men gradually shared generational knowledge with the young boys, who themselves would join the tables by age 20.

    In the 5th century BCE, Greek historian Herodotus wrote about how syssitia evolved from a Spartan military practice to having deep political meaning in society. Similarly, Plato wrote common meals were an integral component of civil society, and that missing a meal without good reason was a civic offence.

    By dining in full view of the rest of society, citizens were compelled to maintain self-discipline. Mealtime was also an opportunity for social linkage, and important discussions ranging from business deals to politics.

    The eating habits of Spartan women are missing in the texts, although it is implied they ate at home.

    Bunches of lunches

    Counter to the tough Spartan way of life, the Romans enjoyed their main meal, cena, earlier in the day, followed by a lighter meal just before bed.

    The northern European tribes tended towards two larger meals per day, as more sustenance is required in colder climes. To the Vikings, these meals were known as dagmal and nattmal, or day meal and night meal. Nattmal was the cooked evening meal, while dagmal usually consisted of leftover nattmal with the addition of bread and beer or mead.

    In Australia, evidence suggests Aboriginal peoples tended toward a daily single meal, which aligns with the predominant method of cookery: slow-cooking with hot coals or rocks in an earth oven. This underground oven, used by Aboriginal and also Torres Strait Islander communities, was referred to as a kup murri or kap mauri by some groups.

    This is similar to other Indigenous preparations throughout the Pacific, such as the New Zealand Māori hāngī, Hawaiian imu, Fijian lovo, and even the Mayan píib.

    The once-daily meal would have been supplemented with snacks throughout the day.

    Three’s the magic number

    The timing of meals was heavily influenced by class structure, local climate and people’s daily activities. Practicality also played a part. Without reliable lighting, meals had to be prepared and eaten before dark. In settled parts of Northern Europe, this could be as early as 3pm.

    So how did we go from one or two main meals, to three? The answer may lie with the British Royal Navy.

    Since its inception in the 16th century, the navy served three regular meals to align with the shipboard routine. This included a simple breakfast of ship’s biscuits, lunch as the main meal, and dinner as more of a light supper.

    Some sources suggest the term “square meal” may have come from the square wooden trays meals were served in.

    Initially, sailors recieved a daily gallon of beer with meals. This was later changed to watered-down rum, the infamous ‘grog’, which is being handed out in this 1940 photo taken aboard HMS King George V.
    Imperial War Museums, CC BY-NC

    The Industrial Revolution, which started around 1760, arguably also played a role in formalising the concept of three specific mealtimes across the Western world.

    The cadence of breakfast, lunch and dinner matched the routine of the longer, standardised workdays. Workers ate breakfast and dinner at home, before and after work, while lunch was eaten with coworkers at a set time.

    With minimal breaks, and no time for snacking, three substantial meals became necessary.

    The fall of the holy trinity

    Today, many factors impact the time and frequency of our meals, from long work commutes to juggling hobbies and social obligations.

    The ways in which we eat and share food continue to evolve alongside our societies and cultures.
    Shutterstock

    The COVID pandemic also impacted how and what we eat, leading us to eat larger amounts of higher calorie foods. The rapid growth of delivery services also means a meal is no more than a few minutes away from most people.

    All of this has resulted in mealtimes becoming less rigid, with social meals such as brunch, elevenses and afternoon teas expanding how we connect over food. And mealtimes will continue to evolve as our schedules become ever more complicated.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Our ancestors didn’t eat 3 meals a day. So why do we? – https://theconversation.com/our-ancestors-didnt-eat-3-meals-a-day-so-why-do-we-250773

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: 1 in 10 tunnel workers could develop silicosis, our new research shows

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Cole, Occupational Hygienist, PhD Candidate, University of Sydney

    Around 10% of underground tunnel workers in Queensland could develop silicosis, our new study has found.

    Silicosis is a serious, incurable lung disease caused by inhaling small particles of silica dust. You might have heard about it in people who work with engineered stone. But silica is more widespread.

    Silica is found in rocks and concrete, so workers in industries such as construction, mining and tunnelling are at high risk if proper safety measures aren’t in place.

    When silica dust is breathed in, it gets trapped in the lungs, causing inflammation and scarring. Over time, this scarring makes it harder to breathe and can be fatal.

    As symptoms of silicosis can take decades to appear, workers may not realise they’re sick until long after they’ve started working, or even after they stop.

    But silicosis is preventable.

    When silica dust is breathed in, it gets trapped in the lungs in tiny air sacs (the alveoli), causing inflammation and scarring.
    Pikovit/Shutterstock

    How does silicosis affect tunnel workers?

    Thousands of people are involved in tunnelling projects in Australia.

    Tunnelling involves breaking up large amounts of silica-containing rock with heavy machinery.

    Tunnel workers rely on advanced ventilation systems to provide fresh air underground, water systems to keep the rocks wet and suppress dust, and they wear respirators on their face to keep the air they breathe clean. But some people have raised concerns these measures do not always work properly.

    There are also national legal limits in place for silica dust exposure, currently 0.05 milligrams per cubic metre over an eight-hour work day.

    However, a media investigation last November revealed one-third of air monitoring tests from a Sydney tunnel project were above legal limits.

    While air monitoring tests are required by law, the results of routine air monitoring tests are often not made public.

    An expert taskforce has recently been set up in New South Wales to address the silica-related health risks for tunnel workers, promising to make high silica results above legal limits publicly available.

    But while attention has been focused on tunnel workers in Sydney, the problem of lung disease in underground workers is more widespread.

    Our Queensland study

    The results of air monitoring tests are important because they show whether legal silica dust limits are being adhered to.

    Another valuable use of this data is it can help us predict future disease risk. Instead of waiting to see how many workers develop silica-related diseases such as silicosis and lung cancer, this data can be used to estimate cases in advance.

    In 2017, a Queensland parliamentary inquiry raised concerns about the health of Brisbane’s tunnel workers, particularly regarding the harmful effects of exposure to silica dust.

    We worked through the parliamentary inquiry documents to uncover the results of hundreds of individual air monitoring tests conducted on three major Queensland tunnel projects between 2007 and 2013.

    We analysed this data to estimate how many workers were exposed to silica dust and at what levels. We then modelled how many cases of silicosis and lung cancer would occur over the workers’ lifetimes.

    We estimated that in a group of around 2,000 workers involved in these Queensland tunnel projects, 200 to 300 would develop silicosis over their lifetime as a result of silica dust exposure (roughly one in every ten workers).

    We also estimated between 20 to 30 workers would develop lung cancer due to their exposure.

    We had limited information on workplace conditions in the specific projects, so we made a number of assumptions based on publicly available information and our own experience. These included assumptions around the use and protective nature of masks. The fact we had to make some assumptions could be a limitation of our study. Due to the lack of data transparency we don’t know if these figures apply more broadly to tunnel workers throughout Australia.

    Silicosis can appear decades after occupational exposure.
    Marco Di Stefano/Shutterstock

    Our projected rate of silicosis, 10%, is the same as the rate of silicosis recorded by a government inquiry in 1924 which investigated silicosis among workers who built Sydney’s sewers.

    So it doesn’t seem things are any better in terms of silicosis risk in underground work than a century ago.

    We need to do more to protect tunnel workers

    Continued secrecy around silica dust data reduces our ability to understand the scale of the problem and respond effectively. Nonetheless, the small amount of data that has been made available supports the need for urgent action.

    With Australia’s ongoing infrastructure expansion, policymakers must act now. This should include enforcing stricter legal limits for silica dust exposure. There is concern among health experts that current limits don’t sufficiently protect workers’ health.

    Policymakers should also ensure protective measures such as advanced ventilation and dust suppression systems are in place for all tunnel projects, set up national tunnel worker health surveillance, and make exposure data available to workers and the public.

    There are several examples where things are done better. Internationally, Norway and Switzerland have strong systems to protect tunnel workers’ health such as air and health monitoring being conducted by an independent government agency. In Switzerland, this agency also insures the project. Noncompliance results in higher insurance premiums or, in some cases, the withdrawal of insurance, effectively stopping the project.

    Nationally, Australia’s mining industry is more heavily regulated than tunnelling, with stricter enforcement of compliance.

    Without immediate intervention, thousands of tunnel workers will continue to face serious health risks and Australia will face a growing wave of preventable occupational diseases.

    Kate Cole receives higher degree by research funding from The University of Sydney; is a member of the Asbestos and Silica Safety Eradication Council; the NSW Dust Diseases Board; the Chair of the External Affairs Committee for the Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists; and acts as an expert witness for law firms concerning silica-related diseases in tunnel workers.

    Renee Carey has previously received funding from the Australian Council of Trade Unions. She is a member of the Occupational Lung Disease Network Steering Committee formed by Lung Foundation Australia.

    Tim Driscoll has acted as an expert witness, and written government reports, in relation to silica exposure but not specifically connected to tunnelling. He chairs the Occupational and Environmental Cancer Committee of Cancer Council Australia and chairs the Occupational Lung Disease Network Steering Committee of Lung Foundation Australia.

    – ref. 1 in 10 tunnel workers could develop silicosis, our new research shows – https://theconversation.com/1-in-10-tunnel-workers-could-develop-silicosis-our-new-research-shows-252186

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor made plenty of promises at the last election. Did they deliver?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frank Rindert Algra-Maschio, PhD Candidate, Social and Political Sciences, Monash University

    Election promises are a mainstay of contemporary politics. Governments cite kept commitments as proof they can be trusted, while oppositions pounce on any failure to deliver.

    But beyond the politics, campaign pledges are also central to representative democracy. They telegraph what to expect from a party in government and create a moral obligation for it to follow through.

    Democratic governments across the globe fulfil, on average, roughly two-thirds of their promises, but most voters believe it is far fewer. Since voters will punish governments for breaking promises, it’s vital they have accurate information on their government’s record.

    We set out to provide Australians with that information through RMIT’s Election Promise Tracker. We assessed 66 major promises made by Labor before the last election.

    By presenting evidence through an interactive timeline that follows all the twists and turns since 2022, the tracker allows voters to form their own judgements during the 2025 campaign.

    Tracking election promises

    Our team compiled a long list of promises during the last election campaign by scouring public statements made by both major parties.

    For this, we kept to the definition of an “election promise” used by the Comparative Pledges Project, a research network that employs a common approach to studying promises.

    After the election, we narrowed Labor’s list to 66 promises — based on newsworthiness, coverage of policy areas and, later, feedback from the audience of ABC News.



    The tracker was originally launched as a project of RMIT ABC Fact Check, and it applies a methodology of fact-check journalism that prioritises impartiality and transparency.

    We laid out, from the start, the criteria by which we would eventually assess each promise, to ensure only those that could be assessed by the end of the electoral term were included.

    Three years on, we determined whether those criteria had been met, marking promises as “delivered”, “thwarted” or “broken”. In a few cases, some remain “in progress” or “stalled”.

    Mostly good news for the government

    Overall, the government delivered at least 46 of the promises (roughly 70%) we tracked. Many of these are in areas typically seen as Labor strengths.

    These include key promises in health and aged care, such as funding pay rises for aged care workers, requiring aged care homes to keep a registered nurse on site 24/7, and mandating minimum “care minutes” for their residents.

    On education, employment and social services, the government boosted childcare subsidies and increased workplace protections for gig workers. It also delivered funding for 450,000 fee-free TAFE places and for the states to hire 500 support workers for women in crisis.

    Integrity was a key theme of the 2022 election, and the government has since followed through on establishing an anti-corruption commission, delivering a royal commission into Robodebt and implementing all the recommendations of the Respect@Work report that fell within its remit.

    And on the all-important cost of living, Labor cut the maximum price for Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) scripts, boosted payments for disabled veterans, increased the low-and-middle income tax offset by $420 and – following a Senate standoff with the Greens and Coalition — established a $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund.

    And some bad news

    But it was not all smooth sailing for the government. It failed to deliver on at least 14 pledges (roughly 20%), including a promise to increase real wages above pre-election levels. It’s pledged to address real wages through a submission to the Fair Work Commission this time around.

    Arguably, it was unlucky on defence spending. Despite injecting $10 billion over its first three years, Labor is poised to miss its target of spending “at least” 2% of gross domestic product on defence, due to an uptick in GDP.

    In other cases, the government never really got close. After promising to deliver 450 gigalitres of environmental water under the Murray Darling Basin Plan, it only managed 27.5GL.

    And some deadlines were simply missed, with the government belatedly establishing 50 urgent care clinics and introducing a new Pacific Engagement Visa.

    Among the most controversial issues was Labor’s restructuring of the stage three tax cuts, having previously pledged to implement the cuts exactly as the Coalition had formulated them. But polling showed voters may forgive the “breaking” of a pledge if they agree with the outcome.

    The government also retreated from its promise to establish a Makarrata Commission following the defeated Voice referendum, providing an example of how changed political circumstances can come to haunt promises made years earlier.

    Not always an easy answer

    Despite the best intentions, some promises don’t fit neatly into the “delivered” or “broken” binary.

    For example, Labor promised Australia would make a joint bid with Pacific Island countries to host a United Nations climate conference. But the government can’t formally submit a bid unless Turkey bows out of the race, meaning this pledge has been “thwarted”.

    And it remains to be seen whether households will receive a much-touted $275 cut to their annual electricity bill (on 2021 levels) by mid-2025. The necessary data won’t arrive until after the election, and Labor’s energy rebates have complicated the picture.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese may not have delivered on “every single thing” he promised, but of the promises we tracked, far more were kept than broken.

    This suggests the Albanese government has performed on a fairly level footing with other comparative countries, as well as with the Gillard Labor government.

    But voters will have different views on which promises are most important, so as ever, it’s the details that matter.

    Lisa Waller receives funding from The Australian Research Council

    David Campbell and Frank Rindert Algra-Maschio do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Labor made plenty of promises at the last election. Did they deliver? – https://theconversation.com/labor-made-plenty-of-promises-at-the-last-election-did-they-deliver-251481

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Joint press release – Fourth CELAC-EU summit to take place on 9-10 November 2025

    Source: Council of the European Union

    Two years after their third successful summit, the leaders of the 27 European Union (EU) member states and the 33 countries of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) will meet in Santa Marta, Colombia on 9-10 November 2025 for the fourth CELAC-EU summit.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Bozeman man sentenced to ten years in prison on drug charges

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    MISSOULA – A Bozeman man who possessed methamphetamine and fentanyl was sentenced today to 120 months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release, U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme said.

    Rene Montenegro-Virrey, 51, pleaded guilty in December 2024 to possession with intent to distribute controlled substances.

    U.S. District Judge Dana L. Christensen presided.

    The government alleged in court documents that in August 2022, drug investigators learned that Rene Montenegro-Virrey was planning a trip to Bozeman to deliver 7,000 fentanyl pills and five pounds of methamphetamine. Over the next several months, drugs were purchased from the defendant through undercover purchases and controlled buys. In August 2024, Montenegro-Virrey met with undercover officers for another transaction. Four pounds of methamphetamine was seized from his vehicle.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecuted the case and the investigation was conducted by the Missouri River Drug Task Force.

    This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results. For more information about Project Safe Neighborhoods, please visit https://www.justice.gov/psn.

    XXX

    MIL Security OSI –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: How the small autonomous region of Puntland found success in battling Islamic State in Somalia

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ido Levy, PhD Candidate, School of International Service, American University

    Soldiers with the Puntland Defense Forces. Photo by Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    On Feb. 24, 2025, members of the Puntland Defense Forces posed next to a sign in Arabic that proclaimed the mountain town of Sheebaab as a “province” of the Islamic State group. The town, located in Somalia’s autonomous northeastern region of Puntland, was one of numerous areas that soldiers from the regional government have taken back during Operation Hilaac, an ongoing campaign against fighters from the Islamic State in Somalia – the local branch of the terrorist network – which began in late November 2024.

    Puntland’s success in combating a growing Islamic State group presence in the northeastern region is particularly notable given the relative lack of success of the central Somali government’s confrontation with the al-Qaida-affiliated group Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahidin – more commonly known as al-Shabab – which for about two decades has waged war against federal forces.

    In contrast, security forces in the self-declared autonomous region of Puntland have, with some key support from international partners, united to repel the Islamic State group’s advance.

    The Islamic State group’s rise in Somalia

    Islamist groups have been part of Somalia’s fractured political landscape since the country’s descent into civil war in the 1980s.

    They tapped into profound local dissatisfaction with warlordism, tribalism and corruption, as well as a reaction to foreign intervention by Ethiopia, the United States and other international actors.

    Al-Shabab and later the Islamic State in Somalia are the most extreme manifestations of this trend.

    Islamic State in Somalia emerged in 2015 when a small group of al-Shabab members led by Abdulqadir Mumin – an extremist Somali preacher who previously lived in Sweden and the United Kingdom, where he acquired citizenship – pledged allegiance to then-Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Having formed as a local branch – or “province” in the group’s self conception as a global entity intent on expanding territory – Islamic State in Somalia launched its first major operation in October 2016, briefly seizing the port town of Qandala in Puntland.

    Thereafter, the group retreated to its strongholds in the mountain regions inside Puntland amid pressure from both the regional government and al-Shabab, which has cracked down on Islamic State supporters in its ranks.

    Yet from the Puntland mountains, Islamic State in Somalia grew into a key node of the terrorist group’s global network. It is now a hub for transferring funds and drawing recruits from across Africa and elsewhere via the regional coordination office it operates known as al-Karrar.

    One notable Sudan-born operative killed in a 2023 U.S. raid in Puntland, Bilal al-Sudani, was known as a key foreign fighter, facilitator and financier who developed Islamic State funding networks in South Africa and helped fund the group’s branch in Afghanistan.

    An NBC News report from mid-2024 cited U.S. officials who believed Mumin, head of Islamic State in Somalia, was acting as the network’s overall leader, or caliph, though other analysts have suggested he holds a top role close to caliph.

    In any case, Islamic State in Somalia’s ranks have increased steadily, from an estimated 200-300 fighters in 2016 to about 1,000 as of February 2025, according to reports.

    Puntland pushes back

    Puntland declared itself an autonomous region of Somalia in 1998 amid the ongoing Somali civil war and has since achieved relative stability compared with the other parts of the country, which have generally been marked by decades of sectarian division and weak central governance.

    Puntland is no stranger to divisions in a country that often hinges on clan loyalties, but it has achieved a greater degree of unity and has regularly raised security forces to defeat external threats, often with considerable foreign support.

    The dominance of a single clan, the Majeerteen, has in part likely helped facilitate this unity. In the current operations against Islamic State in Somalia, the autonomous Puntland government under President Said Abdullahi Deni has gathered several disparate regional forces under the “Puntland Defense Forces” banner, including clan militias, the Puntland Darawish – a regional paramilitary unit – and the Puntland Maritime Police Force.

    Soldiers with the Puntland Defense Forces stand at a base formerly held by the Islamic State group’s Somali affiliate in January 2025 in Puntland, Somalia.
    Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    The Puntland Maritime Police Force in particular has evolved into a well-trained and experienced counterterrorism unit. Founded with United Arab Emirates money and mentored by private South African military contractors to address growing piracy, it has turned to fighting al-Shabab and Islamic State in Somalia in the mountain regions. Indeed, it played a leading role in taking Qandala from Islamic State control in 2016. It also cooperated effectively with other forces to defeat a 2016 al-Shabab attempt to attack Puntland from the sea.

    The U.S. and UAE have supported the Puntland government’s campaign. In February 2025, the U.S. launched two airstrikes on Islamic State fighters, with one on Feb. 1, 2025, killing Omani-born Ahmed Maeleninine, a key recruiter, financier and facilitator. The United States claimed another airstrike on March 25.

    The UAE has conducted airstrikes too, likely from the large UAE-funded Puntland Maritime Police Force headquarters base in the major port city of Bosaso.

    The Puntland government has claimed that through its latest operation it has advanced through 315 kilometers, clearing numerous villages and outposts in the mountains.

    On Feb. 11, 2025, The Washington Post reported that regional security forces had killed more than 150 Islamic State members, mostly foreign fighters from countries including Morocco, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, illustrating the group’s significance as a global hub for the network. In fact, one analyst counted 118 dead fighters from a single encounter in early February, indicating a possibly higher death toll. In any case, it represents heavy losses for Islamic State in Somalia, though it is not defeated yet and still numbers fighters in the hundreds.

    The risk of outside interference

    All in all, Puntland has leveraged past success fighting jihadist groups in making remarkable progress in its fight against Islamic State in Somalia.

    It shows how local and substate forces can be more effective at fighting armed nonstate groups than the federal authorities, despite limited resources.

    No doubt, support from the United States and UAE has aided Puntland’s anti-Islamic State push. But reliance on outside sources risks creating dependence on them when local forces must ultimately take ownership of the fight themselves.

    And less patient foreign supporters have been known to spoil the elite units they build. This occurred with the Puntland Security Force, a U.S.-created special forces unit that splintered during a brief withdrawal of U.S. forces from Somalia in 2021 and 2022.

    There are also risks that partner forces will behave badly. While the Emirati mission in Puntland – as well as in Afghanistan and Yemen – has proven effective in fighting jihadists, in Sudan it has been arguably disastrous. There, the UAE-backed Rapid Support Forces paramilitary unit helped to ignite an ongoing civil war in 2023 during which its members perpetrated alleged atrocities.

    Ultimately, it will be up to Puntlanders themselves to keep fighting. Indeed, foreign support would have little impact without effective local forces on the ground with the political will to sustain the campaign. Just as Puntland has done before, so too is it now demonstrating that it is determined to fight the threat posed by jihadist groups like Islamic State in Somalia.

    Ido Levy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How the small autonomous region of Puntland found success in battling Islamic State in Somalia – https://theconversation.com/how-the-small-autonomous-region-of-puntland-found-success-in-battling-islamic-state-in-somalia-251775

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Magaziner’s Bill to Combat Transnational Repression Passes Homeland Security Committee

    Source: US Representative Seth Magaziner (RI-02)

    WASHINGTON, DC — The House Homeland Security Committee today passed U.S. Representative Seth Magaziner’s (RI-02) Strengthening State and Local Efforts to Combat Transnational Repression Act, bipartisan legislation to crack down on coercive tactics used by repressive foreign governments to silence political dissidents, activists, and journalists within the United States. 

    Rep. Magaziner, who serves as Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence, sponsored the bill to train state and local law enforcement to identify and counter transnational repression by authoritarian regimes. This bill will be sent to Speaker Johnson for consideration on the House floor. 

    “Free speech is a fundamental American value, and people who come to the United States to escape repression should be able to speak out without fear,” said Rep. Seth Magaziner. “But too often, dissidents and journalists are harassed or threatened by foreign governments—even after they’ve found safety on our shores. That’s why I introduced this bipartisan bill, which just passed the full Homeland Security Committee, to ensure local law enforcement has the tools to identify and investigate transnational repression in communities across the country.”

    Rep. Magaziner’s legislation requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a transnational repression threat training program for state, local, tribal, campus, and territorial law enforcement, including Fusion Center personnel. The specialized training will help these law enforcement officers, who are the first line of defense in our communities, counter the threat of transnational repression and protect those seeking refuge from authoritarian regimes.

    The bill advanced out of the House Homeland Security Committee as part of a bipartisan package aimed at combating transnational repression. The package includes the Countering Transnational Repression Act of 2025, sponsored by Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, chairman of the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. Pfluger’s bill will establish a dedicated transnational repression working group within the Department of Homeland Security. It also includes the Law Enforcement Support and Counter Transnational Repression Act, sponsored by Rep. Gabe Evans, R-Colorado, which will establish a public service announcement campaign to address this threat.

    BACKGROUND

    A quarter of the world’s governments (48 states) around the world have reached beyond their borders to forcibly silence political dissidents – including on U.S. soil – according to data by Freedom House.The top ten perpetrators over the past ten years were the governments of Russia, Cambodia, Belarus, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Egypt, Iran, Tajikistan, Turkey, and China. And in 2023, Freedom House reported 125 incidents of physical transnational impression that included assassinations, abductions, assaults, detentions, and unlawful deportations. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Sherrill Presses Top Department of Defense Officials on Trump’s Dangerous Appeasement of Russian President Putin

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11)

    Watch Rep. Sherrill’s questioning here

    WASHINGTON, DC — Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11), former Navy helicopter aircraft commander and Russian policy officer, and member of the House Armed Services Committee, pressed Department of Defense leadership this week on Trump’s dangerous appeasement of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. 

    “Right now, Donald Trump is abandoning our ally Ukraine and threatening to remove American troops stationed in Europe while Russian President Vladimir Putin is rebuilding and strengthening his own military. Allowing Russia’s military to grow unchecked will put the lives of American service members in danger, jeopardize America’s global supply chains, and risk America’s partnerships with our democratic allies and partners worldwide,” said Rep. Sherrill. 

    Sherrill has been at the forefront of House efforts to support Ukraine since the beginning of Putin’s brutal invasion. She spoke directly with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in Kyiv and while representing the United States as part of a bipartisan Congressional Delegation to the Munich Security Conference. New Jersey is home to one of the largest Ukrainian-American populations in the country and Congresswoman Sherrill continues to work closely with community leaders to support Ukraine. 

    Congresswoman Sherrill is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and served in the Navy for almost 10 years as a helicopter pilot and Russian policy officer. As a Russian policy officer, she worked on implementing our nuclear treaty obligations and oversaw the relationship between the US Navy and Russian Federation Navy. She now serves on the House Armed Services Committee and the new House Select Committee on Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Western Balkan investigators and prosecutors gather in Warsaw to discuss crypto-assets and e-evidence challenges

    Source: Eurojust

    Warsaw, 8–9 April 2025

    09 April 2025|

    As digital technologies reshape the landscape of crime, staying ahead of emerging threats is more critical than ever. In response to these challenges, the Western Balkans Criminal Justice (WBCJ) Project organised together with the European Judicial Cybercrime Network (EJCN), the SIRIUS Project, and the CyberSEE Project a two-day seminar on investigations involving crypto-assets and e-evidence, which took place in the National Prosecutor’s Office of Poland on 8-9 April 2025 under the auspices of the Polish Presidency.

    The event brought together prosecutors and investigators from the Western Balkans to share their experiences, discuss challenges, and strengthen overall cooperation in the fight against cybercrime. Additionally, the participants were able to benefit from the experiences of EU prosecutors specialised in this matter.

    Sessions included a wide range of topics such as tracing and seizing crypto-assets, discussions on how crypto-assets are utilised in online fraud and money laundering, as well as the cooperation with crypto-asset service providers.

    Through this workshop, the WBCJ Project was able to promote among Western Balkan law enforcement and judicial authorities the EJCN Guides on Crypto-Currencies and the tools available for them on the platform developed by the SIRIUS Project.

    MIL Security OSI –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Universities in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union thought giving in to government demands would save their independence

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Iveta Silova, Professor of Comparative and International Education, Arizona State University

    Columbia University has been in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.
    Rudi Von Briel/Photodisc via Getty Images

    Many American universities, widely seen globally as beacons of academic integrity and free speech, are giving in to demands from the Trump administration, which has been targeting academia since it took office.

    In one of his first acts, President Donald Trump branded diversity, equity and inclusion programs as discriminatory. His administration also launched federal investigations into more than 50 universities, from smaller regional schools such as Grand Valley State University in Michigan and the New England College of Optometry in Massachusetts to elite private universities such as Harvard and Yale.

    Trump ramped up the pressure by threatening university research funding and targeting specific schools. In one example, the Trump administration revoked US$400 million in grants to Columbia University over its alleged failures to curb antisemitic harassment on campus. The school later agreed to most of Trump’s demands, from tightening student protest policies to placing an entire academic department under administrative oversight – though the funding remains frozen.

    Cornell, Northwestern, Princeton, Brown and the University of Pennsylvania have also recently had grants frozen. Harvard was sent a list of demands in order to keep $9 billion in federal funding.

    Now, across the United States, many universities are trying to avoid being Trump’s next target. Administrators are dismantling DEI initiatives – closing and rebranding offices, eliminating positions, revising training programs and sanitizing diversity statements – while professors are preemptively self-censoring.

    Not all institutions are complying. Some schools, such as Wesleyan, have refused to abandon their diversity principles. And organizations including the American Association of University Professors have filed lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive orders, arguing they violate academic freedom and the First Amendment.

    But these remain exceptions, as the broader trend leans toward institutional caution and retreat.

    As a scholar of comparative and international education, I study how academic institutions respond to authoritarian pressure – across political systems, cultural contexts and historical moments. While some universities may believe that compliance with the administration will protect their funding and independence, a few historical parallels suggest otherwise.

    Students and other Nazi supporters gather at Humboldt University in Berlin in 1933.
    AP Photo

    German universities: A lesson

    In the 1975 book “The Abuse of Learning: The Failure of German Universities,” historian Frederic Lilge chronicles how German universities, which entered the 20th century in a golden age of global intellectual influence, did not resist the Nazi regime but instead adapted to it.

    Even before seizing national power in 1933, the Nazi Party was closely monitoring German universities through nationalist student groups and sympathetic faculty, flagging professors deemed politically unreliable – particularly Jews, Marxists, liberals and pacifists.

    After Hitler took office in 1933, his regime moved swiftly to purge academic institutions of Jews and political opponents. The 1933 Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service mandated the firing of Jewish and other “non-Aryan” professors and members of the faculty deemed politically suspect.

    Soon after, professors were required to swear loyalty to Hitler, curricula were overhauled to emphasize “national defense” and “racial science” – a pseudoscientific framework used to justify antisemitism and Aryan supremacy – and entire departments were restructured to serve Nazi ideology.

    Some institutions, such as the Technische Hochschule Stuttgart, even rushed to honor Hitler with an honorary doctorate within weeks of his rise to power. He declined the offer, though the gesture signaled the university’s eagerness to align with the regime. Professional associations, such as the Association of German Universities, stayed silent, ignoring key opportunities to resist before universities lost their autonomy and became subservient to the Nazi state.

    As linguist Max Weinreich wrote in his 1999 book “Hitler’s Professors,” many academics didn’t just comply, they enabled the regime by reshaping their research. This legitimized state doctrine, helping build the intellectual framework of the regime.

    A few academics resisted and were dismissed, exiled or executed. Most did not.

    The transformation of German academia was not a slow drift but a swift and systemic overhaul. But what made Hitler’s orders stick was the eagerness of many academic leaders to comply, justify and normalize the new order. Each decision – each erased name, each revised syllabus, each closed program and department – was framed as necessary, even patriotic. Within a few years, German universities no longer served knowledge – they served power.

    It would take more than a decade after the war, through denazification, reinvestment and international reintegration, for West German universities to begin regaining their intellectual standing and academic credibility.

    Under Stalin, dissenting scholars were purged and history rewritten to glorify the Communist Party. Moscow State University opened in 1953 with murals such as this one depicting Soviet symbols.
    AP Photo/Zander Hollander

    USSR and fascist Italy suffer similar fate

    Other countries that have fallen under authoritarian regimes followed similar trajectories.

    In fascist Italy, the shift began not with violence but with a signature. In 1931, the Mussolini regime required all university professors to swear an oath of loyalty to the state. Out of more than 1,200, only 12 refused.

    Many justified their compliance by insisting the oath had no bearing on their teaching or research. But by publicly affirming loyalty and offering no organized resistance, the academic community signaled its willingness to accommodate the regime. This lack of opposition allowed the fascist government to tighten control over universities and use them to advance its ideological agenda.

    In the Soviet Union, this control was not limited to symbolic gestures – it reshaped the entire academic system.

    After the Russian Revolution in 1917, the Bolsheviks oscillated between wanting to abolish universities as “feudal relics” and repurposing them to serve a socialist state, as historians John Connelly and Michael Grüttner explain in their book “Universities Under Dictatorship.” Ultimately, they chose the latter, remaking universities as instruments of ideological education and technical training, tightly aligned with Marxist-Leninist goals.

    Under Josef Stalin, academic survival depended less on scholarly merit than on conformity to official doctrine. Dissenting scholars were purged or exiled, history was rewritten to glorify the Communist Party, and entire disciplines such as genetics were reshaped to fit political orthodoxy.

    This model was exported across Eastern and Central Europe during the Cold War. In East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Poland, ministries dictated curricula, Marxism-Leninism became mandatory across disciplines, and admissions were reengineered to favor students from loyalist backgrounds. In some contexts, adherents to older intellectual traditions pushed back, especially in Poland, where resistance slowed though could not prevent the imposition of ideological control.

    By the early 1950s, universities across the region had become what Connelly calls “captive institutions,” stripped of independence and recast to serve the state.

    A more recent example is Turkey, where, following the failed 2016 coup, more than 6,000 academics were dismissed, universities were shuttered and research deemed “subversive” was banned.

    History’s warning

    The Trump administration’s early and direct intervention into higher education governance echoes historical attempts to bring universities under state influence or control.

    The administration says it is doing so to eradicate “discrimatory” DEI policies and fight what it sees as antisemitism on college campuses. But by withholding federal funding, the administration is also trying to force universities into ideological conformity – by dictating whose knowledge counts but also whose presence and perspectives are permissible on campus.

    Columbia’s reaction to Trump’s demands sent a clear message: Resistance is risky, but compliance may be rewarded – though the $400 million has yet to be restored. The speed and scope of its concessions set a precedent, signaling to other universities that avoiding political fallout now may mean rewriting policies, reshaping departments and retreating from controversy, perhaps before anyone even asks.

    The Trump administration has already moved on to other universities, including the University of Pennsylvania over its transgender policies, Princeton for its climate programs and Harvard over alleged antisemitism. The question is which school is next.

    The Department of Education has launched investigations into over 50 institutions, accusing them of using “racial preferences and stereotypes in education programs and activities.” How these institutions choose to respond may determine whether higher education remains a space for open inquiry.

    The pressure to conform is not just financial – it is also cultural. Faculty at some institutions are being advised not to use “DEI” in emails and public communication, with warnings to not be a target. Academics are removing pronouns from their email signatures and asking their students to comply, too. I’ve been on the receiving end of those warnings, and so have my counterparts at other institutions. And students on visas are being warned not to travel outside the U.S. after several were deported or denied reentry due to alleged involvement in protests.

    Meanwhile, people inside and outside academia are combing websites, syllabi, presentations and public writing in search of what they consider ideological infractions. This type of peer surveillance can reward silence, incentivize erasure and turn institutions against their own.

    When universities start regulating not just what they say but what they teach, support and stand for – driven by fear rather than principle – they are no longer just reacting to political threats, they are internalizing them. And as history has shown, that may mark the beginning of the end of their academic independence.

    This article does not represent the views of Arizona State University.

    – ref. Universities in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union thought giving in to government demands would save their independence – https://theconversation.com/universities-in-nazi-germany-and-the-soviet-union-thought-giving-in-to-government-demands-would-save-their-independence-252888

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Booking a gazebo

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    Babushkinsky Park is located in the Losinoostrovsky district of the capital. There are sports and children’s playgrounds, a Green Theater, a dry fountain, attractions, and a living corner with squirrels.

    In the immediate vicinity of the gazebo there is an amusement area and toilets. The gazebo is equipped with benches, in the evening the lighting is turned on. It is prohibited to make a fire (any open fire), grill shashlik, smoke and drink alcoholic beverages on the territory.

    Capacity: 20 people.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    HTTPS: //bytle.mo.ru/Event/341602257/

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Activities of Secretary-General in Belgium, 18-21 March

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    On Tuesday evening, 18 March, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres arrived in Brussels to meet with European Union leaders.

    On Wednesday, the Secretary-General had meetings with Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, as well as with Roberta Metsola, the President of the European Parliament. 

    In the evening, he attended a dinner organized by Antonio Costa, the President of the European Council, along with Ms. Von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, the European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission.

    On Thursday, 20 March, at the invitation of the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa, the Secretary-General took part in a working lunch with the Heads of State and Government of the European Union at the opening of the European Council.  

    The Secretary-General and Mr. Costa spoke to the press as they entered the European Union building.  Mr. Guterres expressed his appreciation for the UN’s partnership with the European Union, reiterating that it is a fundamental pillar of the multilateral response to the challenges we face in peace and security, climate, sustainable development and human rights.

    Turning to the situation in Ukraine, the Secretary-General said any ceasefire is welcome because it saves lives, but he added that it is essential that a ceasefire paves the way for a just peace in Ukraine — a peace that respects the Charter of the United Nations, international law and Security Council resolutions, namely about the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

    The Secretary-General renewed his appeal for respect of the ceasefire in Gaza, for unimpeded humanitarian access to all areas of Gaza, and for the immediate and unconditional release of the hostages.

    Immediately after the working lunch, Mr. Guterres had a pull-aside meeting with the President of France, Emmanuel Macron.

    Later that afternoon, the Secretary-General sat down for a background briefing with a group of journalists assembled by the United Nations Regional Information Centre for Western Europe.

    On Friday morning, the universities KU Leuven and UC Louvain jointly awarded an honorary doctorate to the United Nations.  The Secretary-General received the honorary doctorate on behalf of the organization and, in his remarks, he said that by bestowing this honour, the universities are sending a message of support for the mission of the United Nations — a message of solidarity to all those working to make it real — and a message of inspiration for us to keep up the fight.  (See Press Release SG/SM/22596.)

    He said the Universities’ 600th anniversary coincides with a moment of reflection for the United Nations, which marks its own eightieth anniversary as an organization at the epicentre of multilateralism.

    Standing here in Europe, the Secretary-General added, we know this same commitment to multilateralism is the beating heart of the European Union — a powerful reminder of our shared responsibility to the world’s most vulnerable people and proof that isolationism is an illusion, never a solution.

    Turning to the situation in Gaza, the Secretary-General renewed his appeal for the ceasefire to be restored, for unimpeded humanitarian assistance to be reestablished and for the remaining hostages to be released immediately and unconditionally.

    Following the ceremony, the Secretary-General visited the university library and had an exchange with students.

    Upon returning to Brussels that afternoon, the Secretary-General had a meeting with the Prime Minister of Belgium, Bart De Wever.

    He left Brussels early in the evening.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: March proves deadly month for civilians in Ukraine

    Source: United Nations 4

    9 April 2025 Human Rights

    More than three years on from the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukrainian civilians continue to face the devastating consequences of war, with March 2025 proving to be another deadly month.

    “The near daily barrage of long-range drones killed and injured scores of civilians across the country last month, and disrupted life for millions more,” said the head of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU), Danielle Bell, in the independent human rights team’s latest monthly update.  

    The mission was mandated by the UN human rights chief at the invitation of the Ukrainian Government in 2014, to help safeguard rights during the escalating conflict.  

    With at least 164 Ukrainians killed and 910 injured, March 2025 saw a 50 per cent spike in civilian casualties from the previous month. These numbers represent a 71 per cent increase in civilian casualties compared with March last year, says the latest HRMMU Protection of Civilians Report.

    Russian attacks on cities such as Dnipro, Kharkiv, and Sumy, combined with multiple munitions strikes on Dobropillia, exacerbated the high number of casualties in March.  

    Kryvyi Rih, located around 65 kilometers from the frontline, was one of the places most heavily affected, suffering five waves of Russian attacks which killed at least six civilians and injured 66.  

    Civilian buildings in the city – home town of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy – including two hotels and a restaurant, were amongst the sites hit.  

    Some 29 medical and 50 educational facilities were damaged by Russian armed forces during last month, while two medical centres and six educational facilities were totally destroyed.  

    “Hospitals enjoy special protection under international humanitarian law and should not be subjected to attack,” Ms. Bell said.

    Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited under international humanitarian law, said UN human rights chief, Volker Türk, emphasising that parties to a conflict ought to differentiate military from civilian infrastructures.  

    Hostilities continue  

    UN Human Rights in Ukraine noted that deadly attacks by Russian armed forces continued into April. “It’s an unimaginable horror,” said Mr. Türk, referring to an April 4 attack where a ballistic missile detonated over a playground, killing 19 civilians, including nine children.  

    Another wave of attacks in Eastern Ukraine caused damage to residential buildings and injured scores of civilians on Wednesday. Aid workers are currently on the ground assessing the needs of the affected population.  

    “Ukrainians deserve to live a normal life, free from violence,” said UN aid coordination office, OCHA, in Ukraine.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Expedition 73 Crew Launches to International Space Station

    Source: NASA

    A Soyuz rocket launches to the International Space Station with Expedition 73 crew members including NASA astronaut Jonny Kim on Tuesday, April 8, 2025, at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.
    The crew arrived at the space station the same day, bringing the number of residents to 10 for the next two weeks. Expedition 73 will begin on Saturday, April 19, following the departure of NASA astronaut Don Pettit and Roscosmos cosmonauts Alexey Ovchinin and Ivan Vagner, as they conclude a seven-month science mission aboard the orbiting laboratory.
    Throughout his eight-month stay aboard the orbital outpost, Kim will conduct scientific research in technology development, Earth science, biology, and human research.
    Follow space station activities on the International Space Station blog.
    Image credit: NASA/Joel Kowsky

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Reverend Warnock Demands Answers from Admin Trade Official on Reckless Tariffs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia

    Senator Reverend Warnock Demands Answers from Admin Trade Official on Reckless Tariffs

    During a Tuesday Senate Finance hearing, Senator Reverend Warnock grilled United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on the economic fallout less than a week after President Trump issued sweeping tariffs

    The Senator specifically spotlighted how small businesses and families will be backed into a corner and forced to pay an increased price for goods

    Senator Reverend Warnock uplifted the story of a Georgia small business that may have to close as a result of the tariffs

    Senators Reverend Warnock during the hearing: “This economy is not working for working families, for ordinary people. And I would submit that what the President did last week in such a reckless and sudden way is adding even more pressure on these families”

    Watch video of Senator Reverend Warnock’s questioning HERE

    Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA), ranking member of the Senate Finance Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness, grilled United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the fallout following President Trump’s announcement of a sweeping array of tariffs last week.

    “This economy is not working for working families, for ordinary people. And I would submit that what the President did last week in such a reckless and sudden way is adding even more pressure on these families,” said Senator Warnock.

    During the hearing, Senator Warnock specifically highlighted how the broad and indiscriminate tariffs provide no avenue for relief for ordinary American families and small business owners, backing them into a corner and forcing them to accept higher prices. Senator Warnock uplifted the story of Georgia constituent Angela Hawkins, who is the founder of Bamblu, a small business in Atlanta that sells bamboo-based sleepwear and sheets for people with severe and sensitive skin allergies. Hawkins, who imports many of her products from overseas, is now at risk of going out of business due to the price hikes caused by the tariffs.

    “Angela’s products are made overseas because you can’t find bamboo fabric made in the United States. What should Angela do? Pay the new tax? Raise her prices and risk losing customers? Or is there a process for her to apply for an exclusion from the Trump White House?” asked Senator Warnock.

    “The President has said that in connection with this action, he is not going to have exclusions or exemptions beyond what is in the program already for certain products,” responded Jamieson Greer.

    “She might even go out of business,” said Senator Warnock.

    Last week, Senator Warnock issued a statement following President Trump’s rollout of a sweeping new set of tariffs that raise the prices of everyday goods, everything from groceries to cars. In the statement opposing the tariff announcement, Senator Warnock highlighted the potential of the cost of living to go up as a result.

    Watch the Senator’s full remarks and line of questioning HERE.

    See below a transcript of Senator Warnock’s remarks:

    Senator Reverend Warnock (SRW): “Since President Trump announced his tariffs last week, the stock market has dropped more than 10%, we’ve talked about that. I’m more concerned about the impact on ordinary people. This is a regressive tax. It’s a tax on families, who are already dealing with increasing costs and trying to figure out how to make their lives work. I heard you say that you don’t think we’re in a trade war. I respect your expertise on trade. But tomorrow, the Trump Administration will implement its reciprocal tariffs, which means businesses and families have had less than one week to plan for the largest tax increase in more than 50 years.”

    “We are escalating. We can go back and forth about whether we think it is a trade war. I’m focused on how this is impacting families. Normally, when tariffs are being discussed, businesses and industries have time to plan. The government often provides an orderly and clear process for American companies to apply for exclusions from tariffs when it is not possible for them to sell a product without importing parts or all of it because no one manufactures it here. We all know uncertainty is the worst thing for business. I’m hearing this from farmers, from folks in the manufacturing sector. I hope we can provide some certainty.”

    “What should a multinational retailer do about their products made only overseas, or that contain parts only made overseas? We are seeing this in our automotive sector in Georgia. Should they just raise their prices on families to account for the new tax, or is there a process for that company to reach out to the White House for an exclusion?” 

    United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer (JG): “Senator Warnock, the section 232 on autos is a Commerce Department action. One thing they have done is they have said that they would be willing to give some kind of credit for U.S. Content in parts and components and they can approach the Commerce Department about this. It’s not a decision I’m making, but I know this is one alternative.”

    “I am mindful, when I hear this, obviously, we are sensitive to these dynamics. It reminds me that we lost 5 million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years. That’s part of the reason why we are in the situation now. We just have to bring those back. It’s important to bring those back now before the situation gets worse.”

    SRW: “The question is: what do they do? Do they pass that price onto consumers?” 

    JG: “What we’ve seen Ford and GM, for example, have announced that they are giving discounts. That was the big news last week, last Thursday. They would be giving discounts going forward. These companies often are going figure out how they locate costs among themselves and it rarely gets down to consumers.” 

    SRW: “The company might figure it out.” 

    JG: “They can approach the Commerce Department.” 

    SRW: “Let me go smaller, last week, my office met with Angela Hawkins, she’s the founder of Bamblu, a small business in Atlanta that sells bamboo-based sleepwear and sheets particularly for people with severe and sensitive skin allergies like her husband. Angela’s products are made overseas because you can’t find bamboo fabric made in the United States. What should Angela do? Pay the new tax? Raise her prices and risk losing customers? Or is there a process for her to apply for an exclusion from the Trump White House?” 

    JG: “The President has said that in connection with this action, he is not going to have exclusions or exemptions beyond what is in the program already for certain products.”

    SRW: “So she will just have to figure it out.” 

    JG: “She will have to work with her business partners and figure out outsourcing…”

    SRW: “She’ll have to either raise prices and risk customers [is] basically the answer, right? Because she can’t get bamboo here.”

    JG: “It will depend on the tariff rate. Every country has a different rate. Some are lower than others.”

    SRW: “So she might even go out of business.”

    “Let’s go even smaller. Early estimates show that President Trump’s tariffs will increase the costs of goods by $3,800 for the average American household. Many critical baby [gates] are produced abroad or have foreign-made components. I went through this not long ago as a parent of young children. For an expecting family in Augusta, Georgia, who may see a 50% price increase for that stroller or car seat, what is the process for that family to apply for a White House exclusion? I guess if the business owner can’t get one, they can’t get one either, correct?”

    JG: “There’s not an exclusion process, that’s right.” 

    SRW: “So they would just bear the cost?” 

    JG: “I think the studies you’re talking about, the economists got it wrong in Trump one [first Trump Administration], they said that there would be inflation because of tariffs, and it when down.  When I hear them saying the same thing, I don’t trust what they are saying. The fact of history shows that it’s not a one-to-one.” 

    “The highest inflation we ever saw was under [President] Biden for housing and education and health care, and all of these things. I don’t know where everybody was then, when that was skyrocketing.” 

    SRW: “What if their child is potassium deficient? And now bananas are more expensive. Last I checked, we don’t have the climate to grow bananas in the United States. Who should that family reach out to the White House for an exclusion for that price hike on those bananas?”

    JG: “There’s not an exclusion process. I think we have waited too long with the status quo. I know people want the status quo…” 

    SRW: “Here, you and I agree. Nobody wants the status quo. This economy is not working for working families, for ordinary people. And I would submit that what the President did last week in such a reckless and sudden way is adding even more pressure on these families.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Experts of the Committee against Torture Commend Monaco’s Ratification of International Human Rights Treaties, Ask about Efforts to Revise Torture Laws and the Transfer of Prisoners to France

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Committee against Torture today concluded its consideration of the seventh periodic report of Monaco under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, with Committee Experts praising Monaco’s ratification of United Nations and European human rights treaties, while raising questions about efforts to bring legislation on torture in line with the Convention and the transfer of prisoners to France.

    Abderrazak Rouwane, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, congratulated Monaco on having ratified a significant number of United Nations and Council of Europe human rights instruments. Why had the State party decided not to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture?

    Mr. Rouwane asked about measures the State party had taken to harmonise national legislation on torture with the Convention.  The Committee was concerned about the statute of limitations on torture crimes, the lack of specific provisions in the Criminal Code imposing an absolute prohibition of torture, and the lack of clear mechanisms protecting subordinates from being forced to carry out unlawful orders.

    Erdogan Iscan, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, said some inmates in Monaco continued to be transferred to French prisons, and the State 

    party lacked oversight of places of deprivation of liberty in France.  Would a formal legal procedure for recording prisoners’ consent to transfers be created?  Which State was responsible for ensuring legal safeguards for these prisoners?

    Introducing the report, Samuel Vuelta Simon, Secretary of State for Justice of Monaco, Director of Judicial Services and head of the delegation, said Monaco ensured that its legal framework was fully in line with its international commitments and that its texts were regularly adapted to better meet the requirements of the fight against torture and inhuman treatment.

    Mr. Vuelta Simon said the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure allowed for severe punishment for any act resembling torture or inhuman treatment.  Also, a legislative proposal currently being prepared would ensure that the crime of torture was imprescriptible and would also ensure the unenforceability of any hierarchical order invoked to justify it.

    The delegation said the Convention against Torture had been rendered executory by a sovereign ordinance.  It took precedence over domestic legislation. The State party was also considering domestic legislation that would define torture in line with the Convention.

    The delegation said an impact study on the Optional Protocol to the Convention had been carried out, and the State party was not closing the door on ratification.  However, it attached greater importance to the main international human rights instruments.  There was only one detention facility in Monaco, which was already reviewed by international monitoring mechanisms.

    The delegation also said that Monaco’s territory was only two square kilometres.  Its small size made it necessary to turn to France for assistance in managing prisoners.  Transfer requests to French prisons were made by detainees who were French citizens. The State party would consider formalising this procedure.  French authorities cooperated with transfer procedures and guaranteed detainees’ rights. There was no transfer of citizens of Monaco to foreign prisons.

    In closing remarks, Claude Heller, Committee Chair, said that the dialogue had been fruitful and frank.  The Committee would develop concluding observations based on the dialogue, which would aid the State in the implementation of the Convention.

    In his concluding remarks, Mr. Vuelta Simon said that Monaco was a small State that tried to do things properly, on the same level as larger countries.  Some issues had been raised in the dialogue that the State party could make rapid progress on to promote the well-being of human beings, including detainees.  Monaco hoped to demonstrate this progress in its next review with the Committee.

    The delegation of Monaco consisted of representatives from the Directorate of Public Safety; Department of External Relations and Cooperation; Directorate of Legal Affairs; Directorate of Judicial Services; and the Permanent Mission of Monaco to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

    The Committee will issue concluding observations on the report of Monaco at the end of its eighty-second session on 2 May.  Those, and other documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, will be available on the session’s webpage.  Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, and webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.

    The Committee will next meet in public on Thursday, 10 April at 3 p.m. to continue its examination of the fifth periodic report of Mauritius (CAT/C/MUS/5).

    Report

    The Committee has before it the seventh periodic report of Monaco (CAT/C/MCO/7).

    Presentation of Report

    SAMUEL VUELTA SIMON, Secretary of State for Justice, Director of Judicial Services of Mexico and head of the delegation, said human dignity was an absolute value that the Principality of Monaco was committed to protecting with determination. Monaco was committed to constantly improving its mechanisms for preventing and protecting against torture and inhuman treatment.  Since the submission of its first report in 1994, Monaco had continued its efforts to strengthen its legal and institutional framework, which had led to significant progress, both in terms of legislation and the implementation of concrete measures to guarantee ever more effective protection against all forms of violence.

    Monaco ensured that the legal framework was fully in line with its international commitments and that its texts were regularly adapted to better meet the requirements of the fight against torture and inhuman treatment.  The Constitution explicitly guaranteed respect for human dignity and prohibited any cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.  This absolute prohibition was reinforced by several provisions of the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allowed for severe punishment for any act resembling torture or inhuman treatment. 

    The Principality had begun an in-depth study to incorporate into its domestic law a definition of torture that was fully in line with article one of the Convention. A legislative proposal currently being prepared would ensure that the crime of torture was imprescriptible.  It would also ensure the unenforceability of any hierarchical order invoked to justify it, and the absolute inadmissibility of evidence obtained under duress.  These measures would complement an already strict legal arsenal which severely punished acts of violence, especially when committed by a public official.

    Monaco also attached particular importance to supporting and providing reparation to victims. In 2023, it adopted an unprecedented compensation scheme for victims of serious crimes, including domestic violence and misdemeanours and crimes against minors, guaranteeing rapid and effective compensation to victims when the perpetrators were insolvent.  Courts had an obligation to inform victims of this possibility.

    In recent years, significant improvements had been made to Monaco’s prison to provide a more suitable living environment for inmates.  The renovation of the cells had made it possible to bring in more natural light, while a new exercise yard and an activity room had been set up.  A body scanner had recently been introduced to limit the use of body searches.  The visiting regime had been significantly improved, allowing inmates to benefit from three 90-minute visits per week, in addition to two daily 45-minute visits.

    The incarceration of minors remained an exceptional measure in Monaco.  Recent reforms had strengthened the juvenile justice system to promote the reintegration and well-being of young people in conflict with the law.  Anyone in police custody had the immediate right to information and the assistance of a lawyer, permanent judicial supervision, and audio-visual recording of interrogations, thus ensuring the transparency of proceedings.  Since 2022, the right to the assistance of a lawyer had been strengthened in the event of an extension of police custody. 

    The Monegasque Institute for the Training of the Judicial Professions, in collaboration with other specialised institutions, provided regular training to public security forces on international standards for the respect of fundamental rights. The public security forces were thus regularly made aware of good practices, particularly regarding the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.

    Monaco ensured that respect for fundamental rights within its prison system was monitored. The Office of the High Commissioner for the Protection of Rights, Freedoms and Mediation played a key role in this system by providing detainees with direct access to report any allegations of ill-treatment.  Since the last review, a new right had been introduced allowing detainees to call the Office of the High Commissioner directly once a day, including when they were in a disciplinary cell.

    Monaco reaffirmed its total commitment to the fight against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.  While there was still room for improvement, the legislative, judicial and institutional advances put in place in recent years had made it possible to considerably strengthen the prevention, control and punishment of abuses.  Monaco would continue its efforts with determination to ensure that respect for human dignity was never compromised.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    ABDERRAZAK ROUWANE, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, expressed regret regarding the absence of civil society participants in the dialogue.  Why were they absent?  What measures had the State party taken to harmonise national legislation on torture with the Convention?  The Committee had called on the State party to do so in each of its last six reviews. Could the delegation give some examples of court cases that had referenced the Convention or other United Nations human rights treaties?  The Committee was concerned about the statute of limitations on torture crimes, the lack of specific provisions in the Criminal Code imposing an absolute prohibition of torture, and the lack of clear mechanisms protecting subordinates from being forced to carry out unlawful orders.

    What measures had been taken to ensure that detainees enjoyed all basic legal rights from the outset of deprivation of liberty?  The Committee had called on the State party to amend legislation that allowed police officers to prevent detainees from contacting a family member if such communication was considered detrimental to investigations.  Had this been done?  Did victims benefit from legal aid in cases involving allegations of torture or ill-treatment?

    What steps had been taken to promote the accreditation of the Office of the High Commissioner for the Protection of Rights, Freedoms and Mediation under the Paris Principles?  The Office did not have a specific mandate to protect against human rights violations, including torture and ill-treatment, and it did not have the competence to conduct investigations, publish studies or formulate opinions on draft legislation on its own initiative.  Could the delegation comment on this?  Why had the State party decided not to ratify the Optional Protocol and set up a national preventive mechanism against torture?

    The Committee congratulated Monaco on having ratified a significant number of human rights instruments within the framework of the United Nations system and the Council of Europe.  Would it ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the Convention for the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families?

    The Committee noted positive amendments to the law on the status of the judiciary to strengthen the Supreme Council of the Judiciary, which had enabled the Council to take up disciplinary matters on its own.  However, the Council’s role in appointing judges had not been increased and its activity report was not made public.  The Director of Judicial Services, part of the executive, chaired the High Council and could appoint and suspend judges and magistrates directly.  The Prosecutor General and the magistrates of the Public Prosecutor’s Office were also under the direct authority of the Director. Was this not interference by the executive in the affairs of justice?  How would the State party ensure the full independence of the judiciary, including in matters related to appointment and disciplinary measures?

    Could the State party provide updated data on extraditions, asylum applications, and the number of appeals against asylum decisions?  The Committee noted that refugees enjoyed the rights provided for in the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees.  However, there was a lack of clarity regarding the asylum process and safeguards offered, and uncertainty surrounding the procedure for cooperation between the State party and the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons.  Would the State party implement a mechanism to follow up on asylum seekers’ cases with the Office?  What measures were in place to domesticate an asylum assessment procedure?  Could the State party provide information on extradition cases and requests made for mutual legal assistance related to international cases involving torture?

    A large number of foreigners living in neighbouring countries were working informally in Monaco and were at risk of trafficking.  How was the State party combatting trafficking in persons, raising awareness of the issue, and training the judiciary on it?  What measures were in place to strengthen the identification of trafficking victims?  What tools were available to public officials to guide the identification of child victims of trafficking?

    The Committee had previously called for the strengthening of training for the judiciary and prison officials on the Convention and the revised Istanbul Protocol of 2022.  What measures would the State party take to train officials who were in contact with persons deprived of liberty on the absolute prohibition of torture?  Were there any monitoring mechanisms in places of deprivation of liberty?

    ERDOGAN ISCAN, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, commended the recent progress by the State presented in the opening statement.  The Committee noted that the remand prison of Monaco had recently been extended, its facilities upgraded, and the visit regime improved.  However, there were limits to the extent to which the prison could be expanded due to its location, and the prison reportedly remained unsuitable for prolonged detention due to its limited natural light and lack of space for activities.  What further steps would be taken to improve prison conditions?

    Some inmates continued to be transferred to French prisons, and the State party lacked oversight of places of deprivation of liberty in France.  There was no formalised legal procedure for recording prisoners’ consent and requests regarding transfers.  Would one be created?  How many Monegasque prisoners were currently serving sentences in French prisons? Which State was responsible for ensuring legal safeguards for these prisoners?  Did they have access to lawyers and could they maintain social connections in Monaco?  How would the State party ensure this right?  Which State conducted investigations in cases of complaints by these prisoners?  Had the State party considered expanding the capacity of its prison system to allow inmates to remain in Monaco?

    Did current legislation prohibit corporal punishment in all settings, including homes and educational institutions? Were awareness raising campaigns or training programmes on corporal punishment for parents and childcare professionals planned?  Minors under age 13 could not be detained but could be held in police custody for up to 24 hours in criminal cases.  Could the delegation provide data on minors in police custody?  Would the State party consider revising legislation to raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility to at least 14 years of age?

    Had the State party made progress in adopting legislation that provided full redress to victims of torture? Would it consider scaling up its support to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, and had it updated legislation to ensure that statements obtained through torture were made null and void?

    The Committee noted with satisfaction measures taken by the State party to prevent and combat violence against women, including revision of the Criminal Code and awareness raising campaigns. What protection measures were in place for foreign women who were victims of violence, and what resources were devoted to programmes and measures to combat violence against women?

    Reportedly, conditions in closed psychiatric units in the Princess Grace Hospital were good, but improvements were needed regarding prolonged hospitalisation and treatment of minors and detainees requiring psychiatric care.  Was the State party addressing this?

    Another Committee Expert asked whether the Convention was directly applicable in Monaco.  How were potential conflicts between the Convention and domestic legislation resolved?

    One Committee Expert asked how many prisoners were serving in Monaco.  What happened to prisoners who did not consent to being transferred to French prisons?  Could the delegation clarify whether consent was needed to conduct transfers?

    A Committee Expert said domestic law on trafficking was sound, but the State party needed to strengthen the training of law enforcement officials, social workers, medical staff and the public on identifying victims of trafficking.

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the Director of Judicial Services was also the Secretary of State for Justice, which, as a member of the judiciary, was not part of the executive branch of Government but fell under the authority of the Prince.  The judiciary was guaranteed security of tenure and independence.  The Secretary of State for Justice gave generalised guidance to the judiciary that was consistent with State policies, but prosecutors were free to speak independently in carrying out their work.

    Monaco’s territory was only two square kilometres.  Its small size made it necessary to turn to France for assistance for managing prisoners. There were only six prosecutors and 22 jurists who worked with legislators to develop legal texts.  Some 39,000 people lived in Monaco but only 9,000 had citizenship.

    The Supreme Council of the Judiciary was made up of two elected judges and five judges appointed by the Council itself.  Both the Secretary of State for Justice and the Supreme Council could take up cases of discipline of judges.  The Supreme Council selected candidates for judicial posts and had a special budget guaranteeing its independence.  Training was provided to newly appointed judges and prosecutors through French institutions; approximately two-thirds of judges had been seconded from France.  A draft law had been developed that would create a reserve pool of judges to strengthen the domestic availability of judges.

    Monaco had a dualist system.  The Prince signed and ratified international treaties, with authorisation by the National Council.  Sovereign ordinances were used to allow for international treaties to be directly invoked before national courts.  There were cases in which the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights had been invoked. The Constitution had the highest status in the domestic legal order, followed by international treaties, which took precedence over domestic legislation.

    The Constitution expressly prohibited torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.  Acts of torture committed in offences of sexual aggression, terrorism and abduction were considered to be aggravated crimes. Monaco’s judicial services had limited capacity, but aimed to establish a stand-alone offence of torture in line with article one of the Convention through a draft law that was currently before the legislature.  Serious crimes committed against minors had a statute of limitations of 30 years, which started when the victim reached the age of majority.  Monaco’s law imposed an absolute prohibition of torture; it was impossible to justify acts of torture in any circumstances.  Hierarchical superiors were held accountable for illegal orders to carry out acts of torture, as were agents who carried out such orders.  Subordinates who refused to obey illegal orders were not disciplined or considered to have committed a crime.

    There was one case of trafficking against a minor in which the court had referenced the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime in its ruling.  The scope of the criminalisation of trafficking had been broadened to address domestic trafficking cases that did not involve organised crime.  Trafficking that endangered victims’ lives, trafficking of minors, and trafficking by public officials or members of organised criminal groups were considered aggravating circumstances.

    Police custody was always recorded and was subject to court oversight; examining magistrates could end police custody at any point.  All persons in police custody were informed of the reasons of their detention and their rights, including the right to access a lawyer from the beginning of custody. All persons who earned less than 20,000 euros per year were entitled to free legal aid.  Detainees could request a medical examination at any point.  The State party intended to regulate the grounds under which the Prosecutor General could restrict detainees’ right to contact a relative.  Hearings were filmed and could be conducted in the presence of a legal counsel. Criminal investigative officers needed to record the time of detention and other details relating to the detention, including reasons for refusals of detainees’ rights.

    Minors under 13 could not be placed in police custody unless they committed an offence that carried a five-year prison sentence.  Hearings of minors needed to be conducted with a lawyer present.  Police custody of minors was typically 12 hours but could be extended to 24 hours in criminal cases with the permission of a judge.

    Legislation on the High Commissioner for the Protection of Rights and Mediation had been revised to bring the institution in line with the Paris Principles.  The law allowed the High Commissioner to carry out surveys and provide recommendations related to combatting discrimination, protecting human rights, and implementing international conventions.  It also strengthened the High Commissioner’s investigative powers and gave the body powers to defend the rights of the child. Steps had been taken to promote registration of the institution by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions.  Since 2022, detainees were able to contact the High Commissioner directly by telephone, in addition to through written communications.  Monaco had installed a body scanning machine in its prison after detainees’ complaints to the High Commissioner regarding body searches.

    Civil society in Monaco was very active. As there had been no demonstrated cases of torture in the State for almost a century, there were no non-governmental organizations working on the issue.  The High Commissioner’s mandate had recently been expanded and it was now recruiting staff to address its new functions.  In future, the High Commissioner could be able to participate in reviews by the Committee.

    Ratifying the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance was not a priority for the State.  The State party tried to align its legislation with international instruments before ratifying them, which caused delays in ratification.  There were no cases of enforced disappearance in Monaco. 

    An impact study on the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture had been carried out.  There was only one detention facility in Monaco, which was already reviewed by international monitoring mechanisms. There had been no complaints regarding ill-treatment or poor conditions.  Ratifying the Optional Protocol was not a top priority for the Government but could be done in future.  Monaco made voluntary contributions to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, but did not envisage providing contributions to the Voluntary Fund for the Victims of Torture.

    Refugees fell under ordinary law for entry and stay in Monaco.  They received 10-year residence permits.  The State currently hosted 23 refugees.  Monaco respected the principle of non-refoulement.  Asylum seekers whose claims were rejected were not immediately removed, unless they posed a threat to public safety.  The Government called on the relevant French authority to assess asylum claims.  Refusals of asylum claims were always explained and could be appealed before the relevant court.  The overseas diplomatic presence of Monaco in countries of origin for asylum seekers was limited.

    When the Ukraine conflict began in 2022, Monaco established a system providing temporary protection for Ukrainian citizens who had lived in Monaco prior to the establishment of the system. Currently, around 50 Ukrainians held the temporary protection permit, which allowed them to access health, education and other social services.  Many holders of this permit had since gained residency permits.

    The State party had not received any requests for mutual legal assistance or handled any international cases involving torture.  It had received one extradition request, which Monaco’s court of appeal rejected due to concerns about human rights protections.

    In 2020, two people were transferred to French prisons, while one person was transferred in 2023 and another in 2024; there were two requests in 2025 that were being assessed.  Transfer requests to France were typically made by French citizens.  All requests for prison transfers were made in writing by the detainees themselves. The State party would consider formalising this procedure.  There were no difficulties in transfers to France; French authorities cooperated with transfer procedures and guaranteed detainees’ rights.  Requests for transfers to other countries were considered based on respect for detainees’ rights.

    The national human rights institution received and investigated written complaints from detainees.  There was also an internal oversight body within the police force that could be called on by the judiciary to investigate police officers accused of human rights violations.  Complaints made to the Prosecutor-General triggered judicial proceedings.  Legal assistance was available for persons who filed for civil damages.  A compensation mechanism had been set up for victims of serious offences who could not be compensated by the perpetrator. Compensation covered damages and court costs.  State compensation could also be provided to persons who were placed in pre-trial detention before being released or acquitted.

    The State party had adopted a law on school bullying and harassment, and the Criminal Code prohibited and punished corporal punishment, including in school and family settings.  Teaching staff and other school staff underwent annual training on identifying and addressing harassment of children. Schools needed to implement awareness raising initiatives to combat harassment and bullying.

    Incarceration and pre-trial detention of children were last resort measures.  Judges could determine alternatives to prosecution of minor offenders, including provisional releases, reparation for victims, community service, and training within social health institutions.  Judges could also order minors to be placed in the Foyer d’Enfance, from which they were free to come and go.  In 2020, five minors were charged, of whom none were detained; in 2021, seven minors were charged and only one was placed in pre-trial detention for one month and 20 days; and in 2022, out of the 15 minors who were charged, only two were placed in pre-trial detention.

    The age of criminal responsibility in Monaco was 13 years.  None of the 15 minor offenders in 2022 were aged 13.  The State party would consider raising the age threshold and revising the legal status of minors in the country.

    Considerable progress had been made since 2020 in improving the detention facility.  The State had installed cells with better access to natural light, a games room, a new exercise yard, and air conditioning and heating facilities within cells.  Exercise and folding laundry were no longer mandatory, televisions did not need to be switched off at certain times, and the State no longer imposed solitary confinement on detainees.

    Women and child victims of violence were supported by the Directorate for Social Assistance.  A protocol for care of victims of domestic violence had been established.  Health care professionals were trained in caring for victims and managing perpetrators when they accompanied them.  Victims were provided with shelter in emergencies when they could not stay with friends or family.  They were entitled to medical care, psychological assistance, and legal advice.

    The employment service verified working conditions for migrant workers and the labour inspectorate carried out numerous checks to ensure that workers’ rights were being respected.  Officials held interviews with applicants for residence and work permits to detect risks of trafficking.  To date, 96 public officials had received training on identifying and treating victims of trafficking.

    Members of the judiciary were obliged to attend at least five days of training per year either locally or in France, which addressed human rights and international and European norms.  The State sought to ensure that the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights were incorporated in domestic legislation as soon as possible.

    Training of police officers lasted 10 months.  It stressed the rights of apprehended persons, including the right to be protected from violence, inhumane and degrading treatment.  All police officers had to abide by the code of professional ethnics and respect the dignity of persons.  They were trained on ethical means of restraint, bodily searches, the use of reasonable force, and the prohibition of torture.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    ABDERRAZAK ROUWANE, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee welcomed that there were no cases of torture in Monaco, but this could not be used as an excuse for not ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention.  Crimes needed to be legislated for regardless of their prevalence. A national preventive mechanism would be mandated to investigate all places of deprivation of liberty, including the psychiatric hospital and airports.  It would be fantastic if a European country could ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.  Many of the 63,000 workers in Monaco were migrant workers who needed legal protection.

    Could detainees from Monaco be transferred to French prisons?  When there were criminal prosecutions of perpetrators, were alleged victims entitled to legal assistance?  Did the State party intend to provide the Supreme Council of the Judiciary with further independence?

    ERDOGAN ISCAN, Committee Vice-Chair and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the dialogue had been constructive. Even if there was limited scope for implementing the Optional Protocol, ratification would set a positive example for other States.  Some 42 of the 46 members of the Council of Europe had ratified the Optional Protocol. Did the State party plan to remove its reservation to article 30 of the Convention.  Member States needed to continue to support the treaty body system in a sustainable manner.  What was Monaco’s position on this?

    Another Committee Expert asked whether Monaco had adopted measures addressing trade in equipment used to inflict pain and suffering.

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the State party was not closing the door on ratifying the Optional Protocol; it was still considering the option.  However, it attached greater importance to the main international human rights instruments.  Impact assessment studies on these instruments took time due to the State’s limited resources.

    There were around 60,000 cross-border workers travelling from France or Italy to Monaco every day.  They were entitled to the rights embodied by Monaco’s labour laws.

    The Convention against Torture had been rendered executory by a sovereign ordinance.  It took precedence over domestic legislation.  The State party was also considering domestic legislation that would define torture in line with the Convention.

    Legal aid lasted from the beginning to the end of legal proceedings.

    There was no transfer of Monaco citizens to foreign prisons.  Transfers were only for foreign detainees who had requested a transfer back to their country of origin; such transfers were essentially humanitarian.

    The Supreme Council of the Judiciary promoted the independence of the judiciary.  It drew mostly on the French model.  The Secretary of State for Justice was responsible for appointing and promoting judges, but the Supreme Council approved appointments and promotions and could take up disciplinary cases on its own initiative.

    Concluding Remarks

    CLAUDE HELLER, Committee Chair, said that the dialogue had been fruitful and frank.  The Committee would develop concluding observations based on the dialogue, which would aid the State in the implementation of the Convention. The Committee did not judge States based on their size; it treated them all equally.

    SAMUEL VUELTA SIMON, Secretary of State for Justice of Monaco, Director of Judicial Services and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the dialogue.  Monaco was a small State that tried to do things properly, on the same level as larger countries, though staff numbers made this difficult.  The State tried to respond as best it could to its realities.  Monaco welcomed the Committee’s advice and relevant questions. Some issues had been raised that the State party could make rapid progress on to promote the well-being of human beings, including detainees.  Monaco hoped to demonstrate this progress in its next review with the Committee.

    ___________

    Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media; 
    not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

     

    CAT25.002E

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: In Dialogue with Niger, Experts of the Committee on Migrant Workers Commend the State on Legislation Protecting Migrants, Raise Issues Concerning Bilateral Agreements and the Migration Centre in Agadez

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Committee on Migrant Workers today concluded its consideration of the second periodic report of Niger under the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, with Committee Experts welcoming the State’s legislation focused on the protection of migrants, while raising issues concerning bilateral agreements with other countries and the migration centre in Agadez. 

    Khaled Cheikhna Babacar, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur,

    welcomed that the Niger had ratified the 10 key International Labour Organization Conventions, 2018 legislation that included principles of social protection for migrants, and bilateral agreements that had been reached with neighbouring countries on migrant workers.

    Myriam Poussi, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said most of the bilateral agreements the Niger had reportedly formed with countries in the region were seemingly not applied.  Could the delegation comment on this?  Were the agreements with Türkiye and Morocco referred to in the report in effect?  The State party had yet to set up a committee to follow-up on the implementation of the agreement with Algeria.  What benefits were migrant workers provided with through the agreement with Tunisia?

    A Committee Expert said the reform of the law on illegal smuggling of migrants addressed the outsourcing of processing of migrants by the European Union to the migration centre in Agadez, which had led to increased trafficking in the region.  How was the State party addressing this situation?  Did the withdrawal of the Niger from the Economic Community of West African States impact the organization’s agreement on freedom of movement?

    Alio Daouda, Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Niger, Keeper of the Seals and head of the delegation, said the legislation of the Niger guaranteed migrant workers access to social protection, including health and education.  Migrant workers had access to the competent administrative and judicial bodies in the event of violations of their rights and had access to free legal assistance and redress mechanisms.  The major obstacle to the realisation of human rights of migrant workers in the Niger remained terrorism, which had a profound negative impact on the realisation of human rights.   

    The delegation said the Niger had suspended bilateral agreements with Saudi Arabia, Libya and Algeria, as these countries had violated these agreements, repatriating many migrants from the Niger. Every time the Niger formed a labour agreement, it set up a body to monitor the implementation of the agreement and protect workers’ rights.  The State party had conducted activities to ensure that private recruitment agencies were aware of their responsibilities to protect migrant workers.  Portions of migrant workers’ salaries could not be withheld by these agencies.

    The delegation said the humanitarian centre at Agadez hosted asylum seekers and refugees.  The State party was assessing asylum requests.  Transit centres managed by the International Organization for Migration were also in place that hosted migrants and processed their repatriation. Algeria expatriated about 500 foreign migrants to Agadez every month, forcing them to walk about 15 kilometres through the desert to reach the transit centres.  The Niger was calling on Algeria to change the way it expelled people, which violated the rights of these migrants. 

    In concluding remarks, Sabrina Gahar, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Niger’s report showed that the State was committed to protecting the rights of migrant workers and their families.  However, there was still a lot to do to guarantee that the rights of migrant workers and members of their families were fully respected and protected.

    In his closing remarks, Mr. Daouda expressed gratitude for the attention given to the report and the efforts of the Niger to guarantee the basic rights of migrants and their families.  The State acknowledged the remaining challenges, but would tackle them with conviction and would step up efforts to meet the provisions under the Convention. 

    The delegation of Niger was made up of representatives of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights; Department of Political, Administrative, Legal and Diplomatic Affairs; National Agency for the Fight against Trafficking in Persons; Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Employment; Ministry of the Interior, Public Security and Territorial Administration; and the Permanent Mission of Niger to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

    The Committee on Migrant Workers’ fortieth session is being held from 7 to 17 April.  All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage.  Meeting summary releases can be found here.  The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.

    The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. this afternoon, Wednesday, 9 April, to consider the combined initial and second periodic report of Jamaica (CMW/C/JAM/1-2).

    Report

    The Committee has before it the second periodic report of the Niger (CMW/C/NER/2).

    Presentation of the Report

    ALIO DAOUDA, Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Niger, Keeper of the Seals and head of the delegation, expressed sincere regret that the Convention currently had only 60 States parties, 34 of which were from the African continent.  No country among the main destinations of migrants had ratified it.  By acting together, in a spirit of universal solidarity, States could ensure a future for migrant workers based on the values of dignity, fairness and mutual respect.

    The events of 26 July 2023 had led to the coming to power of the Defence and Security Forces of the Niger.  This seizure of power, which immediately received popular support, was motivated by the rejection of security models and bad governance.  Following this change of regime, the State experienced unprecedented, illegal sanctions, decided by the Economic Community of West African States and the West African Economic and Monetary Union, materialised by the closure of borders, the cessation of the supply of foodstuffs and medicines, and the blocking of access to savings in banks. 

    These sanctions were guided by Western powers using regional and international organizations as tools for geopolitical domination.  They had deprived millions of innocent inhabitants, nationals and foreigners alike, of food, healthcare, medicine, education, freedom of movement, access to their savings, access to electricity, dignity and well-being, in the face of the deafening, complicit silence of international organizations.  The world needed to denounce this situation and work for an international order based on dignity and mutual respect.

    The National Council for the Safeguarding of the Homeland, upon its accession to power in July 2023, reaffirmed its commitment to respect human rights as defined by the treaties and conventions to which the country had freely subscribed.  The Niger, well-known for its hospitality as a country of transit and origin of migratory flows, attached particular importance to the protection of the rights of migrant workers and members of their families.

    In the context of the security situation, which had been marked by the recurrence of attacks by armed terrorist groups supported by foreign powers, the Niger had adopted ordinance no. 2023-02 of 28 July 2023 on the organization of public authorities during the transition period, and the 2025 Constitution, which guaranteed human rights as enshrined in international instruments.  The revised Labour Code had been developed to better protect migrant workers’ rights, while the revised Penal Code, which was in the process of being adopted, prohibited all forms of discrimination and harassment, including discrimination based on national origin.

    The legislation of the Niger guaranteed migrant workers access to social protection, including health and education. Migrant workers had access to the competent administrative and judicial bodies in the event of violations of their rights and had access to free legal assistance and redress mechanisms.  In addition, institutions had been set up to combat trafficking in persons and to manage migratory flows, particularly in transit regions such as Agadez.  The Niger was working closely with the International Organization for Migration to provide humanitarian assistance and build local capacity.  It was working to develop initiatives to provide accurate information to migrants, facilitating their access to legal identity documents and promoting ethical recruitment practices.

    Despite measures taken to combat migrant smuggling, criminal networks continued to exploit vulnerable migrants, especially women and children.  This situation was worsened by neighbouring countries that pushed back hundreds of migrants from the Niger and other countries to the territory of the Niger, despite the signing of several bilateral and regional agreements.  In 2022, 18,728 migrants were pushed back to the Niger.  In addition, conflicts in neighbouring countries and humanitarian crises were increasing the migratory pressure on the Niger, further complicating the implementation of migration policies.  In this context, revisions to the national employment and migration policies were being developed.  All these challenges required national, regional and international efforts to ensure that the rights of migrant workers were protected in an effective and sustainable manner.

    The major obstacle to the realisation of human rights of migrant workers in the Niger remained terrorism, which had a profound negative impact on the realisation of human rights.  Attacks in the border regions had led to massive displacement of populations, creating a humanitarian crisis that affected all rights.  These barbaric acts, which intended to sow fear and divide, would never succeed in shaking the State’s unity and resilience.

    The Niger was committed to honouring its international obligations and to working actively with the Committee to ensure the effective implementation of the Convention.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    KHALED CHEIKHNA BABACAR, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said that the Niger had a border of over 7,000 kilometres and was affected by violence from Burkina Faso, Mali and Nigeria.  There were numerous migrants travelling through the Niger to Europe; many refugees were stranded in the desert and internally displaced persons were exploited by gangs and needed support.

    Mr. Babacar welcomed that the Niger had ratified the 10 key International Labour Organization Conventions.  Would it ratify conventions addressing migrant workers, domestic workers, workplace harassment and labour inspection?  Were there complaint mechanisms in place that workers in the informal sector, including domestic workers, could access? The Expert welcomed that the Labour Code was being revised; this was a good opportunity to address its shortcomings. Would the State party develop specific legislation to protect domestic workers?  Would the national action plan on migration be revised to include measures to promote the registration of the children of migrants?

    Mr. Babacar welcomed 2018 legislation that included principles of social protection for migrants, and bilateral agreements that had been reached with neighbouring countries on migrant workers.  What measures were included in these agreements that protected migrant workers’ rights, including the right to join trade unions?  The Niger permitted the activities of private recruitment agencies, which had abusive recruitment practices such as charging workers 20 per cent of their salaries. What would the Niger do to combat these practices?

    MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the State party’s report did not sufficiently describe the situation of migrant workers and provided incomplete information on activities being undertaken by the State.  Could the delegation provide more information about progress in reforming the Labour Code? What provisions of the Convention would be addressed in the Code?  How would the State party promote its implementation?  What had been achieved by the national action plan on migration? What activities had been organised in the last five years to promote and protect the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families?

    Could the delegation provide more information on the practice of wahaya? Were there plans to prosecute the perpetrators of this practice, which could be tantamount to a form of sexual slavery?  Female migrant workers could be victims of this practice.

    Most of the bilateral agreements the Niger had reportedly formed with countries in the region were seemingly not applied.  Could the delegation comment on this?  Were the agreements with Türkiye and Morocco referred to in the report in effect?  The State party had yet to set up a committee to follow-up on the implementation of the agreement with Algeria.  What benefits were migrant workers provided with through the agreement with Tunisia?

    What services did the Office for Returned Migrants provide and how many people had it helped?  What information was provided to the Niger diaspora and in what form?  How did the State register and support returnees to reintegrate into society, and promote the repatriation of funds by migrant workers to the Niger?  Had the State party established a joint committee on illegal smuggling and trafficking? What was the committee’s composition and mandate?

    Another Committee Expert asked whether returning Niger migrant workers were able to receive pensions.  Were civil servants informed about their obligations under the Convention?  What civil society organizations in the State party were dealing with the rights of migrant workers?  What dispute mechanisms were available for migrant workers?  Did the State party have information on detained migrant workers?  What legal support did the State party provide for migrant workers abroad?

    One Committee Expert asked how civil society organizations had contributed to the State party’s report.  Why had the State party not yet accepted articles 76 and 77 of the Convention, despite having expressed a desire to do so in 2022?

    A Committee Expert said the reform of the law on illegal smuggling of migrants addressed the outsourcing of processing of migrants by the European Union to the migration centre in Agadez, which had led to increased trafficking in the region.  How was the State party addressing this situation?  Did the withdrawal of the Niger from the Economic Community of West African States impact the organization’s agreement on freedom of movement?

    Another Committee Expert said migrants in the region were victims of deportation, incommunicado detention and other human rights violations, and many perished in the Sahara Desert.  How did the State party address these issues and protect migrants from refoulement? Why was there a comparatively low rate of migration from the Niger to Europe and the Americas?

    A Committee Expert asked whether the national mechanism for following up on treaty body recommendations cooperated with civil society organizations on issues related to migration.  What support did the Labour Ministry provide to migrants?  Why was the National Human Rights Commission dissolved in 2023?  Did the Commission deal with cases or issue recommendations related to migrant workers? When would a new national human rights institution be set up, what would its mandate be, and what resources would it have?  Many migrants being held in migration centres in the Niger were struggling to return to their countries of origin.  How was the State party supporting them?  Had courts referred to the provisions of the Convention, and had this had an impact on law or public policy on migration in the State party?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the Niger provided advice to migrants abroad so they were aware of their rights.  However, it had limited resources and could not devote additional resources to supporting this policy.

    The 2015 law on illegal smuggling included a provision criminalising the illegal crossing of borders that ran counter to the Palermo Protocol.  The Niger had thus repealed the law to bring it in line with the Protocol.  Migrants were made more vulnerable to traffickers under the law.  The State remained a member of the Economic Community of West African States and its agreement on freedom of movement.  Some countries and terrorist groups attacked territory of the Niger; the State party had implemented legal and policy measures to repel these attacks.

    The Niger had an inter-ministerial committee for developing State party reports that included members of civil society in the process.  The Niger continued to support civil society.

    Foreign workers in the Niger could join trade unions but needed to live in the country for three years to hold management positions in trade unions. Domestic workers and workers in the informal sector could submit complaints to trade unions.  The Labour Code included provisions enshrining the principle of non-discrimination and access to education and trade unions for migrant workers.

    The Niger had suspended bilateral agreements with Saudi Arabia, Libya and Algeria, as these countries had violated these agreements, repatriating many migrants from the Niger.  Every time the Niger formed a labour agreement, it set up a body to monitor the implementation of the agreement and protect workers’ rights.  The State party had conducted activities to ensure that private recruitment agencies were aware of their responsibilities to protect migrant workers.  Portions of migrant workers’ salaries could not be withheld by these agencies.

    The Niger had ratified 41 International Labour Organization Conventions and two protocols.  It had implemented activities to protect domestic workers and disseminate the International Labour Organization Convention on domestic workers, with support from United Nations agencies.  The Niger had not yet ratified International Labour Organization Convention 190 on violence in the workplace but was working to do so, and conducting training on preventing such violence.

    The State party had ratified conventions on labour inspection and administration.  There were 10 labour inspectorates established in major towns.  Labour inspections were conducted regularly in the formal and informal sectors.  The Government had bolstered the capacities of inspectors through training, which stressed the importance of protecting migrant workers.  The revised Labour Code was still a draft.  The State party had identified deficiencies in the Code that it sought to review to align the Code with the Convention.

    The national migration policy included numerous measures to protect and support migrants and refugees and manage migration flows.  There was a law on the status of migrant workers that allowed migrants to be registered in the civil registry.  The births of the children of migrants were recorded.  A 2023 review on the implementation of the policy found progress had been made in police officers’ and civil society’s knowledge of migrants’ rights, thanks to training on this subject from the State. This training was being revised to address the impact of climate change on migrants.

    The humanitarian centre at Agadez hosted asylum seekers and refugees.  The State party was assessing asylum requests. Transit centres managed by the International Organization for Migration were also in place that hosted migrants and processed their repatriation.  Algeria expatriated about 500 foreign migrants to Agadez every month, forcing them to walk about 15 kilometres through the desert to reach the transit centres.  The Niger was calling on Algeria to change the way it expelled people, which violated the rights of these migrants.  There were some migrants who were forced to stay at transit centres for one year due to difficulties in identifying their countries of origin and repatriating them. The Niger could not afford to pay for repatriation flights for migrants.

    An inter-ministerial committee and a technical committee on repatriation of Niger nationals abroad were set up in 2024.  The former committee was tasked with managing returns and taking people to their towns of origin, while the latter conducted studies on repatriation and assisted reintegration activities.  Officials went to host countries to organise repatriation operations, which were paid for by the Niger.

    Questions by Committee Experts 

    KHALED CHEIKHNA BABACAR, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked if the labour inspectors held a specific status, ensuring they had enough resources to perform their tasks impartially?  The Niger had a national action plan to combat child labour, with support from the International Labour Organization.  Had an assessment of the plan taken place? What actions had been taken in terms of planning after 2018?  The Niger had rolled out awareness raising campaigns for the labour market, which concluded in 2022; what actions had been undertaken since then?  Were there any possibilities for remedies or appeals against expulsions or deportations? 

    A Committee Expert commended the Niger for taking an inclusive approach to drafting the report; what was the consultation process followed during the preparation of the report?  Had external partners been consulted?  What was the role of civil society in the preparation of the report? Regarding multilateral agreements with several countries, what measures had been taken for children and women on the move from the Niger?  Had the Niger been able to pinpoint barriers in integrating the migration policy?  Could information be provided about the protection of the statistical data of migrants? 

    Could more details be provided about the specific causes of insecurity which had caused children to be displaced in the five regions? What measures had been taken to protect the rights of displaced children?  Was there a response plan to support internally displaced persons, including children?  What initiatives had been taken to ensure displaced children could have access to education?  What psycho-social support was available to these children?  Was there a mechanism to follow up on the number of children who were displaced? 

    MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the delegation had mentioned a tripartite memorandum between the Niger, the International Organization for Migration and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which had provided assistance to hundreds of unaccompanied children.  How many children had received this assistance?  Could details of the beneficiaries of assistance be provided? Had the resettlement of these children in third countries taken place?  Which countries did this occur in?  How many children were affected by this settlement? 

    What had been the outcome of the strategy to strengthen systems along the migration route?  What was the timeline to ensure that the new protection strategy was finalised?  What was the hosting capacity of the six holistic centres, created to deal with gender-based violence?  How did they operate?  Did they fall under the management of a specific State body? What was the training provided to the individuals running these centres?  What assistance was provided to those living in these centres? 

    Another Committee Expert said the Niger faced security threats, including terrorism which could impact the services provided to migrant workers.  What measures had been taken in terms of training the military, border guards, the judiciary and other officials implementing the rights of migrant workers to respond to terrorism situations which involved migrants, in line with international best practices? 

    A Committee Expert said the Niger faced issues due to sanctions from European countries.  Did these countries take steps to support migrant workers from the Niger to improve their rights?  What types of consular services could the Niger provide for these workers? 

    Another Expert asked if the diaspora still had five of the 100 seats in the National Assembly reserved?  This was a very high figure.  Was the migration rate still 3.8 per cent?  What instruments governed the Niger now that the Constitution was suspended? Could the State elaborate on the situation of the national human rights body?  What was the true situation of statelessness in the country?  Was there legislation and data collection? 

    A Committee Expert asked if refugee children were actually refugees, or if there were migrants amongst them?  There were 237 unaccompanied children who were refugees and over 1,000 had been separated from their families in 2024.  What support was provided to these children?  Were they housed in the same camps as other migrants? What steps were taken to avoid situations of statelessness?  What was the State party doing to assist migrants returning to the Niger?  How was their reintegration being assisted and what support was being given?   

    The report from the High Commissioner found that there were migrants who were not from the Economic Community of West African States area, who had been subject to refoulment from Algeria, Syria, Egypt and Yemen.  These migrants were often denied access to the Niger, which was discriminatory and ran counter to international law.  The report stated these people were returned 500 kilometres northeast of the capital and could not submit a request for asylum.  Could the delegation comment on this?  What was the fate of these migrants?  What was being done to provide them with the international protection they were entitled to? 

    Responses by the Delegation

    Regarding people received from Syria and Yemen, the delegation said the State had its own problems when it came to managing domestic security and needed to allocate resources to its own people.  The situation in the Niger was complicated. The report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights referred to one spontaneous refoulment relating to a specific population.  There were a number of resettlement programmes dedicated to these individuals. The Niger had never claimed that the fight against terrorism was a grounds to human rights not being respected. Why did the Committee not question those who financed terrorism, like the French, who wanted to steal the Niger’s resources?  These questions were disturbing.  Soldiers of the Niger did not violate the laws; they were trained on human rights issues. There were specific units within the army who dealt with criminal proceedings. 

    There were no financial resources provided to civil society to prepare and submit reports in the Niger.  Civil society was involved in the design of the reports; they participated on the same footing as all partners and made proposals.  Mobilising resources to civil society was a challenge, but they were involved in discussions.  In many countries of the subregion, the wahaya, or “fifth wives” practice existed, but the Niger had addressed this issue and sanctioned its practice. 

    The Niger had had security agencies run by foreigners who wanted to take part in the destabilisation of the regime.  Weapons of war had been found in the warehouses, under the control of France, to attack the Niger.  Therefore, there was no choice but to prohibit this profession to foreigners.  The State would not hesitate to take additional measures to protect its national security.
    Displaced children were sometimes displaced due to terrorism from Nigeria.  The Niger faced a problem in this regard.  There were a few countries whose populations had been refouled to the Niger. The Niger needed to focus on the resettlement of its own people in its own borders and could not always assist those returned to other countries.

    The term wahaya did not actually refer to a “fifth wife”; there was no marriage involved.  This referred to a woman who had been bought, given or exchanged.  It was defined as a form of slavery.  Civil society organizations were fully involved in all stages of the report, including data collection.  The 2023 ordinance superseded the Constitution and equated to the new Constitution.  This ordinance was for Government powers during the transition.  The ordinance was repealed last month after the new Charter was adopted.  The same rights in the Constitution were enshrined in this new State Charter, meaning there was no Constitutional vacuum. 

    The Special Rapporteur on the rights of migrants had spent eight days in the Niger, during which he found that the 2015 ordinance ran counter to the Convention.  Banning migration meant migrants had to change their itineraries and take more dangerous roads, resulting in hundreds of deaths.  There were modules held throughout schools for training, as well as throughout the police, gendarmerie and judiciary.  The State went to remote areas to organise training workshops on the Convention and all other instruments entered into by the State. 

    The Niger was party to the two Conventions on Statelessness. Children who faced statelessness in the Niger who were in the country and met the necessary conditions could acquire citizenship.  Children whose parents were unknown could also apply for citizenship.  There were no stateless individuals in the country. 

    The diaspora document had been drafted by the private sector, civil society and the Government.  This was a guide for returnees who wished to contribute to the socio-economic development of the country.  The Niger had five seats in the National Assembly dedicated to the diaspora before the Constitution.  There were large communities of Niger nationals in Benin, Sudan and Burkina Faso, among others, which was the reason for this choice. 

    All the texts for the Human Rights Observatory were ready and it should be established soon.  It would have the same competencies as the Human Rights Commission.  In addition to the technical services in charge of migration, migrants also received training to ensure they could stay in the Niger. 

    Refugees could not be refouled to countries where their lives could be at risk, but migrants could go to courts with an expedited procedure. The Niger as a member country of the International Labour Organization was aware that the ratification of international labour standards would make it possible to guarantee the protection of migrant workers.  The resources available to the labour inspectors were lacking and while they had a specific status, they encountered difficulties in carrying out their everyday work.  To date, the Niger did not have a national action plan to combat child labour, but it was in the process of drafting this plan. 

    The bilateral agreements the Niger had signed with countries of destination each had their own specific features and focused on social security.  The Niger had made significant progress with Qatar and was in the process of drawing up a memorandum of understanding. 

    Refugee children from the Niger were not held together with adults, but were placed in foster families, who were supported to care for these children.  Children who had been placed in foster families benefitted from State support, free of charge health care, and access to school.  Their parents could have access to the justice system without any restrictions.  Despite meagre resources, the Niger had been able to welcome Africans from other nationalities and provide them with the necessary care. 

    Questions by Committee Experts 

    SABRINA GAHAR, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked for more information about cooperation with non-governmental organizations?  How did the Government collaborate and cooperate to meet the specific needs of vulnerable groups?  The Committee commended the Niger on the strategy to combat gender-based violence.  Had an assessment of the strategy been conducted?  What were the success indicators?  Did the strategy concern harmful practices against migrant girls? 

    What measures were taken by the State to combat sexual violence against women and girls in certain regions?  It was reported that some women were trapped and forced into prostitution to survive.  They were forced into certain sexual practices with security agents at border posts, with some falling pregnant and contracting sexually transmitted diseases at an early age.  It was also reported that smugglers sold these women.  How did the State protect these women against smugglers and those involved in human trafficking?  What measures and strategies had been implemented to protect children from practices, such as begging? 

    KHALED CHEIKHNA BABACAR, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what sanctions were handed down if the provisions of the Labour Code were violated?  What efforts had the State party made to guarantee better assistance to unaccompanied and separated children? 

    MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what was being done to ensure that the right of migrant workers to transfer social security benefits could be made effective?  What measures had Niger taken to fill the protection gaps for the rights of migrant workers who came from the Economic Commission of West African States? Was it planned to sign bilateral agreements to bridge the protection gap?  Could more information be provided about the joint teamwork made up of French, Spanish and Niger police to combat smugglers networks; was this work still ongoing?  How did the team work in combatting these networks? 

    An Expert asked what specific measures had been taken to assist migrants impacted by climate change?  Were there migrants in the various mining areas?  What kind of support was provided to them? 

    Responses by the Delegation 

    The delegation said the Niger had established a human rights institution which had an A status, in line with the Paris Principles.  The State tried to find foster families for unaccompanied children in local communities, and supported them.  It could not be proven that women were forced into prostitution and to have sex with the defence forces.  In 2023, measures were taken to sanction security forces and efforts were taken to prosecute any officer committing offences. In Niger, the Labour Code was clear; those working fell under the protection of the Labour Code regardless of nationality.  Foreigners were protected by the Labour Code and if their rights were violated, there were remedies.  There were labour inspectorates for anyone whose rights were violated, and the inspectors were swamped by complaints.  All workers were aware of the inspectorate and did not hesitate to consult its members in the event of a violation of rights.  There were also labour courts which workers could access, whether they were nationals or foreigners. 

    Closing Remarks

    KHALED CHEIKHNA BABACAR, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation of Niger for the dialogue and for attempting to reply to the Committee’s questions.  The candidacy of the delegation was appreciated.

    MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the presence of the delegation made it clear that the Niger had the clear intention of advancing the rights of migrants.  The State should continue to improve the situation for migrant workers in the country. 

    SABRINA GAHAR, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for all the information provided and the interesting discussions had. The State’s report showed that Niger was committed to protecting the rights of migrant workers and their families. The initiatives showed best practices and strategies aimed at improving migrants’ situations. However, there was still a lot to do to guarantee that the rights of migrant workers and the members of their families were fully respected and protected. 

    ALIO DAOUDA, Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Niger, Keeper of the Seals and head of the delegation, expressed gratitude for the attention given to the report and the efforts of the Niger to guarantee the basic rights of migrants and their families.  The interactive dialogue was vital to building a society where human rights and equity were accessible to all, including migrant workers.  The State acknowledged the remaining challenges, but would tackle them with conviction and would step up efforts to meet the provisions under the Convention.  The Niger looked forward to the Committee’s concluding observations and recommendations.  Mr. Daouda thanked all those who had made the dialogue possible. 

    ___________

     

     

    Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media; 
    not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

     

    CMW25.003E

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Activities of Secretary-General in Geneva, 16-18 March

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI b

    On Sunday, 16 March, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres arrived in Geneva, Switzerland, where he convened the two Cypriot leaders and the Guarantor Powers of Greece, Türkiye and the United Kingdom for an informal meeting on Cyprus at the United Nations Office in Geneva.

    The meeting took place from 17 to 1 March and was held in the context of the Secretary-General’s good offices efforts on the Cyprus issue and as agreed with the two leaders on 15 October 2024.

    The informal meeting was convened to provide an opportunity for a meaningful discussion on the way forward on the Cyprus issue.  The United Nations remains committed to supporting the Cypriot leaders and all Cypriots.

    On Monday evening, 17 March, the informal meeting began with a dinner hosted by the Secretary-General with the two Cypriot leaders and the Guarantor Powers of Greece, Türkiye and the United Kingdom.

    Earlier in the day, the Secretary-General visited the construction site of the Portail des Nations, a new visitors centre currently under construction at the UN campus in Geneva.  Built through a private donation from the Fondation Portail des Nations, the new facility will provide visitors with an interactive experience to learn about the UN’s work and it will enable UN colleagues in Geneva to better welcome visitors.

    On Tuesday, 18 March, the Secretary-General held bilateral meetings with the two Cypriot leaders and the Guarantor Powers of Greece, Türkiye and the United Kingdom.

    Immediately after the conclusion of the bilateral meetings, they held a plenary meeting at the Palais des Nations.

    Following the conclusion of the informal meeting on Cyprus, the Secretary-Generalspoke to the press assembled at the Palais des Nations.  He told reporters the discussions were held in a constructive atmosphere, with both sides showing clear commitment to making progress and continuing dialogue.

     The Secretary-General added that the leaders have agreed to a group of initiatives to build trust:  opening four crossing points; demining; the creation of a technical committee on youth; initiatives on the environment and climate change, including the impacts on mining areas; solar energy in the buffer zone; and the restoration of cemeteries. 

    Mr. Guterres said the leaders also agreed to hold another meeting in the same format at the end of July, as well as to the appointment of a Personal Envoy to prepare the next steps.

    In answer to a question about the situation in Gaza, the Secretary-General said that unfortunately, that day, we witnessed a situation in which we had an intolerable level of suffering for the Palestinian people, with the air strikes that killed hundreds of people, and with the humanitarian aid still blocked.

    He added that the role of the UN is to do everything to convince the parties and to have the international community pressing for three essential aspects.  First, for the ceasefire to be fully respected.  Second, for humanitarian aid to have access to Gaza in an unimpeded way.  And third, for the unconditional release of hostages.  And we will not, we will not give up on these objectives, he said.

    Later that day, the Secretary-General left Geneva for Brussels, where he was scheduled to meet with European Union leaders.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – US AI chip export restrictions: a challenge to EU unity and technological sovereignty – E-000483/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The decision by the United-States (US) to impose export restrictions on advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) chips and the categorisation of Member States into different tiers goes against the core principles of the EU’s single market and technological sovereignty.

    While a detailed assessment of the impact of those measures on the EU is ongoing, the Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy and the Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security already voiced their concerns to the US administration in a Joint Statement[1].

    Europe aims to be among the global leaders in AI and is taking concrete steps in this direction. The Chips Joint Undertaking[2] has launched research and innovation calls on AI chips. The EU’s AI factories initiative and the European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking[3] play a key role in this respect.

    To accelerate the development of the EU’s domestic AI capabilities, the Commission has recently announced the new InvestAI initiative, which aims to mobilise EUR 200 billion for AI investments. In parallel, it is crucial to ensure the access of EU operators to the leading AI chips and models.  

    The Commission has also pointed, in its White Paper on Export Controls[4], to ‘the lack of common EU voice [which] exposes individual Member States to strong geopolitical pressures’.

    The Commission also suggested concrete responses aimed at ensuring uniform EU export controls. To this end, the Commission will soon publish a recommendation to enhance the coordination of national control lists and has also proposed to make the update of the EU list of dual-use controls more flexible and reactive to technological and geopolitical developments.

    The upcoming evaluation of Regulation (EU) 2021/821[5] will further allow the EU to assess this framework in the evolving international context.

    • [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_25_255
    • [2] https://www.chips-ju.europa.eu/
    • [3] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/high-performance-computing-joint-undertaking
    • [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52024DC0025
    • [5] Regulation (EU) 2021/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 setting up a Union regime for the control of exports, brokering, technical assistance, transit and transfer of dual-use items (recast),
      OJ L 206, 11.6.2021, p. 1; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/821/oj/eng
    Last updated: 9 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    April 10, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Threats to democracy, threats to Europe? – E-000058/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Following on a call by the European Council, the Spanish Government, the Belgian government, and the Commission have asked Mr Enrico Letta to write an independent High-Level Report on the future of the Single Market in 2023[1].

    The Commission did not conclude a contract with Mr Letta and did not pay him any allowances or remuneration. The Commission did not award grants to institutes or experts specifically for this report.

    The Senior Expert in the Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, was seconded from November 2023 to June 2024 at the request of the Belgian government, to support the work on the independent High-Level Report on the future of the Single Market.

    The Belgian presidency of the Council selected him on the basis of his academic and professional experience on Single Market policies and Better Regulation.

    • [1] See also the Commission’s press release of 15 September 2023, IP/23/4495.
    Last updated: 9 April 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    April 10, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 976 977 978 979 980 … 1,780
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress