I have analysed several different peace negotiations and agreements. It’s important to distinguish between what’s needed to get warring parties to the table, and what’s eventually agreed on. In this article, I examine whether the DRC-Rwanda deal has got the four essential components that usually signal that an agreement will hold.
Two broad points about peace agreements, first – and one particular complication in the DRC-Rwanda case.
Firstly, one agreement is rarely enough to resolve a complex conflict. Most deals are part of a series of agreements, sometimes between different actors. They often mention previously concluded ones, and will be referred to by subsequent ones.
Secondly, peace is a process, and requires broad and sustained commitment. It is essential that other actors, like armed groups, are brought on board. Importantly, this also includes civil society actors. An agreement will be more legitimate and effective if different voices are heard during negotiations.
One major complication in relation to the DRC-Rwanda deal is that the United States has been the prime broker. But rather than acting as a neutral mediator trying to bring about peace, Washington seems to be pursuing its own economic interests. This does not bode well.
There is no simple recipe for a good peace agreement, but research shows that four elements are important: a serious commitment from the parties, precise wording, clear timelines and strong implementation provisions.
What underpins a good agreement
First, the parties need to be serious about the agreement and able to commit to its terms. It must not be used as a cover to buy time, re-arm or pursue fighting. Moreover, lasting peace cannot be made exclusively at the highest political level. Agreements that are the result of more inclusive processes, with input by and support from the communities concerned, have a higher success rate.
Second, the agreement must address the issues it aims to resolve, and its provisions must be drafted carefully and unambiguously. When agreements are vague or silent on key aspects, they are often short-lived. Previous experiences can guide peace negotiators and mediators in the drafting process. Peace agreement databases established by the United Nations and academic institutions are a useful tool for this.
Third, clear and realistic timelines are essential. These can concern the withdrawal of armed forces from specified territories, the return of refugees and internally displaced persons, and the establishment of mechanisms providing reparations or other forms of transitional justice.
Fourth, an agreement should include provisions on its implementation. External support is usually helpful here. Third states or international organisations, liked the United Nations and the African Union, can be mandated to oversee this phase. They can also provide security guarantees or even deploy a peacekeeping operation. What is crucial is that these actors are committed to the process and don’t pursue their own interests.
To know what to realistically expect from a specific peace agreement, it’s important to understand that such agreements can take very different forms. These range from pre-negotiation arrangements and ceasefires to comprehensive peace accords and implementation agreements.
A lasting resolution of the conflict should not be expected when only a few conflict parties have concluded a temporary ceasefire.
The DRC-Rwanda agreement: an important step with lots of shortcomings
It’s difficult to tell at this point how serious the DRC and Rwanda are about peace, and if their commitment will be enough.
But Rwanda has a history of direct military activities in the DRC since the 1990s. And the treaty only includes rather vague references to the “disengagement of forces/lifting of defensive measures by Rwanda”. It doesn’t specifically mention the withdrawal of the reportedly thousands of Rwandan troops deployed to eastern DRC.
The Paul Kagame-led Rwandan government has also supported Tutsi-dominated armed groups in the DRC since the Rwandan genocide in 1994. The Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23) is the current primary military actor in eastern DRC. But the agreement between the governments of DRC and Rwanda didn’t include the M23 or other groups. The two governments only commit themselves to supporting the ongoing negotiations between the DRC and the M23 facilitated by Qatar.
For instance, aside from a general commitment to promote human rights and international humanitarian law, there is no reference to the widespread violations of human rights and war crimes reportedly committed by all sides. These include summary executions, and sexual and gender-based violence, including violence against children.
There is no single model for this, and so-called transitional justice (defined as the “range of processes and mechanisms associated with a society’s attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large-scale past abuses, in order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve reconciliation”) remains highly controversial. For instance, insisting on war crimes trials can be seen as endangering a fragile peace process.
But peace agreements across the world, from Libya to the Central African Republic, have over past decades moved away from blanket amnesties. They have increasingly included provisions to ensure accountability, especially for serious crimes. The DRC-Rwanda deal is silent on these questions.
The two states agreed to establish a joint oversight committee, with members of the African Union, Qatar and the United States. It foresees a “regional economic integration framework”, which has been criticised as opening the door for foreign influence in the DRC’s rich mineral resources. The country is the world’s largest producer of cobalt, for instance, which is essential for the renewable energy sector.
Philipp Kastner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
NEW YORK — An investigation by ICE Homeland Security Investigations New York, alongside several partners, has resulted in an indictment charging two men for their alleged roles in operating and promoting OmegaPro, an international investment scheme that defrauded victim investors of over $650 million.
According to court documents, Michael Shannon Sims, 48, of Georgia and Florida, was a founder, strategic consultant, and promoter of OmegaPro, and Juan Carlos Reynoso, 57, of New Jersey and Florida, led OmegaPro’s operations in Latin America and parts of the United States, including Puerto Rico.
“This case highlights the critical role international partnerships play in dismantling transnational financial fraud schemes that exploit global markets and victimize unsuspecting investors,” said ICE HSI International Operations Assistant Director Ricardo Mayoral. “HSI remains committed to working with our partners worldwide to disrupt criminal networks that weaponize emerging technologies to conceal illicit profits and defraud the public.”
Mayoral; Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney W. Stephen Muldrow for the District of Puerto Rico; Assistant Director Joe Perez of the FBI Criminal Investigative Division; and Chief Guy Ficco of the IRS Criminal Investigation announced the charges on July 8.
HSI New York, the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation are investigating the case, with assistance from HSI Bangkok; HSI Bogota; HSI Frankfurt; HSI Istanbul; HSI London; HSI Miami; HSI New Delhi; HSI The Hague; the FBI’s Virtual Asset Unit; the Office of the Attorney General of Colombia; and the Joint Chiefs of Global Tax Enforcement, an alliance between the Australian Taxation Office, the Canada Revenue Agency, the Dutch Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs from the U.K., and IRS-CI.
According to the investigation and as outlined in court documents:
Sims and co-conspirators established OmegaPro in or about January 2019, and Reynoso joined a few months later, in or about April 2019. As alleged, the defendants and others operated and promoted OmegaPro as a multi-level marketing scheme for investors to purchase “investment packages,” which the defendants and others falsely promised would generate 300% returns over 16 months through foreign exchange trading by elite traders. Investors were instructed to purchase these investment packages using virtual currency.
Sims allegedly misled victims by vouching for OmegaPro’s trading performance and the skills of the hired traders and by falsely advertising the safety of investment in OmegaPro. Reynoso allegedly falsely and misleadingly represented that OmegaPro was operating pursuant to a legitimate license and, at other times, that OmegaPro was not subject to any country’s legal rules. The indictment alleges that Sims and Reynoso, together with co-conspirators, hosted lavish OmegaPro promotional events and trainings all over the world including, for example, projecting the OmegaPro logo onto the Burj Khalifa, the world’s tallest building, at an event in Dubai. The objective of these promotional events allegedly was to convince existing and prospective investors that OmegaPro was a legitimate enterprise that offered a path to wealth and a luxurious lifestyle.
Further, Sims, Reynoso, and their co-conspirators used social media to display their expensive vacations and cars, as well as their designer clothes and watches. The indictment alleges that through the defendants’ and others’ misrepresentations, OmegaPro raised over $650 million in virtual currency from thousands of investors. After OmegaPro announced that it had suffered a network hack, Reynoso and others told victims in or about January 2023 that their investments were secure and that OmegaPro was transferring their investments to another platform called Broker Group. Despite these representations, victims were unable to withdraw money from either their OmegaPro accounts or their accounts at Broker Group, resulting in millions in victim losses.
The more than $650 million in funds raised from victims allegedly was first sent to virtual currency wallet addresses controlled by OmegaPro executives and then allegedly transferred to OmegaPro insiders and high-ranking promoters to disperse the funds and obscure their origins. As alleged, Sims and Reynoso both profited millions from this scheme.
“As alleged, the defendants preyed upon vulnerable individuals in the U.S. and abroad, defrauding them of over $650 million by making false promises of substantial returns and that their money was safe,” said Galeotti. “The Criminal Division is committed to prosecuting these bad actors and pursuing justice for their many victims. Thanks to the dedicated work of our multiagency and international law enforcement partners, we are leading efforts to combat these complex and insidious digital asset investor scams.”
“As alleged in the indictment, the defendants operated a global fraud scheme through OmegaPro that deceived investors with false promises of extraordinary returns, only to misappropriate hundreds of millions of victim funds,” said Muldrow. “We remain committed to dismantling international financial schemes that target U.S. victims — including here in Puerto Rico — and to recovering illicit proceeds through criminal prosecution and asset forfeiture.”
“The FBI will not stand by while the American public is defrauded,” said Perez. “Through coordination with our partners, these individuals will have to defend their actions in a court of law.”
“This case exposes the ruthless reality of modern financial crime,” said Ficco. “OmegaPro promised financial freedom but delivered financial ruin — stealing over $650 million from everyday people and vanishing it into virtual currency. These weren’t just scams; they were precision-engineered betrayals. Our job is to stand up for those who’ve been exploited and continue our cross-agency collaboration until those responsible are brought to justice.”
Both defendants are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. If convicted, Sims and Reynoso each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on each count.
A twelfth individual has been charged for his role in the shooting of an Alvarado police officer at the Prairieland Detention Center, announced Acting United States Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Nancy E. Larson.
According to a criminal complaint filed today, Benjamin Hanil Song, a former United States Marine Corps reservist, joined ten others in an organized attack against officers at the Prairieland Detention Center just after 10:30 p.m., Friday, July 4.
The complaint alleges that group was dressed in black military style clothing. The group began shooting fireworks towards the detention center. Some then sprayed graffiti on vehicles and a guard structure in the parking lot at the facility. Correctional officers called 911 to report suspicious activity. An Alvarado police officer responded to the scene and, upon exiting his vehicle, the officer was shot in the neck by a defendant positioned in nearby woods. Another alleged assailant across the street fired 20 to 30 rounds at unarmed correctional officers who had stepped outside the facility.
As alleged in the complaint, Song purchased four of the guns that were found in connection with the shooting. Two AR-style rifles were found at the scene, which records show were purchased by Song. One of the abandoned rifles at the scene had a binary trigger, used to “double” a regular rate of fire, allowing a shooter to fire more rapidly than a standard semiautomatic gun. Police also recovered additional firearms in searches of residences and vehicles, including another AR-15 style rifle in the back of a van driven that night by Bradford Morris, who was charged in a separate complaint on Monday. Song also purchased that rifle, according to court documents. Joy Gibson—also charged in Monday’s complaint—had a pistol in her backpack when apprehended. Records show that Song purchased this firearm in October 2024.
Ten assailants charged in Monday’s complaint fled from the detention center but were apprehended by additional responding law enforcement officers. Song, however, was not located by law enforcement officers that night. As alleged, the location data associated with Song’s cellular telephone indicates that his phone was located within several hundred meters of the Prairieland Detention Center from late in the evening of July 4, 2025, until after dark on July 5, the day after the shooting. Additionally, the complaint alleges that on July 6, a white Mercedes Benz registered to a relative of Song was found on the same block of Bradford Morris’s residence. A DFW Airport camera captured an individual—believed to be Song—driving the Mercedes on May 23, 2025.
Song has been charged by federal complaint with three counts of attempted murder of federal agents and three counts of discharging a firearm in relation to a crime of violence. The ten others charged with these offenses in Monday’s complaint include Cameron Arnold, Savanna Batten, Nathan Baumann, Zachary Evetts, Joy Gibson, Bradford Morris, Maricela Rueda, Seth Sikes, Elizabeth Soto, and Ines Soto. The FBI has deemed Song a wanted individual and advises that he should be considered armed and dangerous. As described in the attached notice, the FBI is seeking the public’s assistance in Song’s apprehension.
Acting U.S. Attorney Nancy E. Larson praised the tireless efforts of all federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies involved in this case to date. “The swift response of nearly 70 law enforcement officers to the site of the shooting hemmed in several of the attackers,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Nancy E. Larson. “The quick action and professionalism of our state and local law enforcement officers in the immediate aftermath of the shooting resulted in the prompt capture of ten of the assailants. Though Song escaped the scene by hiding overnight, he will be relentlessly pursued until he is in custody.”
“Benjamin Hanil Song is wanted by the FBI for his connection to the violent assault that occurred at the Prairieland Detention Center. He is considered armed and dangerous, and we ask that the public contact law enforcement immediately if he is seen,” said FBI Dallas Special Agent in Charge R. Joseph Rothrock. “We are committed to apprehending Song and are offering a reward of up to $25,000 for information leading to his arrest and conviction. If you have any information, please call 1-800-CALL-FBI or you can submit a digital tip to fbi.govprairieland.”
A criminal complaint is merely an allegation of criminal conduct, not evidence. Like all defendants, Song is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If convicted, he faces a minimum penalty of ten years in federal prison and a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
The investigation was conducted by the FBI—Dallas, Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Enforcement and Removal Office (ICE ERO), ATF, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Alvarado Police Department, and the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office. Links are below to the FBI Wanted Notice for Song, and the Criminal Complaint filed.
Communicated with undercover law enforcement officer; Phone contained evidence of illegal communication with other children
Seattle – A 73-year-old Tucson, Arizona man was sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Seattle to four years in prison for travel with intent to engage in a sexual act with a minor, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Steven J. Migdon, was arrested in August 2024 following an online investigation by Seattle Police and the FBI. In the investigation, the undercover agent posed as a 13-year-old boy. At the sentencing hearing U.S. District Judge Jamal N. Whitehead noted that Migdon lived a crime free life for 73 years, but added, “Today we are here to confront the ugliness of what you did over ten days. The images you had on your phone represented real children and real abuse. These are among the most serious crimes we see in federal court, the crimes that exploit children.”
In July 2024, an undercover agent posted on a teen chatroom platform. Migdon replied to the 13-year-old persona and made the communication become more sexually explicit. Migdon requested, but did not receive, sexually explicit images from the “teen.” Migdon sent pictures of his face and penis to the undercover agent.
On August 5th Migdon flew from Tucson to Everett, Washington, believing he would meet the “teen” at an Everett hotel room. Instead Migdon was arrested. A search of his phone revealed that he had sent sexually explicit images to other children, and that he had images of child sexual abuse on his phone.
In asking for a four-year sentence and ten years of supervised release to follow, Assistant United States Attorney Cecelia Gregson wrote to the court, “Despite age and experience, Migdon spent ten days communicating with a person he believed to be a 13-year-old boy. Worse, the content of his phone confirmed his chatting and travel conduct were not stand alone. Migdon had been sexually communicating with unidentified minors in the days leading up to his travel to Washington for sex with a fictitious child.”
Migdon was ordered to pay $3,000 in restitution to a fund for the known victims in the child sex abuse images he possessed. Migdon is required to register as a sex offender and will be on ten years of supervised release following prison.
The case was investigated by the FBI and the Seattle Police Department. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Cecelia Gregson.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.
I have analysed several different peace negotiations and agreements. It’s important to distinguish between what’s needed to get warring parties to the table, and what’s eventually agreed on. In this article, I examine whether the DRC-Rwanda deal has got the four essential components that usually signal that an agreement will hold.
Two broad points about peace agreements, first – and one particular complication in the DRC-Rwanda case.
Firstly, one agreement is rarely enough to resolve a complex conflict. Most deals are part of a series of agreements, sometimes between different actors. They often mention previously concluded ones, and will be referred to by subsequent ones.
Secondly, peace is a process, and requires broad and sustained commitment. It is essential that other actors, like armed groups, are brought on board. Importantly, this also includes civil society actors. An agreement will be more legitimate and effective if different voices are heard during negotiations.
One major complication in relation to the DRC-Rwanda deal is that the United States has been the prime broker. But rather than acting as a neutral mediator trying to bring about peace, Washington seems to be pursuing its own economic interests. This does not bode well.
There is no simple recipe for a good peace agreement, but research shows that four elements are important: a serious commitment from the parties, precise wording, clear timelines and strong implementation provisions.
What underpins a good agreement
First, the parties need to be serious about the agreement and able to commit to its terms. It must not be used as a cover to buy time, re-arm or pursue fighting. Moreover, lasting peace cannot be made exclusively at the highest political level. Agreements that are the result of more inclusive processes, with input by and support from the communities concerned, have a higher success rate.
Second, the agreement must address the issues it aims to resolve, and its provisions must be drafted carefully and unambiguously. When agreements are vague or silent on key aspects, they are often short-lived. Previous experiences can guide peace negotiators and mediators in the drafting process. Peace agreement databases established by the United Nations and academic institutions are a useful tool for this.
Third, clear and realistic timelines are essential. These can concern the withdrawal of armed forces from specified territories, the return of refugees and internally displaced persons, and the establishment of mechanisms providing reparations or other forms of transitional justice.
Fourth, an agreement should include provisions on its implementation. External support is usually helpful here. Third states or international organisations, liked the United Nations and the African Union, can be mandated to oversee this phase. They can also provide security guarantees or even deploy a peacekeeping operation. What is crucial is that these actors are committed to the process and don’t pursue their own interests.
To know what to realistically expect from a specific peace agreement, it’s important to understand that such agreements can take very different forms. These range from pre-negotiation arrangements and ceasefires to comprehensive peace accords and implementation agreements.
A lasting resolution of the conflict should not be expected when only a few conflict parties have concluded a temporary ceasefire.
The DRC-Rwanda agreement: an important step with lots of shortcomings
It’s difficult to tell at this point how serious the DRC and Rwanda are about peace, and if their commitment will be enough.
But Rwanda has a history of direct military activities in the DRC since the 1990s. And the treaty only includes rather vague references to the “disengagement of forces/lifting of defensive measures by Rwanda”. It doesn’t specifically mention the withdrawal of the reportedly thousands of Rwandan troops deployed to eastern DRC.
The Paul Kagame-led Rwandan government has also supported Tutsi-dominated armed groups in the DRC since the Rwandan genocide in 1994. The Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23) is the current primary military actor in eastern DRC. But the agreement between the governments of DRC and Rwanda didn’t include the M23 or other groups. The two governments only commit themselves to supporting the ongoing negotiations between the DRC and the M23 facilitated by Qatar.
For instance, aside from a general commitment to promote human rights and international humanitarian law, there is no reference to the widespread violations of human rights and war crimes reportedly committed by all sides. These include summary executions, and sexual and gender-based violence, including violence against children.
There is no single model for this, and so-called transitional justice (defined as the “range of processes and mechanisms associated with a society’s attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large-scale past abuses, in order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve reconciliation”) remains highly controversial. For instance, insisting on war crimes trials can be seen as endangering a fragile peace process.
But peace agreements across the world, from Libya to the Central African Republic, have over past decades moved away from blanket amnesties. They have increasingly included provisions to ensure accountability, especially for serious crimes. The DRC-Rwanda deal is silent on these questions.
The two states agreed to establish a joint oversight committee, with members of the African Union, Qatar and the United States. It foresees a “regional economic integration framework”, which has been criticised as opening the door for foreign influence in the DRC’s rich mineral resources. The country is the world’s largest producer of cobalt, for instance, which is essential for the renewable energy sector.
– 4 things every peace agreement needs – and how the DRC-Rwanda deal measures up – https://theconversation.com/4-things-every-peace-agreement-needs-and-how-the-drc-rwanda-deal-measures-up-260944
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44)
For Immediate Release
July 12, 2025
Contact: jin.choi@mail.house.gov
Rep. Barragán and Sen. Markey IntroduceResolutionto Confront Rising Public Health Threats fromClimateChange
WASHINGTON, D.C. — This week, Congresswoman Nanette Barragán (CA-44), a member of the Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Health, and Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, introduced a resolution recognizing climate change as a growing threat to public health and calling for a coordinated federal strategy to protect communities from worsening climate-fueled harms. The resolution urges the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other federal agencies to lead a whole-of-government effort to protect public health and improve resiliency against climate-related threats throughout the health sector. Representatives Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Doris Matsui (CA-07), and Brad Schneider (IL-10) co-led the resolution in the House.
The climate crisis is here. In 2024, the United States experienced 27 climate disasters that caused more than a billion dollars each in damage. Increasingly frequent and extreme events—like wildfires, floods, and heat waves—are driving spikes in illness, displacement, and death. More than 150 million Americans live in areas with unhealthy air, and people with disabilities are 2 to 4 times more likely to die or be injured in climate-related disasters. Frontline workers in agriculture, construction, delivery, and manufacturing face growing health risks from extreme heat and poor air quality on the job.
“The climate crisis affects us all, but especially economically disadvantaged communities, communities of color, and other marginalized communities,” said Representative Barragán. “Now more than ever, we see families across the country facing significant health risks as a result of climate disasters such as extreme heat, excessive flooding, and unpredictable storms. Yet the Trump Administration has dangerously chosen to ignore the threat of climate change to our public health – firing staff and canceling programs that were focused on improving our resilience to harmful environmental exposures, such as the HHS Office of Climate Change and Health Equity. That is why I am proud to lead this bicameral resolution with Senator Markey and Representatives Carbajal, Matsui, and Schneider to acknowledge the federal government’s responsibility to mitigate the impacts of climate change and protect the health and well-being of all Americans.”
“With deadly extreme weather disasters, devastating heat waves, and pollution that triggers asthma and other health crises all on the rise, climate change is a full-blown public health emergency—and we need to treat it that way,” said Senator Markey. “This resolution calls on our government to protect the people most at risk from climate-related threats—those on the frontlines of the climate crisis, including Black and Indigenous communities, low-income families, and workers, especially those in construction, delivery, manufacturing, and warehouses. While Republicans pass bills that kick people off their health care, we are fighting for a resilient health system that helps everyone survive a warming and increasingly chaotic world.”
“It doesn’t matter if you live in a red or blue state, every American will be affected by climate change,” said Congressman Salud Carbajal.“We’re calling on the Administration to reinstate the OCCHE because it’s essential to protecting the health and well-being of every community in this country.”
“Over the past six months, President Trump and Congressional Republicans have launched a full-scale attack on the environment and public health,” said Congresswoman Matsui. “By blatantly disregarding climate change, they are driving us towards a dangerous future. Climate change is already harming human health nationwide, driving up heat-related deaths, increasing vector-borne illnesses, and disrupting medical care. This resolution demands urgent action to address the health impacts from climate change to prevent countless deaths across the country.”
“Climate change threatens every corner of our nation and must be mitigated through swift, coordinated action by our government,” said Congressman Schneider. “The Office of Climate Change and Health Equity is a critical asset in understanding the dire health implications of climate change and mobilizing strategies that ensure no community is left behind. The decision by the Trump Administration to place all OCCHE staff on leave poses a real threat to American lives and wellbeing. I’m proud to join my colleague Rep. Barragan in urging the Trump Administration to reinstate of the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity (OCCHE) and its Office of Environmental Justice.”
Specifically, the resolution:
Demands the release of funding appropriated by Congress that would help to address climate-related health threats that has been held up by Federal agencies;
Details the public health dimensions of the climate crisis, including increased risks of respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease, mental health stressors, pregnancy complications, infectious disease outbreaks, and disaster-related displacement;
Highlights the disproportionate health burdens on children, people with disabilities, low-income households, communities of color, Tribal nations, and workers in high-risk occupations;
Calls on the Department of Health and Human Services to lead cross-agency coordination to strengthen health system climate resilience, support frontline providers, close gaps in climate-health data, and help the health sector lower its own environmental impact;
Affirms the importance of engaging environmental justice and community-based organizations in local climate-health preparedness and response efforts;
Urges the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to adopt a national worker heat protection standard; and,
Calls for annual public reporting on federal climate-health resilience investments and progress.
The resolution is cosponsored by Senators Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Representatives Hank Johnson (GA-04), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA-37), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC-00), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), and Ritchie Torres (NY-15).
The resolution is endorsed by Health Care Without Harm, Center for American Progress, Climate Justice Alliance, International Transformational Resilience Coalition, Climate and Community Institute, Earthjustice Action, Public Citizen, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, Center for Oil and Gas Organizing, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the American College of Physicians.
“Health Care Without Harm applauds Senator Markey for introducing this important resolution and is pleased to endorse it,” said Jenny Keroack, Director of Program Strategy & Management in the U.S.ClimateProgram. “Climate change is causing more severe and frequent storms, wildfires, and extreme heat events, creating safety and public health crises across our country. Our government must have a science-based, coordinated approach to prepare for and respond to these growing threats, and the Department of Health and Human Services has an indispensable role to play as the guardian of our nation’s health and well-being. Vital programs have been attacked, including a grant program that assists families with energy costs so they can afford to cool and heat their homes, funding that helps hospitals stay open and operational when the grid goes down, and research on how best to protect farmworkers from increasing heat waves. Such programs and the expert civil servants who help protect our communities from environmental health threats like climate change must be immediately reinstated and supported. Now is not the time to retreat.”
“With climate change and extreme weather events driving illness, injury, and death across the United States, the Department of Health and Human Services must harness its resources, leverage its authorities, and coordinate its expertise and action to prepare for and respond to the health and financial impact,” said Jill Rosenthal, Director of Public Health at the Center for American Progress.
“This resolution is crucial because climate change isn’t just an environmental problem; it’s a public health crisis hurting families right now,” said KD Chavez, Executive Director of theClimateJustice Alliance. “Low-income communities bear the brunt – suffering more asthma attacks, heatstroke, and toxic exposure. But these communities also have the answers! They’ve developed practical, replicable solutions. We need bold action: stronger environmental safeguards, smart investments in resilient infrastructure, and policies that prioritize everyone’s health and safety, no matter where they live. Let’s protect our families and build a healthier future for all.”
“The International Transformational Resilience Coalition (ITRC) strongly endorses this resolution,” said ITRC Founder and Coordinator Bob Doppelt. “We do so because the climate crisis is a public health crisis that requires significant leadership, support, and investments by the federal government to prevent and heal the accelerating climate-generated mental health, psychosocial, and physical health issues experienced by newborns, young children, adolescents, working age, and older adults nationwide.”
“Our hospitals and clinics are already seeing the devastating health effects of climate change every day – from children struggling to breathe polluted air to seniors collapsing in extreme heat,” said Ranjani Prabhakar, Legislative Director of Healthy Communities, Earthjustice Action. “Over 200 medical journals have called climate change the greatest threat to human health this century, and Senator Markey’s resolution affirms this data by putting health at the center of environmental solutions. Recognizing this crisis for the public health emergency that it is, is essential to protect our families and communities.”
“As the planet enters a period of increasing climate chaos, our collective response will either deepen disparities or address the drivers of climate breakdown and health inequity together,” said Batul Hassan, Labor Director at theClimateand Community Institute. “This resolution from Senator Markey establishes the urgent need for coordinated action across health and public health systems to ensure all people and generations to come can thrive in a warming world.”
The full text of the legislation can be found here.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 13, 2025
Contact: Jin Choi, jin.choi@mail.house.gov
Rep. Barragán Thanks Governor Newsom and State Legislators for Protecting Access to Medi-Cal and In-Home Care in Final 2025-26 State Budget Signed into Law
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Late June, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the 2025-26 state budget into law and delivered on protecting access to Medi-Cal and in-home care. In early June, Congresswoman Nanette Barragán (CA-44) led 16 members of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation in a letter urging Governor Gavin Newsom and State Legislators to reject reinstating the $2000 Medi-Cal asset limit and to reject capping overtime hours for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) providers.
Governor Newsom’s original May Budget Revision proposed cutting access to state and federally funded Medi-Cal and Medi-Cal’s IHSS program by proposing to reinstate a low $2000 Medi-Cal asset limit for seniors and adults with disabilities. It had also proposed a cap on overtime and travel hours for IHSS providers, who provide in-home care to seniors and people with disabilities as an alternative to out-of-home care.
The final budget, negotiated by the Governor and State Legislature, reinstates a much higher Medi-Cal asset limit of $130,000 for individuals, rather than the Governor’s original proposal of $2,000 – it also did not include the proposal to cap overtime hours for IHSS providers.
Congresswoman Barragán issued the following statement following the Governor’s signing the budget into law:
“The proposals in the Governor’s May Revision included potentially devastating cuts to Medi-Cal and in-home care that would have threatened the health and financial stability of seniors, children, adults with disabilities, and home care workers throughout California. I appreciate that the Governor and the State Legislature took meaningful steps to protect access to Medi-Cal and in-home care in the final negotiated budget that was signed into law. I look forward to continuing to work together with the State to protect our essential in-home care workers and ensure Californians can access the affordable, quality health care they need.”
Motorcyclist dies following single vehicle crash in Hobart
Tuesday, 15 July 2025 – 12:25 am.
Sadly, a motorcyclist has died following a single vehicle crash in Hobart’s northern suburbs.
Police and emergency services were called to the MyState Bank Arena carpark near the Brooker Highway about 9pm last night following a report of a serious crash.
The motorcyclist was taken to the Royal Hobart Hospital in a critical condition but sadly died a short time later.
Forensics and Crash investigators attended the scene, and police are preparing a report for the Coroner.
Anyone with information should contact Police on 131444.
Delays in Background Check Reporting Mean Those on Pre-TrialReleaseAre Oftentimes Still Able to Buy Firearms Despite Court Prohibition
Patchwork State Background Check Laws Create Dangerous LoopholesforGun Purchases
Read the BillHere
Washington, DC – Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10) today introduced the ‘Preventing Pretrial Gun Purchases Act,’ a bill that would close a critical loophole in the federal background check system and prevent individuals on pretrial release who are deemed a public safety risk from obtaining firearms. Senator Cory Booker (NJ-D) has introduced a companion bill in the Senate.
“Improving our background check system and closing loopholes that allow potentially dangerous individuals to access firearms is a commonsense step we can take to address America’s tragic gun violence crisis,” Congressman Dan Goldman said. “I am proud to be jointly re-introducing the Preventing Pretrial Gun Purchases Act in the House, which will close a dangerous loophole in our background check system by flagging individuals on pretrial release who are legally barred from purchasing firearms as a condition of their release. Congress must stop twiddling our thumbs and start taking decisive steps to close these deadly loopholes and prevent weapons from falling into the wrong hands.”
Senator Cory Booker said, “We must close the existing loopholes in the background check system, especially when individuals who are known risks to public safety are still able to buy a firearm,” said Senator Booker. “This legislation will ensure that individuals subject to a pretrial release court order cannot walk into a gun store and buy one. We must act to close the dangerous gaps in our background check system so we can save lives and keep our communities safe.”
Current federal law requires licensed gun dealers to conduct a background check of a firearm buyer using the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to ensure that the buyer is not legally prohibited from purchasing a firearm. Unfortunately, differences between various state and federal background check processes have exposed numerous vulnerabilities in this system. One vulnerability is that jurisdictions are unable to effectively and accurately report the pretrial status of individuals who, as a condition of their pretrial release, are prohibited by a court from purchasing or possessing a firearm.
The Preventing Pretrial Gun Purchases Act would:
Amend federal law to prevent firearm sales to any person subject to a pretrial releasecourt order that prohibits the person from purchasing to possessing a firearm before trial.
Prohibit any person from providing firearms to individuals in this category.
Provide $25 million in funding to aid states in paying for timely and accurate reporting of pretrial orders involving firearms restrictions to NICS
The Preventing Pretrial Gun Purchases Act has been endorsed by Brady: United Against Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, and GIFFORDS.
Congressman Dan Goldman remains committed to protecting families and communities by ensuring firearms do not end up in the hands of those who pose a threat to public safety. He is currently the Vice-Chair of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force.
In January of 2024, the Congressman also cosponsored the ‘Bolstering Security Against Ghost Guns Act’ to strengthen the United States Department of Homeland Security’s response to the growing threat of untraceable firearms, which can be bought online without a background check.
The Isle of Wight Council, Trading Standards Service and Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary are warning Island consumers and businesses of rogue traders cold calling claiming to be working with the Council/Island Roads and having a surplus of tarmac that they need to use up, which is not the case. Reports have been received from the Newport and Cowes areas.
These rogue traders often call on vulnerable and elderly residents, but we are warning businesses to be vigilant as well due to some work being carried out at business premises. Commonly, cold callers are unqualified conmen who charge extortionate amounts of money for little or no work done at all along with the prices being very misleading and demanding immediate payment.
Trading Standards is warning residents to be aware that these businesses are operating on the Island, and to be extremely careful before even discussing any work that the trader may suggest requires doing.
Trading Standards & Community Safety Manager, James Potter said: “Island residents should always be very wary of rogue traders who will cold call, as in our experience they are often unqualified conmen who will overcharge for unnecessary repairs/services which will be of poor quality.
“Legislation protecting consumers requires cold callers to give consumers a ‘Cancellation Notice’ giving them 14 days to cancel the contract made for over £42.”
“Failure to issue a cancellation notice in the correct manner is a criminal offence.”
These conmen offer services including gardening work, house maintenance, driveways, jet washing roofs, to name a few. Never engage with cold callers, and if you require work doing to your home always try to obtain at least two written quotes. Trading Standards run a trader approval scheme where local traders are vetted for compliance with consumer legislation.
For further information on our Scheme, please contact 823000 or look at our website (www.iwight.com/tas). Please be vigilant if you have elderly or vulnerable neighbours and report your concerns to the Police or the Trading Standards Service. We are committed, with the support of the Police, to protect Island residents and will take enforcement action, including prosecution, against rogue traders.
Michelle Love, Service Director for Highways and Community Protection said: “Island Roads does not ‘doorstep sell’.”
“Any materials used on the Island’s roads is carefully accounted for and used solely across the scope of our work.”
“If you are in any doubt about the legitimacy of anyone claiming to work for or with us, please contact our call centre immediately on 822440 or, alternatively, contact Trading Standards on 823371.”
A couple who were arrested following a police search across the UK have been found guilty of killing their newborn baby.
Mark Gordon, 51 (08.06.74) and Constance Marten, 38 (16.05.87), both of no fixed address, lived outside in a tent in freezing conditions with their baby Victoria.
The court heard they went on the run with Victoria to evade the authorities after their previous four children were taken into care.
After a 53-day search, they were arrested in Brighton on 27 February 2023 and officers later found the body of their child in a shopping bag at an allotment where they had been living.
Today, Monday, 14 July following a trial at the Old Bailey, they were found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.
Detective Chief Inspector Joanna Yorke, who led the homicide investigation into Victoria’s death, said: “The selfish actions of Mark Gordon and Constance Marten resulted in the death of an innocent newborn baby who would have recently had her second birthday and should have had the rest of her life ahead of her.
“This was an incredibly challenging investigation for the hundreds of officers across the UK who were involved in the search. Our main focus throughout the search was finding Victoria alive and we were devastated by the outcome.
“We know today’s verdict won’t bring Victoria back, but I am pleased our investigation has resulted in the couple who caused her death finally being brought to justice.” Investigation launched
Concerns were first raised on 5 January 2023 when the couple’s car broke down and caught fire on the M61 in Greater Manchester. Firefighters found the pair had abandoned their car and left the motorway before help had arrived.
The car was full of items, including nappies and clothing. A placenta was also found and there was concern that whoever had been in the car had recently given birth and could be in need of urgent medical care.
Officers were called and a missing person’s investigation was launched. Marten’s passport was found in the wreckage of the fire.
Through speaking to witnesses and viewing CCTV it later became clear that the couple had travelled to Bolton and then to Liverpool that evening. Moving across the country
From Liverpool the couple paid a taxi driver £350 to take them 270 miles away to Harwich in Essex.
The reason for them choosing this location is unclear, however it is thought they may have been trying to leave the country by boat.
They arrived in the town in the early hours of 6 January 2023 and checked into a hotel. Marten gave staff a fake surname and CCTV showed she had a baby underneath her coat.
Concerned about the welfare of the couple and their newborn child, officers shared a public appeal for information.
This was being widely reported in the media and on 7 January 2023 they were stopped by a member of the public who asked if they were the people who were on the news. Avoiding authorities
From Harwich the couple took a taxi to Colchester and then on to east London. They arrived in East Ham at around midday on the same day and went to buy a buggy from a branch of Argos.
The buggy they bought was too big for a newborn baby. They dumped it in an alleyway and transferred their child into a supermarket bag for life.
CCTV also showed them sitting in a restaurant in Whitechapel. This footage was the first time baby Victoria had been seen alive on camera since her birth.
The couple’s erratic and unpredictable movements across the country made it difficult for officers to trace them. Travelling to Newhaven
Shortly after midnight on 8 January 2023 they couple paid £475 for a taxi to Newhaven in East Sussex.
Soon after arriving in the town they were seen on CCTV entering the South Downs Way.
This is a huge area of open land in the south of England. Officers carried out searches, but could not locate the pair.
On 16 January 2023 a member of the public spotted them in a tent at the Stanmer Park Nature Reserve near Brighton. It was winter and temperatures regularly dropped below freezing.
There were further sightings over the following weeks. These were not reported to police at the time. Arrests
After more than a month living in a tent, the couple visited a shop in Hollingbury Place in Brighton on 27 February 2023.
A member of the public, who recognised them from the media appeals, called police and officers from Sussex Police responded quickly.
They were arrested nearby in Golf Drive, however there was no sign of baby Victoria.
Officers carried out emergency interviews and asked them both where their child was. Both refused to share any information and Gordon instead continually asked for food. Finding baby Victoria
Over the following days, hundreds of officers from the Met travelled to Sussex to search the area near to where the couple were arrested.
On 1 March 2023, following an extensive search, officers found the body of a baby inside a carrier bag at a shed on an allotment where they had been staying.
Pathologists were unable to confirm how Victoria had died. Marten told officers she had died while the couple was sleeping but did not share any further information. Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford, who led the search for the couple, said: “Victoria’s death was completely avoidable. The couple had plenty of opportunities to do the right thing and come forward to ask for help. They knew that officers were looking for them.
“We have waited more than two years to secure justice for baby Victoria and I am pleased we have now been able to get that for her – despite her parents trying to disrupt and derail not one, but two trials.
“I would like to thank the media for the support they showed throughout the search, as well as the many members of the public who reported sightings. I’d also like to thank the jury for their patience and resilience in having to sit through a long trial where they had to listen to Marten and Gordon’s horrific actions.
“This information was incredibly important, and officers travelled across the country to track down CCTV and speak to witnesses.
“Speaking personally as a father, I find it hard to comprehend how, instead of providing the warmth and care their child needed, Mark Gordon and Constance Marten chose to live outside during freezing conditions to avoid the authorities.” Chief Superintendent James Collis, from Sussex Police, said: “The search for Constance Marten and Mark Gordon ended in the most tragic circumstances and had a profound effect on the local community in Sussex.
“Our thoughts remain with baby Victoria and extend to her wider family after what must have been an extremely difficult time.
“I hope the conclusion of these criminal proceedings will everyone the space to begin to come to terms with the traumatic events of the last 28 months.
“I would once again like to thank the public for their compassion and support throughout this process, and of course the police officers, staff and volunteers who took part in the extremely challenging search as well as those who have supported the investigation.”
The pair will be sentenced at the Old Bailey on a date to be set.
A couple who were arrested following a police search across the UK have been found guilty of killing their newborn baby.
Mark Gordon, 51 (08.06.74) and Constance Marten, 38 (16.05.87), both of no fixed address, lived outside in a tent in freezing conditions with their baby Victoria.
The court heard they went on the run with Victoria to evade the authorities after their previous four children were taken into care.
After a 53-day search, they were arrested in Brighton on 27 February 2023 and officers later found the body of their child in a shopping bag at an allotment where they had been living.
Today, Monday, 14 July following a trial at the Old Bailey, they were found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter.
Detective Chief Inspector Joanna Yorke, who led the homicide investigation into Victoria’s death, said: “The selfish actions of Mark Gordon and Constance Marten resulted in the death of an innocent newborn baby who would have recently had her second birthday and should have had the rest of her life ahead of her.
“This was an incredibly challenging investigation for the hundreds of officers across the UK who were involved in the search. Our main focus throughout the search was finding Victoria alive and we were devastated by the outcome.
“We know today’s verdict won’t bring Victoria back, but I am pleased our investigation has resulted in the couple who caused her death finally being brought to justice.” Investigation launched
Concerns were first raised on 5 January 2023 when the couple’s car broke down and caught fire on the M61 in Greater Manchester. Firefighters found the pair had abandoned their car and left the motorway before help had arrived.
The car was full of items, including nappies and clothing. A placenta was also found and there was concern that whoever had been in the car had recently given birth and could be in need of urgent medical care.
Officers were called and a missing person’s investigation was launched. Marten’s passport was found in the wreckage of the fire.
Through speaking to witnesses and viewing CCTV it later became clear that the couple had travelled to Bolton and then to Liverpool that evening. Moving across the country
From Liverpool the couple paid a taxi driver £350 to take them 270 miles away to Harwich in Essex.
The reason for them choosing this location is unclear, however it is thought they may have been trying to leave the country by boat.
They arrived in the town in the early hours of 6 January 2023 and checked into a hotel. Marten gave staff a fake surname and CCTV showed she had a baby underneath her coat.
Concerned about the welfare of the couple and their newborn child, officers shared a public appeal for information.
This was being widely reported in the media and on 7 January 2023 they were stopped by a member of the public who asked if they were the people who were on the news. Avoiding authorities
From Harwich the couple took a taxi to Colchester and then on to east London. They arrived in East Ham at around midday on the same day and went to buy a buggy from a branch of Argos.
The buggy they bought was too big for a newborn baby. They dumped it in an alleyway and transferred their child into a supermarket bag for life.
CCTV also showed them sitting in a restaurant in Whitechapel. This footage was the first time baby Victoria had been seen alive on camera since her birth.
The couple’s erratic and unpredictable movements across the country made it difficult for officers to trace them. Travelling to Newhaven
Shortly after midnight on 8 January 2023 they couple paid £475 for a taxi to Newhaven in East Sussex.
Soon after arriving in the town they were seen on CCTV entering the South Downs Way.
This is a huge area of open land in the south of England. Officers carried out searches, but could not locate the pair.
On 16 January 2023 a member of the public spotted them in a tent at the Stanmer Park Nature Reserve near Brighton. It was winter and temperatures regularly dropped below freezing.
There were further sightings over the following weeks. These were not reported to police at the time. Arrests
After more than a month living in a tent, the couple visited a shop in Hollingbury Place in Brighton on 27 February 2023.
A member of the public, who recognised them from the media appeals, called police and officers from Sussex Police responded quickly.
They were arrested nearby in Golf Drive, however there was no sign of baby Victoria.
Officers carried out emergency interviews and asked them both where their child was. Both refused to share any information and Gordon instead continually asked for food. Finding baby Victoria
Over the following days, hundreds of officers from the Met travelled to Sussex to search the area near to where the couple were arrested.
On 1 March 2023, following an extensive search, officers found the body of a baby inside a carrier bag at a shed on an allotment where they had been staying.
Pathologists were unable to confirm how Victoria had died. Marten told officers she had died while the couple was sleeping but did not share any further information. Detective Superintendent Lewis Basford, who led the search for the couple, said: “Victoria’s death was completely avoidable. The couple had plenty of opportunities to do the right thing and come forward to ask for help. They knew that officers were looking for them.
“We have waited more than two years to secure justice for baby Victoria and I am pleased we have now been able to get that for her – despite her parents trying to disrupt and derail not one, but two trials.
“I would like to thank the media for the support they showed throughout the search, as well as the many members of the public who reported sightings. I’d also like to thank the jury for their patience and resilience in having to sit through a long trial where they had to listen to Marten and Gordon’s horrific actions.
“This information was incredibly important, and officers travelled across the country to track down CCTV and speak to witnesses.
“Speaking personally as a father, I find it hard to comprehend how, instead of providing the warmth and care their child needed, Mark Gordon and Constance Marten chose to live outside during freezing conditions to avoid the authorities.” Chief Superintendent James Collis, from Sussex Police, said: “The search for Constance Marten and Mark Gordon ended in the most tragic circumstances and had a profound effect on the local community in Sussex.
“Our thoughts remain with baby Victoria and extend to her wider family after what must have been an extremely difficult time.
“I hope the conclusion of these criminal proceedings will everyone the space to begin to come to terms with the traumatic events of the last 28 months.
“I would once again like to thank the public for their compassion and support throughout this process, and of course the police officers, staff and volunteers who took part in the extremely challenging search as well as those who have supported the investigation.”
The pair will be sentenced at the Old Bailey on a date to be set.
Following a ruling by a District Judge, a council tenant was evicted yesterday (Thursday 10 July 2025), after criminal activities and anti-social behaviour caused misery for their neighbours.
This follows reports from local residents to the Council and North Yorkshire Police about substance misuse and dealing, and anti-social behaviour at a home in the west of the city.
The anti-social behaviour in the home and local area included loud noise and arguments at the house, which disrupted and worried local people about its impact on their families.
Following ongoing work with residents and North Yorkshire Police, City of York Council served the tenant a number of legal warnings of eviction. The tenant then unsuccessfully appealed against the warnings and also breached them.
The Council then applied to York County Court for an eviction warrant. After considering the evidence, the District Judge granted it and evicted the tenant on Thursday 10 July.
Councillor Michael Pavlovic, Executive Member for Housing and Safer Communities at City of York Council, said:
Working with the police and neighbours, as this case shows, we take action against tenancy breaches to stop anti-social behaviour. We also fully support work to tackle illegal activity such as County Lines and the misery it heaps on communities.
“This home will now be prepared to be sensitively re-let to another tenant as quickly as possible.”
Sergeant Charlotte Gregory, from the York Community Safety Hub, said:
Alongside City of York Council, we have worked tirelessly to robustly address the deeply concerning behaviour of the tenant, resulting in the County Court granting full possession of the property back to the Council.
“This positive outcome, which falls under Operation Titan, North Yorkshire Police’s dedicated effort to combat County Lines drug dealing, shows we will use all available powers to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour. The multi-agency approach involves more than criminal convictions, as this successful eviction clearly demonstrates.
“The detrimental impact this behaviour has on residents, and the community as a whole, will not be tolerated.
“We encourage residents to keep feeding information to the Council, to the police, or anonymously to Crimestoppers.
“You can be assured that we will use it effectively against those suspected of being involved in drug dealing and related anti-social behaviour in our area.”
The tenant was advised where they could get information about their options for new accommodation.
To report anti-social behaviour:
To report drug-related crime:
Anyone with any information about suspected drug-related crime are urged to make a report via the North Yorkshire Police website or by calling 101 and speaking to the Force Control Room.
Always dial 999 if an emergency response is required.
If you would prefer to remain anonymous, please call Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111 or make a report online.
The signs of drug-dealing can include:
Increased callers at a home at all times of the day or night
Increase in cars pulling up for short periods of time
Different accents at a home
Anti-social behaviour at a home
Not seeing the resident for long periods of time
Drug-related waste such as small plastic bags and syringes
Windows covered or curtains closed for long periods.
For professional support for substance-related issues, visit:
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ted Palys, Professor of Criminology, Associate Member of Dept. of Indigenous Studies, Simon Fraser University
The contemporary internet has been with us since roughly 1995. Its current underlying economic model — surveillance capitalism — began in the early 2000s, when Google and then Facebook realized how much our personal information and online behaviour revealed about us and claimed it for themselves to sell to advertisers.
Perhaps because of Canada’s proximity to the United States, coupled with its positive shared history with the U.S. and their highly integrated economies, Canada went along for that consumerist ride.
The experience was different on the other side of the Atlantic. The Stasi in the former East Germany and the KGB under Josef Stalin maintained files on hundreds of thousands of citizens to identify and prosecute dissidents.
This has fuelled the motivation of Canada both internally and in co-operation with western European governments to seek greater independence in trade and military preparedness by diversifying its relationships.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has begun promoting “nation-building projects,” but little attention has been paid to Canada’s digital infrastructure.
Three recent developments suggest Canada would be well-advised to start paying close attention:
1. The current U.S. administration has raised concerns about its reliability as a partner and friend to Canada. Most of the concerns raised in Canada have been economic. However, Curtis McCord, a former national security and technology researcher for the Canadian government, has said the current situation has created vulnerabilities for national security as well:
“With Washington becoming an increasingly unreliable ally, Mr. Carney is right to look for ways to diversify away from the U.S. But if Canada wants to maintain its sovereignty and be responsible for its national security, this desire to diversify must extend to the U.S. domination of Canada’s digital infrastructure.”
2. Silicon Valley is exhibiting a newfound loyalty to Trump. The photo of the “broligarchy” at Trump’s inauguration spoke volumes, as their apparent eagerness to appease the president brings the data gathered by the internet’s surveillance-based economy under state control.
3. Trump’s recent executive order entitled “Stopping waste, fraud and abuse by eliminating information silos” is alarming. The order became operational when the Trump administration contracted with Palantir, a company known for its surveillance software and data analytics in military contexts. Its job? To combine databases from both the state and federal levels into one massive database that includes every American citizen, and potentially any user of the internet.
Combining multiple government databases is concerning. Combining them with all the personal data harvested by Silicon Valley and providing them to a government showing all the hallmarks of an authoritarian regime sounds like Big Brother has arrived.
Civil liberties groups such as the Electronic Freedom Foundation, academics and even former Palantir employees have raised alarms about the possibilities for abuse, including the launch of all the vendettas Trump and his supporters have pledged to undertake.
The appeal of Eurostack
European governments have attempted to rein in Silicon Valley’s excesses for years. Trump’s re-election and his moves toward potentially weaponizing internet data have further boosted Europe’s resolve to move away from the U.S.-led internet.
One newer effort is Eurostack. A joint initiative involving academics, policymakers, companies and governments, it envisions an independent digital ecosystem that better reflects European values — democratic, sovereign, inclusive, transparent, respectful of personal privacy and innovation-driven.
Spokesperson Francesca Bria explains the “stack” arises from the idea that a digitally sovereign internet needs to have European control from the ground up.
Bria discusses Eurostack in May 2025. (re:publica)
That includes the acquisition of raw materials and manufacture and operation of the physical components that comprise computers and servers; the cloud infrastructure that has the processing power and storage to be operational at scale; the operating systems and applications that comprise the user interface; the AI models and algorithms that drive services and its policy and governance framework.
Prospective gains to Europe are considerable. They include greater cybersecurity, promoting innovation, keeping high-end creative jobs in Europe, promoting collaboration on equitable terms and creating high-skilled employment opportunities.
Canada receives no mention in the Eurostack proposal to date, but the project is still very much in the developmental phase. Investment so far is in the tens of millions instead of the billions it will require.
Canada has a lot to offer and to gain from being part of the Eurostack initiative. With the project still taking shape, now is the perfect time to get on board.
Ted Palys does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
While the typical voter may not think much about judicial elections, political operatives and political scientists, like me, know they have consequences.
I think it’s important that voters understand what a retention election is and why state judicial elections are growing in political importance in the U.S.
Retention elections
Federal judges are appointed by the U.S. president, confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and can serve for the rest of their lives. State judges, however, are put in place in a variety of ways.
The most powerful state courts are the so-called “courts of last resort.” These are essentially the supreme courts of each state. The method for selecting judges in these courts has varied over time and across the states. Currently, states use either gubernatorial appointment, legislative appointment, partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, or a merit process for selecting the judges of their highest courts.
Pennsylvania has partisan elections, meaning judges run for office attached to political parties, just like a candidate would run for governor or president. However, it is only in their first race for office that a judge runs in a competitive partisan election. After they assume the bench, they participate in retention elections every 10 years. These retention elections are considered nonpartisan, since party labels do not appear on the ballot.
Essentially, a retention election is an up or down vote. If more than 50% of voters cast a vote in opposition to a sitting judge, that judge will be out of the office at the end of their term. The governor, who is currently Democrat Josh Shapiro, then makes a temporary appointment to fill the seat with a special election held in the next odd year – in this case, 2027. But any appointments would need to be confirmed by the Republican-controlled state Senate, which may not confirm his picks.
Politicization of the state courts
Judges win retention elections over 90% of the time. So why should people bother to cast their vote?
Courts, including state courts, have become highly politicized over the past several decades. A marked increase in politicization occurred for the U.S. Supreme Court after the failed nomination of Robert Bork in the 1980s.
State supreme courts have always made big decisions, but the nationalization of American politics – where national partisan politics drive voter behavior in local elections – has elevated the controversy over state supreme court decisions on issues such as reproductive rights, trans rights, COVID-19 restrictions, environmental protection and more.
This issue became more acute when courts in battleground states were thrust to the center of adjudicating false claims of election fraud during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. And judges have faced increasing threats, particularly when opposing actions of the Trump administration, as President Donald Trump is prone to calling out specific judges in decisions that he does not like.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has received additional attention, in part due to the outsized role it has played in recent redistricting. In 2018, the court threw out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly in 2011 and invited a new plan from the governor and General Assembly. The two came to a political loggerhead, so the Supreme Court ended up using its own map as a replacement.
In 2022, the state Supreme Court once again took control of redistricting after Pennyslvania’s then-Gov. Tom Wolf vetoed the congressional district map approved by the General Assembly.
Former prosecutor Susan Crawford won the highly politicized race for Wisconsin Supreme Court justice in 2025. It was the most expensive state supreme court race in U.S. history. Scott Olson via Getty Images
That was one seat.
Pennsylvania has three up for grabs in November 2025, with the potential to swing the current Democratic majority.
And retention elections are politically simple for opponents. As one Republican political consultant told investigative news outlet Spotlight PA: “This is a political consultant’s dream, because your message is just one thing, and that’s ‘No.’”
This can give some advantage to Republicans in a state that Trump won in 2024 and in a low-turnout election. The question will be whether there is more energy motivating opponents to turn out against the Democratic majority or supporters seeking to maintain the status quo.
The 2025 retention elections could change the balance of power in the court. AP Photo/Aimee Dilger
The stakes for Pennsylvania in 2025
Much is at stake for Pennsylvanians in the fall. Republicans see this as their best opportunity to break the firm 5-2 Democratic majority on the court. This would pave the way for very different judicial decisions. Many of the court’s recent election-related rulings were made on narrow 4-3 votes that could swing differently if the composition of the court changes.
Republicans have had their power in Harrisburg diminished with Shapiro in the governor’s mansion and a one-seat Democratic majority in the state House of Representatives over the past two terms.
A Republican majority on the court would significantly change the balance of power in Harrisburg.
But it is important to focus not only on the top court. The state’s two appellate-level courts – one step below the state Supreme Court – also have two important races and two retention votes in November that will decide the judiciary’s relationship with the governor and General Assembly.
Daniel J. Mallinson 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.
While the typical voter may not think much about judicial elections, political operatives and political scientists, like me, know they have consequences.
I think it’s important that voters understand what a retention election is and why state judicial elections are growing in political importance in the U.S.
Retention elections
Federal judges are appointed by the U.S. president, confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and can serve for the rest of their lives. State judges, however, are put in place in a variety of ways.
The most powerful state courts are the so-called “courts of last resort.” These are essentially the supreme courts of each state. The method for selecting judges in these courts has varied over time and across the states. Currently, states use either gubernatorial appointment, legislative appointment, partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, or a merit process for selecting the judges of their highest courts.
Pennsylvania has partisan elections, meaning judges run for office attached to political parties, just like a candidate would run for governor or president. However, it is only in their first race for office that a judge runs in a competitive partisan election. After they assume the bench, they participate in retention elections every 10 years. These retention elections are considered nonpartisan, since party labels do not appear on the ballot.
Essentially, a retention election is an up or down vote. If more than 50% of voters cast a vote in opposition to a sitting judge, that judge will be out of the office at the end of their term. The governor, who is currently Democrat Josh Shapiro, then makes a temporary appointment to fill the seat with a special election held in the next odd year – in this case, 2027. But any appointments would need to be confirmed by the Republican-controlled state Senate, which may not confirm his picks.
Politicization of the state courts
Judges win retention elections over 90% of the time. So why should people bother to cast their vote?
Courts, including state courts, have become highly politicized over the past several decades. A marked increase in politicization occurred for the U.S. Supreme Court after the failed nomination of Robert Bork in the 1980s.
State supreme courts have always made big decisions, but the nationalization of American politics – where national partisan politics drive voter behavior in local elections – has elevated the controversy over state supreme court decisions on issues such as reproductive rights, trans rights, COVID-19 restrictions, environmental protection and more.
This issue became more acute when courts in battleground states were thrust to the center of adjudicating false claims of election fraud during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. And judges have faced increasing threats, particularly when opposing actions of the Trump administration, as President Donald Trump is prone to calling out specific judges in decisions that he does not like.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has received additional attention, in part due to the outsized role it has played in recent redistricting. In 2018, the court threw out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly in 2011 and invited a new plan from the governor and General Assembly. The two came to a political loggerhead, so the Supreme Court ended up using its own map as a replacement.
In 2022, the state Supreme Court once again took control of redistricting after Pennyslvania’s then-Gov. Tom Wolf vetoed the congressional district map approved by the General Assembly.
Former prosecutor Susan Crawford won the highly politicized race for Wisconsin Supreme Court justice in 2025. It was the most expensive state supreme court race in U.S. history. Scott Olson via Getty Images
That was one seat.
Pennsylvania has three up for grabs in November 2025, with the potential to swing the current Democratic majority.
And retention elections are politically simple for opponents. As one Republican political consultant told investigative news outlet Spotlight PA: “This is a political consultant’s dream, because your message is just one thing, and that’s ‘No.’”
This can give some advantage to Republicans in a state that Trump won in 2024 and in a low-turnout election. The question will be whether there is more energy motivating opponents to turn out against the Democratic majority or supporters seeking to maintain the status quo.
The 2025 retention elections could change the balance of power in the court. AP Photo/Aimee Dilger
The stakes for Pennsylvania in 2025
Much is at stake for Pennsylvanians in the fall. Republicans see this as their best opportunity to break the firm 5-2 Democratic majority on the court. This would pave the way for very different judicial decisions. Many of the court’s recent election-related rulings were made on narrow 4-3 votes that could swing differently if the composition of the court changes.
Republicans have had their power in Harrisburg diminished with Shapiro in the governor’s mansion and a one-seat Democratic majority in the state House of Representatives over the past two terms.
A Republican majority on the court would significantly change the balance of power in Harrisburg.
But it is important to focus not only on the top court. The state’s two appellate-level courts – one step below the state Supreme Court – also have two important races and two retention votes in November that will decide the judiciary’s relationship with the governor and General Assembly.
Daniel J. Mallinson 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.
While the typical voter may not think much about judicial elections, political operatives and political scientists, like me, know they have consequences.
I think it’s important that voters understand what a retention election is and why state judicial elections are growing in political importance in the U.S.
Retention elections
Federal judges are appointed by the U.S. president, confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and can serve for the rest of their lives. State judges, however, are put in place in a variety of ways.
The most powerful state courts are the so-called “courts of last resort.” These are essentially the supreme courts of each state. The method for selecting judges in these courts has varied over time and across the states. Currently, states use either gubernatorial appointment, legislative appointment, partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, or a merit process for selecting the judges of their highest courts.
Pennsylvania has partisan elections, meaning judges run for office attached to political parties, just like a candidate would run for governor or president. However, it is only in their first race for office that a judge runs in a competitive partisan election. After they assume the bench, they participate in retention elections every 10 years. These retention elections are considered nonpartisan, since party labels do not appear on the ballot.
Essentially, a retention election is an up or down vote. If more than 50% of voters cast a vote in opposition to a sitting judge, that judge will be out of the office at the end of their term. The governor, who is currently Democrat Josh Shapiro, then makes a temporary appointment to fill the seat with a special election held in the next odd year – in this case, 2027. But any appointments would need to be confirmed by the Republican-controlled state Senate, which may not confirm his picks.
Politicization of the state courts
Judges win retention elections over 90% of the time. So why should people bother to cast their vote?
Courts, including state courts, have become highly politicized over the past several decades. A marked increase in politicization occurred for the U.S. Supreme Court after the failed nomination of Robert Bork in the 1980s.
State supreme courts have always made big decisions, but the nationalization of American politics – where national partisan politics drive voter behavior in local elections – has elevated the controversy over state supreme court decisions on issues such as reproductive rights, trans rights, COVID-19 restrictions, environmental protection and more.
This issue became more acute when courts in battleground states were thrust to the center of adjudicating false claims of election fraud during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. And judges have faced increasing threats, particularly when opposing actions of the Trump administration, as President Donald Trump is prone to calling out specific judges in decisions that he does not like.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has received additional attention, in part due to the outsized role it has played in recent redistricting. In 2018, the court threw out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly in 2011 and invited a new plan from the governor and General Assembly. The two came to a political loggerhead, so the Supreme Court ended up using its own map as a replacement.
In 2022, the state Supreme Court once again took control of redistricting after Pennyslvania’s then-Gov. Tom Wolf vetoed the congressional district map approved by the General Assembly.
Former prosecutor Susan Crawford won the highly politicized race for Wisconsin Supreme Court justice in 2025. It was the most expensive state supreme court race in U.S. history. Scott Olson via Getty Images
That was one seat.
Pennsylvania has three up for grabs in November 2025, with the potential to swing the current Democratic majority.
And retention elections are politically simple for opponents. As one Republican political consultant told investigative news outlet Spotlight PA: “This is a political consultant’s dream, because your message is just one thing, and that’s ‘No.’”
This can give some advantage to Republicans in a state that Trump won in 2024 and in a low-turnout election. The question will be whether there is more energy motivating opponents to turn out against the Democratic majority or supporters seeking to maintain the status quo.
The 2025 retention elections could change the balance of power in the court. AP Photo/Aimee Dilger
The stakes for Pennsylvania in 2025
Much is at stake for Pennsylvanians in the fall. Republicans see this as their best opportunity to break the firm 5-2 Democratic majority on the court. This would pave the way for very different judicial decisions. Many of the court’s recent election-related rulings were made on narrow 4-3 votes that could swing differently if the composition of the court changes.
Republicans have had their power in Harrisburg diminished with Shapiro in the governor’s mansion and a one-seat Democratic majority in the state House of Representatives over the past two terms.
A Republican majority on the court would significantly change the balance of power in Harrisburg.
But it is important to focus not only on the top court. The state’s two appellate-level courts – one step below the state Supreme Court – also have two important races and two retention votes in November that will decide the judiciary’s relationship with the governor and General Assembly.
Daniel J. Mallinson 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.
While the typical voter may not think much about judicial elections, political operatives and political scientists, like me, know they have consequences.
I think it’s important that voters understand what a retention election is and why state judicial elections are growing in political importance in the U.S.
Retention elections
Federal judges are appointed by the U.S. president, confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and can serve for the rest of their lives. State judges, however, are put in place in a variety of ways.
The most powerful state courts are the so-called “courts of last resort.” These are essentially the supreme courts of each state. The method for selecting judges in these courts has varied over time and across the states. Currently, states use either gubernatorial appointment, legislative appointment, partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, or a merit process for selecting the judges of their highest courts.
Pennsylvania has partisan elections, meaning judges run for office attached to political parties, just like a candidate would run for governor or president. However, it is only in their first race for office that a judge runs in a competitive partisan election. After they assume the bench, they participate in retention elections every 10 years. These retention elections are considered nonpartisan, since party labels do not appear on the ballot.
Essentially, a retention election is an up or down vote. If more than 50% of voters cast a vote in opposition to a sitting judge, that judge will be out of the office at the end of their term. The governor, who is currently Democrat Josh Shapiro, then makes a temporary appointment to fill the seat with a special election held in the next odd year – in this case, 2027. But any appointments would need to be confirmed by the Republican-controlled state Senate, which may not confirm his picks.
Politicization of the state courts
Judges win retention elections over 90% of the time. So why should people bother to cast their vote?
Courts, including state courts, have become highly politicized over the past several decades. A marked increase in politicization occurred for the U.S. Supreme Court after the failed nomination of Robert Bork in the 1980s.
State supreme courts have always made big decisions, but the nationalization of American politics – where national partisan politics drive voter behavior in local elections – has elevated the controversy over state supreme court decisions on issues such as reproductive rights, trans rights, COVID-19 restrictions, environmental protection and more.
This issue became more acute when courts in battleground states were thrust to the center of adjudicating false claims of election fraud during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. And judges have faced increasing threats, particularly when opposing actions of the Trump administration, as President Donald Trump is prone to calling out specific judges in decisions that he does not like.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has received additional attention, in part due to the outsized role it has played in recent redistricting. In 2018, the court threw out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly in 2011 and invited a new plan from the governor and General Assembly. The two came to a political loggerhead, so the Supreme Court ended up using its own map as a replacement.
In 2022, the state Supreme Court once again took control of redistricting after Pennyslvania’s then-Gov. Tom Wolf vetoed the congressional district map approved by the General Assembly.
Former prosecutor Susan Crawford won the highly politicized race for Wisconsin Supreme Court justice in 2025. It was the most expensive state supreme court race in U.S. history. Scott Olson via Getty Images
That was one seat.
Pennsylvania has three up for grabs in November 2025, with the potential to swing the current Democratic majority.
And retention elections are politically simple for opponents. As one Republican political consultant told investigative news outlet Spotlight PA: “This is a political consultant’s dream, because your message is just one thing, and that’s ‘No.’”
This can give some advantage to Republicans in a state that Trump won in 2024 and in a low-turnout election. The question will be whether there is more energy motivating opponents to turn out against the Democratic majority or supporters seeking to maintain the status quo.
The 2025 retention elections could change the balance of power in the court. AP Photo/Aimee Dilger
The stakes for Pennsylvania in 2025
Much is at stake for Pennsylvanians in the fall. Republicans see this as their best opportunity to break the firm 5-2 Democratic majority on the court. This would pave the way for very different judicial decisions. Many of the court’s recent election-related rulings were made on narrow 4-3 votes that could swing differently if the composition of the court changes.
Republicans have had their power in Harrisburg diminished with Shapiro in the governor’s mansion and a one-seat Democratic majority in the state House of Representatives over the past two terms.
A Republican majority on the court would significantly change the balance of power in Harrisburg.
But it is important to focus not only on the top court. The state’s two appellate-level courts – one step below the state Supreme Court – also have two important races and two retention votes in November that will decide the judiciary’s relationship with the governor and General Assembly.
Daniel J. Mallinson 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.
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
HOUSTON – A total of 236 new cases have been filed in immigration and border security-related matters from July 3-10, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.
Among those are 106 people who face charges of illegally reentering the country. The majority have prior felony convictions for narcotics, violent crimes, prior immigration crimes and more. A total of 116 people are charged with illegally entering the country, while six cases allege various instances of human smuggling with the remainder involving other immigration related crimes.
Two of those charged include Mexican nationals Charlie Ruben Ortiz-Lopez and Mauricio Rivera-Medina. According to their criminal complaints, both have prior convictions for illegal reentry. Rivera-Medina was last removed just last month, but authorities allegedly found him again illegally in the United States near Mission. They encountered Rivera-Medina near Edinburg after he had been previously removed in November 2023, according to his charges.
Another man facing charges this week is Honduran national Jose Eduardo Escobar-Reyes, who law enforcement allegedly discovered unlawfully in the United States near Roma. According to court documents, he was previously removed March 12 and has a prior conviction for conspiracy to distribute cocaine.
If convicted, all three face up to 20 years in prison.
In addition to the new cases, a Rio Grande City man was ordered to prison for 24 months for unlawfully transporting an illegal alien. At the hearing, the court heard additional evidence that Jason Al Venecia took his girlfriend and her minor daughter with him to smuggle the illegal alien to facilitate passage through the Falfurrias Border Patrol (BP) checkpoint. While on bond awaiting sentencing, Al Venecia was also caught assisting his girlfriend during her own attempt to smuggle illegal aliens. She has since pleaded guilty to separate charges in her case prosecuted in the McAllen Division.
These cases were referred or supported by federal law enforcement partners, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) – Homeland Security Investigations, ICE – Enforcement and Removal Operations, BP, Drug Enforcement Administration, FBI, U.S. Marshals Service and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives with additional assistance from state and local law enforcement partners.
The cases are part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces and Project Safe Neighborhood.
Under current leadership, public safety and a secure border are the top priorities for this district. Enhanced enforcement both at the border and in the interior of the district have yielded aliens engaged in unlawful activity or with serious criminal history, including human trafficking, sexual assault and violence against children.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas remains one of the busiest in the nation. It represents 43 counties and more than nine million people covering 44,000 square miles. Assistant U.S. Attorneys from all seven divisions including Houston, Galveston, Victoria, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo work directly with our law enforcement partners on the federal, state and local levels to prosecute the suspected offenders of these and other federal crimes.
An indictment or criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence. A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
PHOENIX, Ariz. – Antonio Cruz, 36, of Mexico, was arrested on July 8, and charged by criminal complaint for Distribution of a Controlled Substance, after selling over 1000 grams of methamphetamine to an undercover agent.
According to the complaint, in April, Cruz met with an undercover Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (ATF) agent and another individual at a business parking lot in Phoenix, Arizona, to sell them methamphetamine. Cruz provided the agent with approximately 3 pounds of 100% pure methamphetamine in exchange for $2700.
A records check showed that Cruz is a Mexican national and previously convicted felon, illegally present in the United States.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
ATF is conducting the investigation in this case. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Usry, District of Arizona, Phoenix, is handling the prosecution.
A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
CASE NUMBER: 25-MJ-3289 RELEASE NUMBER: 2025-113_Cruz
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
PHOENIX, Ariz. – Antonio Cruz, 36, of Mexico, was arrested on July 8, and charged by criminal complaint for Distribution of a Controlled Substance, after selling over 1000 grams of methamphetamine to an undercover agent.
According to the complaint, in April, Cruz met with an undercover Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (ATF) agent and another individual at a business parking lot in Phoenix, Arizona, to sell them methamphetamine. Cruz provided the agent with approximately 3 pounds of 100% pure methamphetamine in exchange for $2700.
A records check showed that Cruz is a Mexican national and previously convicted felon, illegally present in the United States.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
ATF is conducting the investigation in this case. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Usry, District of Arizona, Phoenix, is handling the prosecution.
A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
CASE NUMBER: 25-MJ-3289 RELEASE NUMBER: 2025-113_Cruz
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
PHOENIX, Ariz. – Antonio Cruz, 36, of Mexico, was arrested on July 8, and charged by criminal complaint for Distribution of a Controlled Substance, after selling over 1000 grams of methamphetamine to an undercover agent.
According to the complaint, in April, Cruz met with an undercover Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (ATF) agent and another individual at a business parking lot in Phoenix, Arizona, to sell them methamphetamine. Cruz provided the agent with approximately 3 pounds of 100% pure methamphetamine in exchange for $2700.
A records check showed that Cruz is a Mexican national and previously convicted felon, illegally present in the United States.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
ATF is conducting the investigation in this case. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Usry, District of Arizona, Phoenix, is handling the prosecution.
A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
CASE NUMBER: 25-MJ-3289 RELEASE NUMBER: 2025-113_Cruz
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
Our CBR is the ACT Government’s key channel to connect with Canberrans and keep you up-to-date with what’s happening in the city. Our CBR includes a monthly print edition, email newsletter and website.
You can easily opt in or out of the newsletter subscription at any time.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
NEW DELHI, July 14 (Xinhua) — At least nine people were killed and 11 others injured after a truck carrying mangoes overturned in India’s southern Andhra Pradesh state, police said on Monday.
The accident occurred on Monday night, about 387 km southwest of Andhra Pradesh’s capital Amaravati.
“The accident occurred when a truck lost control and overturned. The truck was carrying mangoes weighing about 40 tonnes and there were 20 workers sitting on top,” a police official said.
When the truck overturned, crates of mangoes fell on workers, causing casualties and injuries, police said.
After the accident, local residents and rescuers arrived at the scene to conduct a rescue operation and took the victims to the hospital.
The cause of the accident is being investigated. Police suspect that overloading was the cause of the accident, but the driver who survived the accident said that he lost control while trying to avoid a collision with a car traveling in the opposite direction. –0–
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
A journalist who was on the Rainbow Warrior voyage to Rongelap last night condemned France for its “callous” attack of an environmental ship, saying “we haven’t forgotten, or forgiven this outrage”.
David Robie, the author of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, said at the launch that the consequences of almost 300 US and French nuclear tests – many of them “dirty bombs” — were still impacting on indigenous Pacific peoples 40 years after the bombing of the ship.
French saboteurs had killed “our shipmate Fernando Pereira” on 10 July 1985 in what the New Zealand prime minister at the time, David Lange, called a “sordid act of international state-backed terrorism”.
Although relations with France had perhaps mellowed over time, four decades ago there was a lot of hostility towards the country, Dr Robie said.
“And that act of mindless sabotage still rankles very deeply in our psyche,” he said at the launch in Auckland Central’s Ellen Melville Centre on the anniversary of July 10.
About 100 people gathered in the centre’s Pioneer Women’s Hall for the book launch as Dr Robie reflected on the case of state terrorism after Greenpeace earlier in the day held a memorial ceremony on board Rainbow Warrior III.
“One of the celebrated French newspapers, Le Monde, played a critical role in the investigation into the Rainbow Warrior affair — what I brand as ‘Blundergate’, in view of all the follies of the bumbling DGSE spy team,” he said.
Plantu cartoon “And one of the cartoons in that newspaper, by Plantu, who is a sort of French equivalent to Michael Leunig, caught my eye.
“You will notice it in the background slide show behind me. It shows François Mitterrand, the president of the French republic at the time, dressed in a frogman’s wetsuit lecturing to school children during a history lesson.
“President Mitterrand says, in French, ‘At that time, only presidents had the right to carry out terrorism!’
Tahitian advocate Ena Manurevia . . . the background Plantu cartoon is the one mentioned by the author. Image: Asia Pacific Report
He noticed that in the Mitterrand cartoon there was a “classmate” sitting in the back of the room with a moustache. This was none other than Edwy Plenel, the police reporter for Le Monde at the time, who scooped the world with hard evidence of Mitterrand and the French government’s role at the highest level in the Rainbow Warrior sabotage.
Dr Robie said that Plenel now published the investigative website Mediapart, which had played a key role in 2015 revealing the identity of the bomber that night, “the man who had planted the limpet mines on the Rainbow Warrior — sinking a peace and environmental ship, and killing Fernando Pereira.”
Jean-Luc Kister, a retired French colonel and DGSE secret agent, had confessed to his role and “apologised”, claiming the sabotage operation was “disproportionate and a mistake”.
“Was he sincere? Was it a genuine attempt to come to terms with his conscience. Who knows?” Dr Robie said, adding that he was unconvinced.
Hilari Anderson (right on stage), one of the speakers, with Del Abcede and MC Antony Phillips (obscured) . . . the background image shows Helen Clark meeting Fernando Pereira’s daughter Marelle in 2005. Image: Greenpeace
French perspective Dr Robie said he had asked Plenel for his reflections from a French perspective 40 years on. Plenel cited three main take ways.
“First, the vital necessity of independent journalism. Independent of all powers, whether state, economic or ideological. Journalism that serves the public interest, the right to know, and factual truths.
“Impactful journalism whose revelations restore confidence in democracy, in the possibility of improving it, and in the usefulness of counterbalancing powers, particularly journalism.”
Secondly, this attack had been carried out by France in an “allied country”, New Zealand, against a civil society organisation. This demonstrated that “the thirst for power is a downfall that leads nations astray when they succumb to it.
“Nuclear weapons epitomise this madness, this catastrophe of power.”
Eyes of Fire 10 years ago . . . same author, same publisher. Video: Pacific Media Centre
Finally, Plenel expressed the “infinite sadness” for a French citizen that after his revelations in Le Monde — which led to the resignations of the defence minister and the head of the secret services — nothing else happened.
“Nothing at all. No parliamentary inquiry, no questioning of François Mitterrand about his responsibility, no institutional reform of the absolute power of the president in a French republic that is, in reality, an elective monarchy.”
‘Elective monarchy’ trend Dr Robie compared the French outcome with the rapid trend in US today, “a president who thinks he is a monarch, a king – another elective monarchy.”
He also bemoaned that “catastrophe of power” that “reigns everywhere today – from the horrendous Israeli genocide in Gaza to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, from Trump to Putin to Netanyahu, and so many others.”
The continuous Gaza massacres were a shameful indictment of the West that had allowed it to happen for more than 21 months.
Dr Robie thanked many collaborators for their help and support, including drama teacher Hilari Anderson, an original crew member of the Rainbow Warrior, and photographer John Miller, “who have been with me all the way on this waka journey”.
He thanked his wife, Del, and family members for their unstinting “patience and support”, and also publisher Tony Murrow of Little Island Press.
Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior . . . published 10 July 2025. Image: David Robie/Little Island Press
Launching the book, Greenpeace Aotearoa programme director Niamh O’Flynn said one thing that had stood out for her was how the legacy of the Rainbow Warrior had continued despite the attempt by the French government to shut it down 40 years ago.
“We said then that ‘you can’t sink a rainbow’, and we went on to prove it.
“When the Rainbow Warrior was bombed in Auckland harbour, it was getting ready to set sail to Moruroa Atoll, to enter the test exclusion zone and confront French nuclear testing head-on.”
So threatened The French government had felt so threatened by that action that it had engaged in a state-sanctioned terror attack to prevent the mission from going ahead.
“But we rebuilt, and the Rainbow Warrior II carried on with that mission, travelling to Moruroa three times before the French finally stopped nuclear testing in the Pacific.
“That spirit and tenacity is what makes Greenpeace and what makes the Rainbow Warrior so special to everyone who has sailed on her,” she said.
“It was the final voyage of the Rainbow Warrior to Rongelap before the bombing that is the focus of David Robie’s book, and in many ways, it was an incredibly unique experience for Greenpeace — not just here in Aotearoa, but internationally.
“And of course David was a key part in that.”
O’Flynn said that as someone who had not even been born yet when the Rainbow Warrior was bombed, “I am so grateful that the generation of nuclear-free activists took the time to pass on their knowledge and to build our organisation into what it is today.
“Just as David has by writing down his story and leaving us with such a rich legacy.”
Greenpeace Aotearoa programme director Niamh O’Flynn . . . “That spirit and tenacity is what makes Greenpeace and what makes the Rainbow Warrior so special to everyone who has sailed on her.” Image: APR
Other speakers Among other speakers at the book launch were teacher Hilari Anderson, publisher Tony Murrow of Little Island Press, Ena Manuireva, a Mangarevian scholar and cultural adviser, and MC Antony Phillips of Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga.
Anderson spoke of the Warrior’s early campaigns and acknowledged the crews of 1978 and 1985.
“I have been reflecting what these first and last crews of the original Rainbow Warrior had in common, realising that both gave their collective, mostly youthful energy — to transformation.
“This has involved the bonding of crews by working hands-on together. Touching surfaces, by hammer and paint, created a physical connection to this beloved boat.”
She paid special tribute to two powerful women, Denise Bell, who tracked down the marine research vessel in Aberdeen that became the Rainbow Warrior, and the indomitable Susi Newborn, who “contributed to naming the ship and mustering a crew”.
Manuireva spoke about his nuclear colonial experience and that of his family as natives of Mangareva atoll, about 400 km from Muroroa atoll, where France conducted most of its 30 years of tests ending in 1995.
He also spoke of Tahitian leader Oscar Temaru’s pioneering role in the Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement, and played haunting Tahitian songs on his guitar.
Ahead of the appeal hearing of 13 people – among 45 individuals convicted in a mass trial last year of “conspiring to subvert state power” under Hong Kong’s National Security Law – Amnesty International’s China Director Sarah Brooks said:
“The Hong Kong 47 case stands as one of the most shocking examples of the crackdown on human rights in the city. This appeal hearing is a chance for the courts to start righting the wrongs of this unprecedented mass prosecution.
“Research findings we released earlier this month show that the vast majority of convictions under the National Security Law have targeted legitimate expression. It is appalling that Hong Kong courts could condone a crackdown that leaves more than 80% of defendants wrongfully languishing behind bars.
“This appeal is a pivotal test—not just for these 13 individuals, but for the future of freedom of expression in Hong Kong. Only by overturning these convictions can Hong Kong’s courts begin to restore the city’s global standing as a place where rights are respected and where people are allowed to peacefully express their views without fear of arrest.”
Over the past six months, the headlines have been dominated by stories of fear, division and hatred.However, activists around the world are working away to ensure hope prevails. Here are some of the human rights wins we can be proud of from January to June 2025.
January
Afghanistan
In 2023, Amnesty International released a report on the Taliban’s war on women. Following its findings, the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor filed a request for arrest warrants against the Taliban’s Supreme Leader and their Chief Justice, citing crimes against humanity.
The request charges the Taliban’s Supreme Leader and their Chief Justice for gender persecution against women, girls, and LGBTI people since their return to power in August 2021. Although the warrants are still subject to the approval of ICC judges these are the first public arrest warrants sought by the ICC in Afghanistan since the country became a member of the court in 2003.
Cameroon
Dorgelesse Nguessan was released on 16 January after spending more than four years in prison for participating in a protest. The hairdresser and single mother had never been politically active yet joined a protest after growing concerned about the high cost of living. She was charged with insurrection, tried by a military court and sentenced to five years in prison on 7 December 2021.
I thank those who directly or indirectly work for your organization and contributed to my release.
Dorgelesse Nguessan
Dorgelesse was part of Amnesty International’s 2022 Write for Rights campaign, where thousands of supporters called for her release. Amnesty also provided short-term relief support to assist Dorgelesse and her family through the difficult moments of her detention. On 16 January, the Court of Appeal reduced her sentence.
“I thank you for all the efforts you have devoted as I was arbitrarily detained,” said Dorgelesse. “I thank those who directly or indirectly work for your organization and contributed to my release.”
Chile
On 2 January, two police [Carabineros] officers were sentenced to prison for shooting activist Renzo Inostroza and blinding him in one eye. The court concluded that their actions violated both Chile’s national regulations and international obligations. This conviction set a judicial precedent in the struggle to ensure the Chilean justice system pursues criminal responsibility for the unlawful actions of the Carabineros. This conviction follows Amnesty’s landmark Eyes on Chile report, which analyzed patterns and individual cases of police violence during the social unrest that broke out in Chile in October 2019. Renzo’s case was part of the report.
Saudi Arabia
From January to February, Amnesty successfully campaigned for the release of several human rights defenders in Saudi Arabia. On 7 January, human rights defender and former prisoner of conscience, Mohammed al-Qahtani, was conditionally released after spending 12 years in prison for his human rights work. On 13 February, 47-year-old teacher Asaad bin Nasser al-Ghamdi was released from prison following an unfair trial before the notorious Specialized Criminal Court (SCC). Asaad was arrested in 2022 and initially sentenced to 20 years in prison for social media posts criticizing the government’s Vision 2030 programme. On 10 February 2025, Leeds University PhD student and mother of two, Salma al-Shehab, was released from prison after completing a four-year prison term following an unfair trial before the SCC. Following a grossly unfair trial, the SCC had convicted Salma al-Shehab of terrorism-related offences for publishing tweets in support of women’s rights.
USA
The United States sanctioned a number of companies involved in the transfer of weapons into Sudan and Darfur. These sanctions follow Amnesty’s innovative briefing, published in July 2024, that combined business trade data and video analysis to show how the constant import of foreign-manufactured arms into Sudan was fuelling relentless civilian suffering.
Amnesty International members long campaigned for the release of Native American activist Leonard Peltier and most recently called on President Biden to grant Leonard Peltier clemency on humanitarian grounds and as a matter of justice.
USA
Leonard Peltier, a Native American activist, was imprisoned for nearly 50 years in the USA for a crime he maintains he did not commit. There were serious concerns about the fairness of his trial and conviction. Tribal Nations, Nobel Peace Laureates, former FBI agents, numerous others, and even the former U.S. Attorney, James Reynolds, whose office handled the prosecution, have called for Leonard Peltier’s release. Amnesty International members had long campaigned for his release, and most recently called on President Biden to grant Leonard Peltier clemency on humanitarian grounds and as a matter of justice. In the final hour of his presidency, former President Biden commuted Peltier’s life sentence to home confinement. Amnesty recently offered him short-term relief support as he works to rebuild his life after his release.
February
Algeria
Thanks to sustained advocacy work from Amnesty International Algeria and several national women’s rights organizations, Algeria’s president Abdelmadjid Tebboune announced a series of concrete measures to combat violence against women – moving from commitment to action.
The Ministry of Solidarity has since launched a national toll-free helpline, available 24/7 across the country, enabling victims to report abuse, be referred to appropriate support services, and receive emergency assistance when in danger. It is already proving effective. A Guide for Women Victims of Violence has been published in Arabic and English and is currently being distributed nationwide. New legal measures, including the possibility of issuing an immediate restraining order against perpetrators of violence, have also been announced.
Benin
Thousands of Beninese families living in coastal areas have been living an endless nightmare, victims of forced evictions orchestrated in the name of tourism development. However, in February the authorities issued a public call for people awaiting proper compensation to come forward so their case can be followed up. The National Agency for Land and Property’s direct also asked Amnesty International for a list of people who have not received appropriate reparations.
The move follows the release of an Amnesty International report on forced evictions in Benin in December 2023 and a subsequent campaign calling for proper compensation for those who have been unfairly evicted, which proved vital in securing this positive outcome.
Thank you all very much. Without your help, we could not have saved my husband.
Zaynura Hasan
Amnesty International had been campaigning for his freedom since he was initially detained in July 2021. Zaynura Hasan, Idris’ wife, thanked the organization for the relentless support.
“Thank you all very much. Without your help, we could not have saved my husband.”
Serbia
Recent research by Amnesty International’s Security Lab and European Regional Office documented how Serbian police and intelligence authorities are using advanced phone spyware alongside mobile phone forensic products to unlawfully target journalists, environmental activists and other individuals in a covert surveillance campaign.
In a significant human rights win, Cellebrite (a company specialising in digital intelligence and forensics) announced it will stop the use of its digital forensic equipment for some of its customers in Serbia as a direct result of Amnesty’s research. Simultaneously, Serbia’s Prosecutor for High Technological Crime, the Ombudsman and Data Protection Commissioner started separate investigations based on the research findings.
Senegal
In a positive step forward, the Senegalese government invited Amnesty International to provide support and assistance for people who have been arrested for participating in protests, as well as former detainees.
Since 2021, Amnesty International has denounced the unlawful use of force by security forces during protests, compiled a list of those who have been killed, and condemned the arbitrary detention of hundreds of people for having called for or participated in protests. According to figures gathered by Amnesty International and other civil society organizations, at least 65 people were killed, the majority by firearms, with at least 1,000 wounded. A further 2,000 people were arrested.
Amnesty International continues to call for the repeal of the amnesty law adopted by the former government, for justice and reparation for the victims and their family members.
Taner Kılıç, a refugee rights lawyer and former Chair of Amnesty International’s Türkiye section, was finally acquitted after nearly eight years of judicial proceedings.
Türkiye
Taner Kılıç, a refugee rights lawyer and former Chair of Amnesty International’s Türkiye section, was finally acquitted after nearly eight years of judicial proceedings.
Arrested in June 2017 and imprisoned for over 14 months, he was unjustly convicted in 2020 despite no credible evidence. He faced more than six years in prison for “membership of a terrorist organization”. Amnesty provided relief support to him and his family as they navigated the difficulty of his imprisonment.
Reflecting on the case, Taner said: “This nightmare that has gone on for almost eight years is finally over… The only thing I was sure of throughout this process was that I was right and innocent, and the support from all over the world gave me strength. I thank each and every one who stood up for me.”
In a landmark ruling, Brazilian actor Juan Darthés was found guilty for the rape of Argentinian actress Thelma Fardin. Amnesty provided legal and psychosocial support to Thelma.
Latin America
In a landmark ruling for women’s rights in Latin America, a Brazilian court convicted actor Juan Darthés of sexual violence against Argentine actress Thelma Fardin, who accused him in 2018 of abusing her when she was 16. Amnesty provided support for transport related costs, and psychosocial support for Thelma throughout her case. The sentence sets an important precedent for sexual violence cases in the region.
After a five-year legal battle across three countries, Thelma stated: “Today I can look my 16-year-old self in the eye and say we did it.”
Philippines
Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested by police on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity.
Thousands of people, mostly from poor and marginalized communities, were unlawfully killed by the police – or by armed individuals suspected to have links to the police – during Duterte’s so-called “war on drugs”. Amnesty has been calling for his arrest for a number of years and described it as “a long-awaited and monumental step for justice”. He is now due to stand trial at the ICC.
Sierra Leone
Hawa Hunt, a reality TV star, was freed from detention on 4 March and cleared of all the cybercrime related charges against her. She was arrested on live television in December 2024 and charged with insulting the President and First Lady in a social media video.
Amnesty International called on authorities to release her and to ensure her rights were upheld.
Her daughter Alicia said: “In one of the very few phone calls I was able to have with my mother as she was in jail, I told her how Amnesty International spoke up for her. She and our whole family were very touched by the support. We believe it played a very key role in her being released.”
Since May 1995, the Saturday Mothers have held peaceful weekly protests demanding justice for relatives forcibly disappeared in the eighties and nineties.
Türkiye
Since May 1995, the Saturday Mothers have held regular peaceful protests at Galatasaray Square every Saturday, demanding justice for relatives forcibly disappeared in the eighties and nineties. Their 700th vigil on 25 August 2018 was banned and violently dispersed by police using tear gas and water cannons.
Forty-six people were detained and later released, but in 2020, they were prosecuted for “attending illegal meetings and marches without weapons and not dispersing despite warnings”.
Thanks to the determination of the Saturday Mothers and their supporters – including Amnesty International who provided legal aid – all were acquitted in March 2025.
USA
On March 17, US immigration authorities detained Alberto, the father of a Venezuelan family of four, separating him from his wife and two children. Despite the family having pending asylum applications, he was charged with “illegal” entry to the United States. His case was an example of the Trump administration’s use of a provision of immigration law to target individuals and families that have been in the United States for years, rather than recent arrivals at the US-Mexico border. On April 21, 2025, Alberto was granted bond and released from ICE detention, following calls from Amnesty International and reunited with his wife and two children.
May
Chile
Romario Veloz was shot and killed by an army captain during social unrest in La Serena, Chile, in 2019. The police officer who shot Romario Veloz was imprisoned in May 2025 – setting a precedent in cases of human rights violations committed by state agents. Despite the victory, widespread impunity for police violence continues. Romario was also part of Amnesty’s Eyes on Chile investigation (2020). Amnesty provided support to Romario’s young child, helping her access education as well as covering the legal expenses for the family’s quest to seek justice.
Alongside the report, Amnesty was part of the Advisory Unit for Police Reform, wrote letters to the Chilean president and gave numerous media interviews on police violence. Amnesty Chile’s relentless campaigning paid off and helped to stop the implementation of the use of tasers by Chilean police forces.
Côte d’Ivoire
On 7 May, Ghislain Duggary Assy, Communications Secretary of the Movement of Teachers for the Dignity Dynamic union, was provisionally released pending his trial, due to international pressure from Amnesty International. A month earlier, he had been sentenced to two years’ imprisonment solely for having called for strike action in primary and secondary schools.
Amnesty International condemned the flagrant violation of workers’ rights, in particular the right to strike and freedom of association and will continue to call for his unconditional release.
Greece
Two years ago, the Pylos shipwreck led to the death of more than 600 people. Now, 17 Greek coastguard officers face charges in connection with it, including causing a shipwreck, exposure to danger and failure to provide assistance. These developments may pave the way towards accountability for the worst shipwreck in the Mediterranean in recent years.
Amnesty has been calling for justice through sustained advocacy and campaigning.
Türkiye
Afghan asylum seeker Tabriz Saifi is blind due to chronic diabetes and relies on dialysis three times a week. However, his international protection application was rejected by the Turkish authorities on 28 February, which meant he no longer had access to life-saving healthcare. Amnesty International immediately launched an urgent action, calling for the decision to be reversed.
On 2 May, his family was informed that the decision had been reversed and that his asylum seeker status had been reinstated, along with full access to free healthcare.
Girls and women support the right to abortion in Argentina.
Argentina
An Argentine private health insurer was fined over $4,000 USD for denying a legal abortion to a woman whose pregnancy posed serious health risks — a clear violation of the country’s reproductive rights law.
Amnesty International Argentina provided legal advice and stressed that rulings like this reinforce the need to guarantee access to legal abortion as a right, not an exception subject to individual or institutional discretion.
Council of Europe
Following sustained advocacy by Amnesty International and the Omega Research Foundation, the Council of Europe’s Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) adopted a report on measures against the trade in goods used for death penalty, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Georgia
After months of public pressure, protests and legal action, the Georgian Ministry of Justice announced it would end the humiliating practice of fully stripping detainees during body searches.
The decision followed a lawsuit from the Public Defender in February, a report from Amnesty International condemning the practice as degrading and unlawful, as well as a video featuring Georgian artist and activist Kristina Botkoveli, who was subjected to a forced strip search, harassment, and threats after participating in protests.
Following calls from Amnesty International and other organizations, the revised Sámi Parliament Act has now been approved by the Finnish parliament.
Finland
The Sámi are a group of Indigenous people that come from the region of Sápmi, which stretches across the northern parts of Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Kola peninsula in Russia.
For a number of years, they have been subjected to human rights violations. However, following calls from Amnesty International and other organizations, the revised Sámi Parliament Act has now been approved by the Finnish parliament.
The amended Act strengthens Indigenous Sámi people’s right to self-determination and improves the way in which the Sámi Parliament operates. It also corrects human rights violations highlighted by international human rights treaty bodies.
Hungary
On 28 June, Budapest Pride proceeded despite restrictive anti-Pride laws and police targeting the march. Around 200,000 people, including over 280 Amnesty International activists and staff from Hungary and 22 other countries, peacefully demanded equality and assembly rights. This was Budapest’s largest Pride in 30 years, symbolizing strong public resistance to discrimination and highlighting the resilience of Hungary’s LGBTI community. Amnesty’s Let Pride March campaign helped raise awareness, mobilize activists, and urged police to respect peaceful protest. With over 120,000 global actions supporting the event – it demonstrated that solidarity can overcome oppression, though challenges for LGBTI rights in Hungary persist.
Activists and speakers – including King Okabi of the Ogale community – call for an end to Shell’s pollution of the Niger Delta and compensation outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London, on day one of the Ogale and Bille communities vs Shell trial, 13 February 2025.
Nigeria/UK
After a decade-long fight for justice, a UK court ruled that Shell can be held liable for the oil spills and leaks it has failed to clean up in the Niger Delta – regardless of how long ago they happened.
The judgement is an important step towards justice for communities in the Niger Delta and a vital opportunity to make Shell pay for the devastating pollution it has caused to the Ogale and Bille communities’ lands.
In parallel with this decision, the Nigerian government also pardoned the Ogoni Nine. The group of activists, led by Ken Saro-Wiwa, Nigerian author and campaigner, were executed 30 years ago by a government that wanted to hide the crimes of Shell and other oil companies that were destroying the lives and livelihoods of tens of thousands of people across the Niger Delta.
Amnesty has been supporting and campaigning for justice for the Ogoni Nine for years and documenting the destruction Shell has left behind through a series of powerful reports. While these are positive outcomes, much more needs to be done to ensure justice is achieved for communities in the Niger Delta, including holding Shell and other oil companies to account for the damage they have done and continue to do – and Amnesty will be there every step of the way!
Ukraine
On 24 June, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Secretary General of the Council of Europe Alain Berset signed an agreement establishing a Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression Against Ukraine in Strasbourg, following calls from Amnesty International and others. It is hoped this will help hold perpetrators of the crime of aggression accountable.
Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and student organizer who recently graduated from Columbia University, was targeted for his role in student protests at Columbia University.
USA
On March 9, US immigration authorities unlawfully arrested and arbitrarily detained Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist, lawful permanent resident of the USA, and student organizer who recently graduated from Columbia University. Mahmoud was targeted for his role in student protests at Columbia University, where he was exercising his rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. He was not charged with a crime yet was held in a detention centre, told that his permanent residency status was “revoked”, and placed in deportation proceedings. Amnesty International demanded that authorities release Mahmoud immediately and respect his rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and due process. After 104 days in a Louisiana immigration detention centre, Mahmoud Khalil was released on bail in June 21, however he’s still facing threats of deportation by US authorities. He has since filed a $20 million USD lawsuit against the Trump administration.
“The Hong Kong 47 case stands as one of the most shocking examples of the crackdown on human rights in the city. This appeal hearing is a chance for the courts to start righting the wrongs of this unprecedented mass prosecution.
“Research findings we released earlier this month show that the vast majority of convictions under the National Security Law have targeted legitimate expression. It is appalling that Hong Kong courts could condone a crackdown that leaves more than 80% of defendants wrongfully languishing behind bars.
“This appeal is a pivotal test – not just for these 13 individuals, but for the future of freedom of expression in Hong Kong. Only by overturning these convictions can Hong Kong’s courts begin to restore the city’s global standing as a place where rights are respected and where people are allowed to peacefully express their views without fear of arrest.”
Dramatic deterioration of human rights
In Hong Kong’s largest prosecution under the National Security Law, which came into force in June 2020,47 opposition figures were jointly chargedwith “conspiracy to commit subversion”. Thirty-one of the 47 pleaded guilty to the charge while 16 pleaded not guilty, two of whom were acquitted.
On 14 July, Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal will hear the appeal of 13 of those convicted. In the same hearing, Hong Kong’s Department of Justice will also appeal against the acquittal of one of the defendants, Lawrence Lau.The charges against the ‘Hong Kong 47’ relate to their organisation and participation in self-organised ‘primaries’ for the 2020 Legislative Council elections that were ultimately postponed by authorities on Covid-19 grounds before the Chinese government brought in a new electoral system that strictly vetted who could stand for office.
Research published last month by Amnestyon the fifth anniversary of the National Security Law’s enactment, found that more than 80% of people convicted under the law have been wrongly criminalised and should never have been charged in the first place.Human rights in Hong Kong have deteriorated dramaticallysince 2020, with Amnesty identifying more than 250 people arrested for violating the National Security Law or a colonial-era “sedition” law.Last year, the Hong Kong parliament itself enacted further national security legislation – the so-called ‘Article 23’ law – whichhas further deepened repression and silenced opposition voices in the city.
Reappointment of a non-lay member of the Legal Services Board
The Lord Chancellor has approved the reappointment of Habib Motani as a non-lay member of the Legal Services Board.
The Lord Chancellor has approved the reappointment of Habib Motani as a non-lay member of the Legal Services Board for four years from 18 April 2026.
Mr Motani qualified as a solicitor in 1980. He is a Consultant to Clifford Chance LLP having spent over 30 years as a partner in the firm’s banking and finance practice. He is a Visiting Professor at the School of Law at the University of Edinburgh. and a Trustee at: The British Institute of International and Comparative Law, the Institute of Ismaili Studies and The Aga Khan University (International) in the United Kingdom. He is also a member of the Steering Group of the Canary Wharf Multi-faith Chaplaincy.
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is the independent body overseeing the regulation of lawyers in England and Wales. Its goal is to reform and modernise the legal services marketplace by putting the interests of consumers at the heart of the system. It is independent of government and the legal profession and oversees the approved regulators, which themselves regulate lawyers.
The LSB also oversees the Office for Legal Complaints and its administration of the Legal Ombudsman scheme that resolves complaints about lawyers.
Appointments and reappointments are made, by the Lord Chancellor, under the Legal Services Act 2007 and are regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments. This reappointment has been made in line with the Governance Code on Public Appointments.
This study provides a general overview of the procedures before the two courts within the Court of Justice of the European Union – the Court of Justice and the General Court. It focuses on the preliminary reference procedure, the action for infringement of EU law, the action for annulment, the action for failure to act, the action for damages, and the review of compatibility of an international agreement with EU law. Appellate procedures are also discussed. With regard to each procedure, the analysis identifies the parties that may initiate it, the defendant parties, the object of the procedure, and the procedural steps.