ReportWire

Tag: ADVO

  • Hong Kong police issue arrest warrants for eight overseas activists

    Hong Kong police issue arrest warrants for eight overseas activists

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG, July 3 (Reuters) – Hong Kong police on Monday accused eight overseas-based activists of serious national security offences including foreign collusion and incitement to secession and offered rewards for information leading to their arrest.

    The accused are activists Nathan Law, Anna Kwok and Finn Lau, former lawmakers Dennis Kwok and Ted Hui, lawyer and legal scholar Kevin Yam, unionist Mung Siu-tat, and online commentator Yuan Gong-yi, police told a press conference.

    “They have encouraged sanctions … to destroy Hong Kong and to intimidate officials,” Steve Li, an officer with the police’s national security department, told reporters.

    Issuing wanted notices and offering rewards of HK$1 million ($127,656) each, police said the assets of the accused would be frozen where possible and warned the public not to support them financially.

    The notices accused the activists of asking foreign powers to impose sanctions on Hong Kong and China.

    The activists are based in several countries, including the United States, Britain and Australia. Yam is an Australian citizen. They are wanted under a national security law that Beijing imposed on the former British colony in 2020, after the financial hub was rocked by protracted anti-China protests the previous year.

    The United States on Monday condemned the move through a U.S. State Department spokesman, who said it set “a dangerous precedent that threatens the human rights and fundamental freedoms of people all over the world.”

    British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly criticised the decision to issue the arrest warrants and said his government “will not tolerate any attempts by China to intimidate and silence individuals in the UK and overseas”.

    Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong said her government was “deeply disappointed.” Australia, she said, has consistently expressed concern about the broad application of the national security law.

    Some countries, including the United States, say the law has been used to suppress the city’s pro-democracy movement and has undermined rights and freedoms guaranteed under a “one country, two systems” formula, agreed when Hong Kong returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

    Chinese and Hong Kong authorities say the law has restored the stability necessary for preserving Hong Kong’s economic success.

    ACTIVISTS DEFIANT

    Several of the accused activists said they would not cease their Hong Kong advocacy work.

    “It’s my duty … to continue to speak out against the crackdown that is going on right now, against the tyranny that is now reigning over the city that was once one of the freest in Asia,” Yam, a senior fellow with Georgetown University’s Center for Asian Law, told Reuters by telephone from Australia.

    “I miss Hong Kong but as things stand, no rational person would be going back,” added Yam, who police accused of meeting foreign officials to instigate sanctions against Hong Kong officials, judges and prosecutors.

    Former Democratic party lawmaker Ted Hui told Reuters the “bounty” adds to the arrest warrants already issued for him under the national security law, but “free countries will not extradite us”.

    “The bounty … makes it clearer to the western democracies that China is going towards more extreme authoritarianism,” he said in Australia, where he has lived since 2021 on a bridging visa.

    Anna Kwok, executive director of the Hong Kong Democracy Council, told Reuters from Washington she would not back down.

    “One key thing I urge President Biden to do immediately is to say a strong and firm NO to (Hong Kong chief executive) John Lee’s possible entry into the United States for November’s APEC meeting in San Francisco,” Kwok wrote.

    “He’s the man who has orchestrated the far-reaching transnational repression,” she said. “Bar John Lee.”

    Finn Lau, an activist based in London told Reuters the reward was motivated by the fact that many democratic countries had suspended extradition treaties with Hong Kong.

    Nathan Law, who obtained refugee status in the UK two years ago, said that people in Hong Kong should not cooperate. “We should not limit ourselves, self-censor, be intimidated, or live in fear,” he said on Twitter.

    Police told the press conference 260 people had been arrested under the national security law, with 79 of them convicted of offences including subversion and terrorism, but admitted that the chances of prosecution were slim if the defendants remained abroad.

    “We are definitely not putting on a political show nor disseminating fear,” Li, the police official, said.

    “If they don’t return, we won’t be able to arrest them, that’s a fact,” he said. “But we won’t stop wanting them.

    Reporting by James Pomfret and Jessie Pang; additional reporting by Kirsty Needham in Sydney and Dan Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Editing by Robert Birsel, Alison Williams and Conor Humphries

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    Jessie Pang

    Thomson Reuters

    Jessie Pang joined Reuters in 2019 after an internship. She covers Hong Kong with a focus on politics and general news.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UK police charge two women after soup thrown at van Gogh’s ‘Sunflowers’

    UK police charge two women after soup thrown at van Gogh’s ‘Sunflowers’

    [ad_1]

    LONDON, Oct 15 (Reuters) – Two women have been charged with criminal damage after climate change protesters threw soup over Vincent van Gogh’s painting “Sunflowers” at London’s National Gallery, British police said on Saturday.

    A video posted by the Just Stop Oil campaign group, which has been holding protests for the last two weeks in the British capital, showed two of its activists on Friday throwing tins of Heinz tomato soup over the painting, one of five versions on display in museums and galleries around the world.

    The gallery said the incident had caused minor damage to the frame but the painting was unharmed. It later went back on display.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Police said two women, aged 21 and 20, would appear later at Westminster Magistrates’ Court charged with “criminal damage to the frame of van Gogh’s Sunflowers painting”.

    Another activist will also appear in court accused of damaging the sign outside the New Scotland Yard police headquarters in central London.

    Police said in total 28 people had been arrested during protests on Friday.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by Emelia Sithole-Matarise

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Israel designates Palestinian civil society groups as terrorists, U.N. ‘alarmed’

    Israel designates Palestinian civil society groups as terrorists, U.N. ‘alarmed’

    [ad_1]

    • Palestinians, rights watchdogs reject the designations
    • Israel accuses groups of funnelling aid to militants

    TEL AVIV, Oct 22 (Reuters) – Israel on Friday designated six Palestinian civil society groups as terrorist organisations and accused them of funnelling donor aid to militants, a move that drew criticism from the United Nations and human rights watchdogs.

    Israel’s defence ministry said the groups had ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP), a left-wing faction with an armed wing that has carried out deadly attacks against Israelis.

    The groups include Palestinian human rights organisations Addameer and Al-Haq, which document alleged rights violations by both Israel and the Western-backed Palestinian Authority in the occupied West Bank.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    “(The) declared organizations received large sums of money from European countries and international organizations, using a variety of forgery and deceit,” the defence ministry said, alleging that the money had supported PFLP’s activities.

    The designations authorise Israeli authorities to close the groups’ offices, seize their assets and arrest their staff in the West Bank, watchdogs Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International said in a joint statement.

    Addameer and another of the groups, Defense for Children International – Palestine, rejected the accusations as an “attempt to eliminate Palestinian civil society.”

    The United Nations Human Rights Office in the Palestinian territories said it was “alarmed” by the announcement.

    “Counter-terrorism legislation must not be used to constrain legitimate human rights and humanitarian work,” it said, adding that some of the reasons given appeared vague or irrelevant.

    “These designations are the latest development in a long stigmatizing campaign against these and other organizations, damaging their ability to deliver on their crucial work,” it said.

    Israel’s ally the United States was not given advance warning of the move and would engage Israel for more information about the basis for the designations, State Department spokesperson Ned Price told reporters.

    “We believe respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and a strong civil society are critically important to responsible and responsive governance,” he said.

    But Israel’s defence ministry said: “Those organizations present themselves as acting for humanitarian purposes; however, they serve as a cover for the ‘Popular Front’ promotion and financing.”

    An official with the PFLP, which is on United States and European Union terrorism blacklists, did not outright reject ties to the six groups but said they maintain relations with civil society organisations across the West Bank and Gaza.

    “It is part of the rough battle Israel is launching against the Palestinian people and against civil society groups, in order to exhaust them,” PFLP official Kayed Al-Ghoul said.

    Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International said the “decision is an alarming escalation that threatens to shut down the work of Palestine’s most prominent civil society organizations.”

    Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war. Palestinians seek the territories for a future state.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Rami Ayyub in Tel Aviv; Additional reporting by Ali Sawafta in Ramallah, Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza and Stephen Farrell in Jerusalem; Editing by William Maclean and Mark Porter

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Giuliani associate Parnas found guilty of violating U.S. campaign finance law

    Ex-Giuliani associate Parnas found guilty of violating U.S. campaign finance law

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK, Oct 22 (Reuters) – Lev Parnas, a onetime associate of Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, was found guilty on Friday of violating U.S. campaign finance laws during the 2018 elections.

    Parnas, a Ukraine-born American businessman, and his former associate Igor Fruman had been accused of soliciting funds from Russian businessman Andrey Muraviev to donate to candidates in states where the group was seeking licenses to operate cannabis businesses in 2018.

    Parnas also concealed that he and Fruman, who pleaded guilty in September, were the true source of a donation to a group supporting Republican then-President Trump, prosecutors said. Giuliani’s attorney has said the Parnas case is separate from a probe into whether violated lobbying laws while representing Trump.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Giuliani, a U.S. prosecutor in the 1980s before he was elected New York’s mayor in 1994, has not been charged with any crimes and denies wrongdoing.

    Parnas was found guilty on all six counts of federal election law violations that he faced, which included illegally helping a foreigner contribute to a U.S. election campaign, making contributions in the names of others, and lying to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC).

    Andrey Kukushkin, a Muraviev associate and California resident who was tried alongside Parnas, was found guilty on Friday of two counts of campaign finance violations. Kukushkin is also a Ukraine native.

    The trial in U.S. District Court in Manhattan has drawn attention because of the role Parnas and Belarus-born U.S. citizen Fruman played in helping Giuliani, who was Trump’s personal attorney while he held office, to investigate Democrat Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential campaign. Biden won the election, denying Trump a second term.

    Parnas, dressed in a blue suit, stared straight at the jury as the verdict was read. Kukushkin, wearing a grey sweater, shook his head after he was pronounced guilty on the second count.

    “I’ve never hid from nobody,” Parnas said as he left court wearing a black “Combat COVID” mask. “I’ve always stood and tried to tell the truth.”

    His attorney Joseph Bondy said they would be filing a motion to vacate the verdict “in the interest of justice.”

    “It’s obviously a very difficult time for Mr. Parnas and his wife and his children,” Bondy said.

    U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken denied a request from prosecutors to detain Parnas and Kukushkin. “The defendants have sufficiently established that they’re not a risk of flight,” Oetken said after the jury left.

    Oetken set a sentencing date of Feb. 16 for Kukushkin. He did not set a sentencing date for Parnas, who faces another possible trial on separate fraud charges.

    ‘IN WELL OVER HIS HEAD’

    The case provided a glimpse into the inner workings of political fundraising in the United States.

    “You saw the wires from Muraviev,” Assistant U.S Attorney Hagan Scotten told the jury during closing arguments on Thursday. “You saw how that money came out on the other side, finding its way into American elections, where the defendants thought they had bought influence to further their business.”

    Parnas’ defense lawyers countered that Muraviev’s funds went toward business investments, not campaign contributions, and that the donation to the pro-Trump group was from a company founded by Parnas and broke no laws.

    In his closing statement Parnas attorney Bondy characterized his client as a passionate proponent of marijuana legalization who was “in well over his head.” He argued that Muraviev’s money funded business operations, not campaign contributions.

    Deliberations in the trial began on Friday morning and lasted about five hours.

    Fruman, who lives in Florida, pleaded guilty to one count of soliciting campaign contributions from a foreign national. His sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 21.

    Parnas and Kukushkin had faced two counts of conspiring to make donations from a foreign national, and making the donations. Parnas had also been charged with four other counts, including making false statements to the Federal Elections Commission.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Franklin Paul, Grant McCool and Jonathan Oatis

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    Jody Godoy

    Thomson Reuters

    Jody Godoy reports on banking and securities law. Reach her at jody.godoy@thomsonreuters.com

    Luc Cohen

    Thomson Reuters

    Reports on the New York federal courts. Previously worked as a correspondent in Venezuela and Argentina.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. Supreme Court takes up Texas abortion case, lets ban remain

    U.S. Supreme Court takes up Texas abortion case, lets ban remain

    [ad_1]

    Oct 22 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear on Nov. 1 a challenge to a Texas law that imposes a near-total ban on the procedure and lets private citizens enforce it – a case that could dramatically curtail abortion access in the United States if the justices endorse the measure’s unique design.

    The justices took up requests by President Joe Biden’s administration and abortion providers to immediately review their challenges to the law. The court, which on Sept. 1 allowed the law to go into effect, declined to act on the Justice Department’s request to immediately block enforcement of the measure.

    The court will consider whether the law’s unusual private-enforcement structure prevents federal courts from intervening to strike it down and whether the federal government is even allowed to sue the state to try to block it.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    The measure bans abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy, a point when many women do not yet realize they are pregnant. It makes an exception for a documented medical emergency but not for cases of rape or incest.

    Liberal Justice Sotomayor dissented from the court’s deferral of a decision on whether to block enforcement of the law while the litigation continues. Sotomayor said the law’s novel design has suspended nearly all abortions in Texas, the second most populous U.S. state, with about 29 million people.

    “The state’s gambit has worked. The impact is catastrophic,” Sotomayor wrote.

    The Texas dispute is the second major abortion case that the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has scheduled for the coming months, with arguments set for Dec. 1 over the legality of a restrictive Mississippi abortion law.

    The Texas and Mississippi measures are among a series of Republican-backed laws passed at the state level limiting abortion rights – coming at a time when abortion opponents are hoping that the Supreme Court will overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade that legalized the procedure nationwide.

    Mississippi has asked the justices to overturn Roe v. Wade, and the Texas attorney general on Thursday signaled that he also would like to see that ruling fall.

    Lower courts already have blocked Mississippi’s law banning abortions starting at 15 weeks of pregnancy.

    The Texas measure takes enforcement out of the hands of state officials, instead enabling private citizens to sue anyone who performs or assists a woman in getting an abortion after cardiac activity is detected in the embryo. That feature has helped shield the law from being immediately blocked as it made it more difficult to directly sue the state.

    Individual citizens can be awarded a minimum of $10,000 for bringing successful lawsuits under the law. Critics have said this provision lets people act as anti-abortion bounty hunters, a characterization its proponents reject.

    Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing the abortion providers, said Friday’s decision to hear their case “brings us one step closer to the restoration of Texans’ constitutional rights and an end to the havoc and heartache of this ban.”

    Alexis McGill Johnson, president of healthcare and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, said it is “devastating” that the justices did not immediately block a law that already has had a “catastrophic impact” after being in effect nearly two months.

    “Patients who have the means have fled the state, traveling hundreds of miles to access basic care, and those without means have been forced to carry pregnancies against their will,” she added.

    Kimberlyn Schwartz, a spokesperson for the Texas Right to Life anti-abortion group, praised the court’s action, saying it “will continue to save an estimated 100 babies per day, and because the justices will actually discuss whether these lawsuits are valid in the first place.”

    The Supreme Court only rarely decides to hear cases before lower courts have ruled, indicating that the justices have deemed the Texas matter of high public importance and requiring immediate review.

    The Justice Department filed its lawsuit in September challenging the Texas law, arguing that it is unconstitutional and explicitly designed to evade judicial review.

    Rulings in Texas and Mississippi cases are due by the end of next June, but could come sooner.

    Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

    Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link