Tag Archives: dissent

Troopers vs. moms: Tennessee House Republicans clamp down on dissent during special session – News Channel 5 Nashville

  1. Troopers vs. moms: Tennessee House Republicans clamp down on dissent during special session News Channel 5 Nashville
  2. In session reacting to school shooting, Tennessee GOP lawmaker orders removal of public from hearing The Associated Press
  3. Covenant School Shooting Parents in Tears As They’re Kicked Out of Tennessee Special Session The Daily Beast
  4. All removed from Tennessee House subcommittee after paper sign debacle News Channel 5 Nashville
  5. Tennessee’s special legislative session won’t do what citizens want Tennessean
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Russian woman who left note on grave of Putin’s parents convicted amid dissent crackdown – Yahoo News

  1. Russian woman who left note on grave of Putin’s parents convicted amid dissent crackdown Yahoo News
  2. Russian woman gets 2-year suspended sentence for “insulting” note on Putin’s parents’ grave Reuters
  3. St. Petersburg woman gets suspended prison sentence for asking Putin’s dead parents to ‘take him away’ Meduza
  4. Prosecutors Seek Suspended Sentence For Russian Woman Charged With ‘Desecrating’ Grave Of Putin’s Parents Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
  5. Prosecutor seeks 3 years’ probation for woman who left note on grave of Putin’s parents Reuters
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Donald Trump Blasts Republican Rivals as MAGA Dissent Breaks Out

Donald Trump has openly but subtly criticized the loyalty of two potential Republican rivals for the GOP 2024 presidential candidacy.

Speaking to reporters on his plane Saturday as the former president kicked off his latest White House campaign, Trump hit out at one-time close ally, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, over his COVID-19 response, while also discussing the presidential ambitions of Trump’s former ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

While flying to South Carolina to headline the first major rally of his 2024 campaign, Trump accused DeSantis of trying to “re-write history” with regards to how Florida responded early on to the outbreak of the coronavirus and that the governor has “changed his tune a lot” about his stance on the COVID vaccine.

“Florida was actually closed, for a great, long period of time,” Trump said in footage aired by CNN. “Remember, he [DeSantis] closed the beaches and everything else? They’re trying to re-write history.”

In this combination image, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at a campaign rally at the Cheyenne Saloon on November 7, 2022, Nikki Haley visits “Hannity” at Fox News Channel Studios on January 20, 2023 and Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the New Hampshire Republican State Committee’s Annual Meeting on January 28, 2023
Getty

The former president also reverted back to an oft-repeated refrain in claiming that DeSantis would not have won the 2018 gubernatorial elections were it not for Trump’s endorsement, and accused the Florida governor of being “very disloyal” amid reports he is plotting to run in the 2024 GOP primary.

“Ron would have not been governor if it wasn’t for me,” Trump said. “So when I hear he might run, I consider that very disloyal.”

Trump also spoke about Haley, a former South Carolina governor who was not present at the rally on Saturday, amid suggestions she will also announce plans to run for president in 2024.

While approving Haley’s desire to run, Trump also noted how his ex-administration member previously stated that she would never seek the Republican party’s nomination if Trump was also on the ballot.

“I talked to her for a little while, I said, ‘Look, you know, go by your heart if you want to run,'” Trump said. “She’s publicly said that ‘I would never run against my president, he was a great president.'”

Trump said he told Haley that she “should do it.”

The relationship between Trump and DeSantis has long soured amid reports the Florida governor is planning to run for president in 2024.

In recent weeks, Haley has also suggested that she is a better candidate to lead the GOP in the future over Trump.

In a Fox News interview in mid-January, Haley suggested that there needs to be a “generational change” in the party, when asked about her previous comments about not running against Trump in 2024.

“When you’re looking at the future of America, I think it’s time for new generational change. I don’t think you need to be 80 years old to go be a leader in D.C.,” Haley said. “I think we need a young generation to come in, step up, and really start fixing things.”

Haley reshared the comments on Twitter on Saturday as Trump was due to arrive in South Carolina to speak at his 2024 campaign rally.

It is arguable that Trump approved Haley running for the White House as he does not consider her as big a threat as DeSantis.

While Trump is still the overwhelming favorite to clinch the GOP 2024 nomination, DeSantis is by far the second-placed candidate, and beats the former president in the occasional polls.

In comparison, Haley regularly does not even break the top three in terms of who GOP voters would choose in a hypothetical 2024 primary.

A recent NH Journal poll released ahead of Trump arriving in New Hampshire to speak at the Republican Party’s annual state meeting revealed the former president came out on top when Republicans were asked who they would vote for in a GOP primary (37 percent), with DeSantis second on 26 percent.

The poll placed Haley in fourth, receiving the support of just four percent of GOP voters in the first-in-the-nation primary state.

Haley and DeSantis have been contacted for comment.

Read original article here

China Covid protests: How a deadly fire ignited a week of dissent



CNN
 — 

Stunning scenes of dissent and defiance played out across China over the past week, marking the country’s largest protests in decades – and an unprecedented challenge to leader Xi Jinping.

Deep public anger after nearly three years of snap lockdowns, border closures and financial hardship brought thousands out onto the streets to demand an end to China’s zero-Covid policy – with some also calling for democracy.

The country’s security forces moved swiftly to snuff out the protests, while health officials tried to appease the public by promising to soften tough Covid measures. But furious posts on Chinese social media, which continued despite censors’ best efforts, suggested it wasn’t enough.

Then came Friday, and the first known remarks from Xi on the protests – an unexpected acknowledgment of people’s frustration, according to a European Union official who declined to be named.

“Xi also said Omicron is less deadly than Delta, which makes the Chinese government feel more open to further relaxing Covid restrictions,” the EU official added, raising hopes of greater freedoms after an extraordinary week.

On November 24, Ali Abbas’ granddaughter was charging her tablet device when an electrical fault caused smoke to fill their Urumqi home, in China’s far western Xinjiang region, he told CNN on the phone from Turkey.

Smoke quickly turned to flames, which raced through the wood-furnished apartment. Abbas’ granddaughter and daughter were able to evacuate – but residents on higher floors found themselves stranded after the elevator stopped working.

Some households with previous Covid cases were also locked inside their apartments, leaving them with no way to escape. Urumqi has been under strict lockdown since August, with most residents banned from leaving their homes.

The fire broke out in Urumqi, Xinjiang, on November 24, according to Chinese authorities. Credit: Douyin

Videos of the incident, taken from other buildings and on the street, suggest firefighters may have been delayed in reaching victims due to street-level lockdown restrictions. Footage shows one fire truck struggling to spray water at the building from a distance.

State-run media reported the fire killed 10 people and injured nine, but reports from local residents suggest the real toll is far higher. A day after the blaze, Urumqi local government officials denied the city’s Covid policies were to blame for the deaths, adding that an investigation was underway.

Public anger quickly swelled. Videos online showed people marching to a government building in Urumqi on the night of November 25, demanding an end to the lockdown, chanting with fists in the air. Residents in other parts of the city broke through lockdown barriers and confronted Covid workers dressed in PPE; at one point, the crowd sang the national anthem, roaring the chorus: “Arise, arise, arise!”

The scenes were extraordinary in a city subject to some of China’s most stringent surveillance and security. The government has long been accused of committing human rights abuses against ethnic Uyghurs and other minorities in the region, including placing up to 2 million people in internment camps. Beijing has repeatedly denied these accusations, claiming the camps are vocational training centers.

The next morning, the Urumqi government said it would gradually ease the lockdown in certain areas. But by then, it was too late to quell the protests erupting across the nation.

The protests tapped into a well of anger that had been brewing over China’s zero-Covid policy – and the damage it has often caused – as the rest of the world ended lockdown restrictions and eased other mandates, including masking.

The cost has been immense. Unemployment has skyrocketed. The economy is flailing. Those trapped in unexpected lockdowns have found themselves without adequate food, basic supplies, or even medical care in non-Covid emergencies.

And, like those in the Urumqi fire, many deaths have been blamed on the zero-Covid policy in the last six months – far more than the six official Covid deaths reported during the same period. Demands for accountability are growing, especially after a September bus crash that killed 27 people while transporting residents to a Covid quarantine facility, and the November death of a toddler during a suspected gas leak in a locked-down residential compound.

The policy had been broadly popular at the start of the pandemic, but many residents have now had enough. In a rare demonstration in October, a sole protester hung banners on a Beijing bridge that decried Covid restrictions and demanded Xi’s removal.

Though all references to the banners were wiped from the Chinese internet, versions of those slogans began appearing in other parts of the country and in universities around the world – scrawled on bathroom walls and pinned on bulletin boards. More acts of disobedience came in November; workers fled China’s largest iPhone assembly factory in Zhengzhou when it was placed under lockdown, while residents of Guangzhou, also a manufacturing hub, tore down lockdown barriers and surged onto the streets in a nighttime revolt.

From June to November 22, American think tank Freedom House recorded at least 79 protests against Covid restrictions, spanning from social media campaigns to gatherings on the street. But most of these voiced grievances against local authorities – a far cry from some of the nationwide protests that, for the first time in a generation, took aim at the country’s powerful leader and central government.

Protesters gather in Wuhan, Beijing and Shanghai on November 26. Credit: Twitter/@whyyoutouzhele

The protests in Urumqi quickly sparked more across the country – from the original epicenter of the pandemic in Wuhan, to the capital Beijing, and Shanghai, China’s glitzy financial hub, which still carries the trauma of its own two-month lockdown earlier this year.

Hundreds of Shanghai residents gathered on November 26 for a candlelight vigil for the victims of the fire. Grief turned to anger as the crowd chanted slogans calling for freedom and political reform, while holding blank sheets of paper in a symbolic protest against censorship. In videos, people can be heard shouting for Xi and the Communist Party to “step down,” and singing a famous socialist anthem.

Around 300 kilometers (186 miles) away, dozens of students in Nanjing gathered to mourn the victims, with photos showing a crowd of young people lit by cell phone flashlights. Images of the protests raced across social media faster than censors could erase them – igniting demonstrations in other university campuses, including the prestigious Peking University in Beijing. One wall at Peking University bore a message in red paint, echoing the slogans used by the protester who had hung the Beijing bridge banners in October: “Say no to lockdown, yes to freedom.”

Protesters and students demonstrate outside Nanjing University, November 26. Credit: Twitter/@whyyoutouzhele

Some of these protests dispersed peacefully, while several escalated into scuffles with police. In Shanghai, one protester told CNN around 80 to 110 people had been detained by police on the night of November 26, adding they were released 24 hours later after officers collected their fingerprints and retina patterns.

CNN cannot independently verify the number of protesters detained and it is unclear how many people, if any, remain in custody.

Beijing emerged as a protest hotspot on November 27, as hundreds of students gathered at the elite Tsinghua University, shouting: “Democracy and rule of law! Freedom of expression!” Elsewhere in the city, a large crowd gathered for a vigil and a march through the commercial center, chanting slogans for greater civil liberties.

Amid the mourning and frustration, a strong sense of solidarity emerged as people shared the rare chance to stand side by side and voice grievances long silenced.

Online, China’s vast army of censors worked overtime to erase content about the demonstrations – prompting many to get creative. Some posts on social media consisted only of one or two characters repeated for several paragraphs, in the long tradition of using codes and wordless icons to convey dissent on China’s internet.

Similar tactics were used on the ground, with videos on social media showing crowds shouting, “We want lockdowns, we want tests” after reportedly being told not to chant the opposite.

Protesters in Shanghai hold up pieces of white paper to symbolize censorship, November 27. Credit: Twitter/@whyyoutouzhele

Pockets of resistance continued through the week; protesters in Guangzhou clashed with riot police on Wednesday, with videos showing people toppling Covid testing tents. The following day, residents in Beijing, Pingdingshan and Jinan broke down metal lockdown barriers blocking building exits.

Police and security forces line the streets of Shanghai, November 26. Credit: Twitter/@whyyoutouzhele

China dispatched extra police officers to key protest sites to smother the outpouring of rage. In Shanghai, huge barricades were erected to prevent crowds from congregating on sidewalks, while police officers checked passengers’ cell phones on the street and on subway trains, according to eyewitnesses and videos on social media.

In a veiled warning, the Communist Party’s domestic security committee vowed to “strike hard against infiltration and sabotage activities by hostile forces, as well as criminal activities that destabilize social order,” according to state media.

Others in Beijing described receiving phone calls from authorities asking about their participation. One protester told CNN they received a call on Wednesday from a police officer, who revealed that their cell phone signal had been detected near a protest site three days before.

According to a recording of the phone conversation heard by CNN, the protester denied being near the site that night – to which the officer asked, “Then why did your cell phone number show up there?”

At the same time as the crackdown, health officials tried to appease the public, acknowledging in a news conference on Tuesday that some Covid control measures had been implemented “excessively.” Authorities were adjusting measures to “limit the impact on people as much as possible,” they said, reiterating similar recent statements.

The promises failed to soothe some listeners who seethed in comments on Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter, where the conference was livestreamed. “You’ve lost all credibility,” one said. Another wrote: “We’ve cooperated with you for three years. Now, it’s time to give our freedom back.”

The following day, a top official gave the clearest indication yet that the country was considering a new direction.

“With the decreasing toxicity of the Omicron variant, the increasing vaccination rate and the accumulating experience of outbreak control and prevention, China’s pandemic containment faces (a) new stage and mission,” said Vice Premier Sun Chunlan, who oversees the country’s Covid response, according to state media.

Several cities moved quickly to loosen restrictions. On Friday, Beijing’s municipal government reversed rules set just 10 days ago that required residents to show a negative Covid-19 test taken in the previous 48 hours to board public transport in the capital city.

Tianjin and Chengdu also scrapped requirements for commuters to present a negative test result, effective immediately, according to notices from both cities’ metro operators on Friday. 

In Chongqing and Guangzhou, close contacts of positive cases can quarantine at home instead of at a government facility. Several lockdowns were also lifted, including in Zhengzhou and in Guangzhou.

While these measures are expected to bring some relief, authorities have repeatedly voiced concerns that vaccination rates aren’t high enough to fully open up without risking spikes in Covid deaths.

China recorded 34,772 new Covid cases on Thursday, then 32,827 on Friday, continuing a downward trend in daily infections from record highs on November 27.

As of Friday, thousands of buildings and residential communities across China remain under lockdown restrictions due to their classification as “high risk.”

One user on Weibo urged authorities to further relax rules “so people can live a normal life,” warning that strict Covid measures could push some too far.

“If they don’t open up soon, people will really go crazy,” one comment read.

Another wrote: “The pressure is too great.”

Read original article here

SpaceX performs three launches within two days amid internal dissent

Updated 3:30 p.m. Eastern after Globalstar statement.

WASHINGTON — SpaceX completed a surge of three successful launches in a little more than 36 hours early June 19, days after an open letter within the company critical of founder Elon Musk led to the firing of several employees.

The stretch of launches started June 17 with a Falcon 9 launch from Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39A. The rocket, lifting off at 12:09 p.m. Eastern, placed 53 Starlink satellites into orbit. The booster used for the launch completed its 13th flight with a droneship landing, setting a company record for booster reuse.

The second launch took place at 10:19 a.m. Eastern June 18 from Space Launch Complex 4E at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The Falcon 9 placed into orbit the SARah-1 radar imaging satellite, built by Airbus for the German military as a replacement for the existing SAR-Lupe system. SpaceX provided limited information about the launch, similar to restrictions for classified U.S. launches, but the German military later confirmed payload deployment and successful contact with the four-ton satellite. The booster, which flew two National Reconnaissance Office missions earlier this year, landed back at the launch site.

The final, and perhaps most mysterious, launch took place at 12:27 a.m. Eastern June 19 from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The only identified payload on the launch was Globalstar FM15, a spare satellite for low Earth orbit satellite operator Globalstar. That satellite deployed from the upper stage nearly two hours after liftoff.

Several aspects of the mission suggested to observers that Globalstar FM15 was not the only payload on the launch. That included an unusual set of three burns by the upper stage and the droneship landing of the first stage, even through the Globalstar satellite alone, weighing about 700 kilograms, was small enough to enable a landing back at the launch site.

SpaceX initially did not initially provide video of the payload after fairing separation, but did after the second burn. Those views showed not just the Globalstar satellite but also what appeared to be a payload adapter. That could mean the rocket also carried one or more payloads deployed after the upper stage’s first burn. It could also mean, though, that the launch was originally intended to carry additional payloads but launched without them.

Globalstar provided few details about its own satellite on the mission. The company did not publicize the launch in advance. In a statement after its quarterly earnings release May 5, Dave Kagan, chief executive of Globalstar, said the company was planning to launch that ground spare “in the coming months” that would, along with plans for a new set of satellites ordered earlier in the year, “ensure continuity of service to all of our existing and future subscribers as well as other users of the network.”

In a statement June 19, Globalstar said the satellite was working well after launch. The spacecraft will remain in a lower transfer orbit as an on-orbit spare until needed to replace an existing satellite.

In its filing of its quarterly results with the Securities and Exchange Commission May 5, the company said the “vast majority” of the costs for both preparing Globalstar FM15 for launch and the launch itself were paid for by an unnamed customer. That same customer is also financing nearly all the costs of 17 new satellites Globalstar ordered from Canadian company MDA in February.

Internal criticism

The launches took place days after internal criticism of Elon Musk, founder of chief executive of SpaceX, erupted into public view. An open letter circulated within company networks June 15 said Musk’s public statements had become an “embarrassment” for some employees, distracting them from their work.

“Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us, particularly in recent weeks,” the letter stated. “As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX — every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to our potential talent pool that his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values.”

The letter, first reported by The Verge, did not include any specific examples of behavior by Musk, although there is arguably no shortage of such cases. That includes not just controversial tweets but also a claim published in May that he sexually harassed a flight attendant on a SpaceX private jet in 2016, an account that Musk has strongly denied.

The letter called on SpaceX to “publicly address and condemn Elon’s harmful Twitter behavior” and “separate itself from Elon’s personal brand.” It also demanded that the company’s leadership be held “equally accountable” for addressing workplace issues, and better define its “zero tolerance” policies for unacceptable behavior. Company sources, speaking on background because they are not authorized to speak publicly, said they believed several hundred employees had endorsed the letter before it was taken off company networks.

Neither Musk nor SpaceX did not respond publicly to the open letter. However, in a memo to company employees June 16, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell said it had fired “a number of employees” involved with the open letter. The New York Times first reported the firings.

Shotwell, in the memo, claimed that “the letter, solicitations and general process made employees feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied, and/or angry because the letter pressured them to sign onto something that did not reflect their views.” Disseminating the letter, she said, went against company policies “and does not show the strong judgment needed to work in this very challenging space transportation sector.”

Shotwell said the letter was a distraction for the company as it worked on activities that included the three launches that were coming up. “We have 3 launches within 37 hours for critical satellites this weekend,” she wrote, as well as work on cargo and crew Dragon spacecraft and being “on the cusp” of an orbital Starship launch. “We have too much critical work to accomplish and no need for this kind of overreaching activism.”

Read original article here

Biden unveils new Latin America economic plan at reboot summit dogged by dissent

LOS ANGELES, June 8 (Reuters) – President Joe Biden announced on Wednesday a proposed new U.S. economic partnership with Latin America aimed at countering China’s growing clout as he kicked off a regional summit marred by discord and snubs over the guest list.

Hosting the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles, Biden sought to assure the assembled leaders about his administration’s commitment to the region despite nagging concerns that Washington, at times, is still trying to dictate to its poorer southern neighbors.

The line-up of visiting heads of state and government in attendance was thinned down to 21 after Biden excluded Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, prompting Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and several other leaders to stay away in protest.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

“We have to invest in making sure our trade is sustainable and responsible in creating supply chains that are more resilient, more secure and more sustainable,” Biden told a gala opening ceremony.

Biden is seeking to present Latin American countries with an alternative to China that calls for increased U.S. economic engagement, including more investment and building on existing trade deals.

However, his “Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity,” which still appears to be a work in progress, stops short of offering tariff relief and, according to a senior administration official, will initially focus on “like-minded partners” that already have U.S. trade accords. Negotiations are expected to begin in early fall, the official added.

Biden outlined his plan as he launched the summit, which was conceived as a platform to showcase U.S. leadership in reviving Latin American economies and tackling record levels of irregular migration at the U.S.-Mexico border.

But his agenda has been undermined by the partial boycott by leaders upset at Washington’s decision to cut out its main leftist antagonists in the region.

As a result, Biden found himself welcoming a larger-than-normal contingent of foreign ministers sitting in for their national leaders as the arriving dignitaries walked one-by-one up a red carpet flanked by a military honor guard.

U.S. officials hope the summit and a parallel gathering of business executives can pave the way for greater cooperation as governments grappling with higher inflation work to bring supply chains stretched by the COVID-19 pandemic closer to home.

Biden also used his speech to preview a summit declaration on migration to be rolled out on Friday, calling it “a ground-breaking, integrated new approach” with shared responsibility across the hemisphere. But he provided few specifics.

Even as Biden deals with priorities such as mass shootings, high inflation and the Ukraine war, the U.S. official said the president is seeking to press the administration’s competitive goals against China with the launch of the new partnership for the region.

The U.S. plan also proposes to revitalize the Inter-American Development Bank and create clean energy jobs

Still, the administration appeared to be moving cautiously, mindful that an initiative that promotes jobs abroad could face U.S. protectionist pushback.

CHINA’S CHALLENGE

The challenge from China is clearly a major consideration.

China has widened the gap on the United States in trade terms in large parts of Latin America since Biden came into office in January 2021, data show.

An exclusive Reuters analysis of U.N. trade data from 2015-2021 shows that outside of Mexico, the top U.S. trade partner, China has overtaken the United States in Latin America and increased its advantage last year. read more

“The best antidote to China’s inroads in the region is to ensure that we are forwarding our own affirmative vision for the region economically,” the administration official said.

Biden’s aides have framed the summit as an opportunity for the United States to reassert its leadership in Latin America after years of comparative neglect under his predecessor Donald Trump.

But diplomatic tensions broke into the open this week when Washington opted not to invite the three countries it says violate human rights and democratic values.

Rebuffed in his demand that all countries must be invited, Lopez Obrador said he would stay away, deflecting attention from the U.S. administration’s goals and toward regional divisions.

Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters the choice by some leaders not to attend reflected their own “idiosyncratic decisions” and that substantive work would still be accomplished.

Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said the United States lacked “moral authority” to lecture on democracy and thanked Lopez Obrador for his “solidarity.”

The leaders of Guatemala and Honduras, two of the countries that send most migrants to the United States, also stayed home, raising questions about the significance of the coming joint migration declaration.

Still, leaders from more than 20 countries, including Canada, Brazil and Argentina, are attending the summit, hosted by the United States for the first time since its inaugural session in 1994.

Biden will use a meeting on Thursday with Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro to talk about climate change and will also discuss the topic of “open, transparent and democratic elections” in Brazil. read more

Bolsonaro, a populist admirer of Trump who has had chilly relations with Biden, has raised doubts about Brazil’s voting system, without providing evidence, ahead of October elections that opinion polls show him losing to leftist rival Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt, Daina Beth Solomon, Matt Spetalnick, Dave Graham, Humeyra Pamuk; Additional reporting by Jeff Mason, Steve Holland and Dave Sherwood; writing by Matt Spetalnick and Dave Graham; Editing by Grant McCool and Richard Pullin

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

UK judges resign from Hong Kong court over China’s crackdown on dissent

A general view shows insids the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) at Central, in Hong Kong, China September 18, 2015. REUTERS/Tyrone Siu

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

LONDON/HONG KONG, March 30 (Reuters) – Two senior British judges, including the president of the UK Supreme Court, resigned from Hong Kong’s highest court on Wednesday because of a sweeping national security law imposed by China cracking down on dissent in the former British colony.

Robert Reed, who heads Britain’s top judicial body, said that he and colleague Patrick Hodge would relinquish their roles with immediate effect as non-permanent judges on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA).

“I have concluded, in agreement with the government, that the judges of the Supreme Court cannot continue to sit in Hong Kong without appearing to endorse an administration which has departed from values of political freedom, and freedom of expression,” Reed said in a statement.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Britain, which handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, has said the security law that punishes offences like subversion with up to life imprisonment has been used to curb dissent and freedoms. London also says the law is a breach of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration that paved the way for the handover.

Many of the city’s democratic campaigners have been arrested, detained or forced into exile, civil society groups shuttered and liberal media outlets forced to close under a security crackdown since the law was enacted in June 2020.

Beijing says the law has brought stability to Hong Kong, rocked by months of sometimes violent anti-government street protests in 2019, and that it includes human rights safeguards.

Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam expressed “regret and disappointment” over the move.

Lam said in a statement that foreign judges had made a valuable contribution to Hong Kong for 25 years but “we must vehemently refute any unfounded allegations that the judges’ resignations have anything to do with…the national security law”.

Hong Kong Chief Justice Andrew Cheung said in a statement that he noted with “regret” the resignations of Reed and Hodge, saying the judiciary was committed to the rule of law.

PRESSURE ON OTHER FOREIGN JUDGES

British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said Hong Kong had witnessed “a systematic erosion of liberty and democracy”.

“The situation has reached a tipping point where it is no longer tenable for British judges to sit on Hong Kong’s leading court, and (this) would risk legitimising oppression,” she added.

Truss this month criticised Hong Kong authorities for accusing a British-based human rights groups of colluding with foreign forces in a “likely” violation of the security law. read more

In a report on Hong Kong last December, she said that while judicial independence was increasingly finely balanced, she believed British judges could still “play a positive role in supporting this judicial independence”.

The presence of foreign judges in Hong Kong is enshrined in the Basic Law, the mini-constitution that guarantees the global financial hub’s freedoms and extensive autonomy under Chinese rule, including the continuation of Hong Kong’s common law traditions forged during the colonial era.

Reed has previously said he would not serve on the HKCFA in the event the judiciary in the city was undermined.

Local lawyers said the resignations would likely put pressure on the 10 other foreign Court of Final Appeal judges to quit. Six of these are British.

Those judges, also from Canada and Australia, are mostly retired senior jurists in their home countries, unlike Reed and Hodge, who were still serving.

Two other foreign judges, Britain’s Brenda Hale and Australia’s James Spigelman, have also stepped down from the city’s highest court since 2020.

“It is a big blow to the local fraternity and the grand tradition of Hong Kong’s rule of law,” one veteran barrister told Reuters. “For all the pressures ahead, we really needed them and I fear what comes next.”

In a statement on Wednesday, Hong Kong Law Society president Chan Chak Ming urged Reed and Hodge to reconsider their moves, expressing “deep regret” and saying that the decision “disappointingly falls short” of the support among the public and legal community for the continued role of overseas judges.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Michael Holden and William James in London and Greg Torode and James Pomfret in Hong Kong; Editing by Kate Holton, Barbara Lewis, John Stonestreet and Nick Macfie

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

As Olympics heat up, China clamps down on dissent

But in a different part of Beijing, prominent human rights activist Hu Jia is again living in another kind of bubble: what he says is a house arrest imposed by authorities who want him out of public view during the Games.

“They said Winter Olympics is a very important political event and no ‘disharmonious voice’ will be allowed — like any criticism of the Winter Olympics, or any talk related to human rights,” said Hu, who spoke to CNN during what he describes as a weeks-long restriction to his home.

“In China, people like me are called ‘domestic hostile forces’… that’s why they have to cut me off from the outside world,” said Hu, who gained international prominence as a champion of human rights in the early 2000s and was a friend to late Nobel Peace Prize winner and dissident Liu Xiaobo.
Hu says he has been restricted to his residence, with the exception of trips to care for his ailing mother, since January 15. It’s an escalation of the round-the-clock state surveillance Hu says he has been under for nearly two decades. It’s also treatment he has become used to during sensitive political events in China. Hu said he was originally told to leave Beijing altogether and relocate to Guangdong during the Olympic period but an outbreak of Covid-19 prevented him from going.

But Hu is far from the only dissident facing restrictions in the months leading up the Winter Games.

William Nee, research and advocacy coordinator at Chinese Human Rights Defenders, a non-profit network supporting rights advocates in China, said before the Winter Games there had been an uptick in reports of state security wanting to know people’s whereabouts, house arrests and the detention of high profile activists and lawyers.

“The Olympics has given China an opportunity to showcase its international clout and it doesn’t want pesky activists disrupting that and talking about its human rights abuses,” he said, adding that many prominent rights defenders are “surveilled by state security all the time” or subject to other measures of control.

Rights experts say that crackdowns on activists and speech — which can range from closing social media accounts to house arrests, detentions or enforced disappearances — are typical in the lead up to sensitive events in China, where the Communist Party keeps a tight lid on dissent.

“The point is to prevent any contact between the activists and, essentially, the outside world, which, during these events, tends to pay more attention to what’s happening in China,” said Maya Wang, a senior China researcher at the New York-based non-profit Human Rights Watch.

But controls on dissent have been getting tighter year-round, blurring the line between normal and sensitive periods, according to observers.

“The human rights environment in China has deteriorated pretty significantly in the last decade,” Wang said.

A shadow over the Games

Concerns over China’s human rights record have already cast a shadow over Beijing’s Olympic Games, including a US-led diplomatic boycott over what Washington calls serious human rights abuses against Uyghur and other Muslim minorities in the country’s far-western region of Xinjiang.

China has denied these charges and pushed back on international concerns about its human rights record, calling these “political posturing and manipulation” in the lead up to the Games.

Following a faxed request for comment on allegations that Hu Jia has been forcibly confined to his home during the Winter Olympics, and that other human rights activists have also been detained or monitored, China’s Ministry of Public Security referred CNN to Beijing authorities. Multiple calls to the Beijing municipal government went unanswered.

Hu, who rose to prominence for his activism related to HIV/AIDS in rural China, says the house arrest began after he posted on Twitter — a platform banned in China — describing a ramp-up of restrictions and controls on activists in the lead up to the Beijing Games,. He also noted the circumstances of jailed or missing dissidents while using a Winter Olympics hashtag in Chinese.

Since then, security agents have visited him multiple times, Hu says, including once this week to instruct him not to discuss Olympic skier Eileen Gu. That was after Hu commented via Twitter on an article about the US-born athlete who is representing China at the Beijing Games.

Hu says he expects this period of house arrest could last through the country’s annual legislative gathering next month. He says he’ll spend the time reading.

“It’s so much better than my friends who are suffering in jail and prison. We are like (the difference between) heaven and hell, so I have nothing to complain about,” Hu said in a recorded video dairy, where he is documenting this period of house arrest for CNN.

“There is some level of stress for sure, my mental health, and so on. After all, you always want to be able to walk out of your home freely and stand under the bright sky,” he said in another entry.

But Hu is no stranger to harsher forms of confinement.

Just months before Beijing hosted its last Olympics in 2008, Hu was handed a three-and-a-half year prison term for “incitement to subvert state power” — a sentence that activists at the time linked to his work calling international attention to human rights abuses in China ahead of the Games.

This time, Hu watched the Olympic opening ceremony from his elderly parents’ home in Beijing — the one place he says the security agents will allow him to visit and a privilege he says they have threatened to deny if he acts out. He also says if things escalate he could be imprisoned again. But nonetheless, Hu has a message.

“This might be the only Olympics in history that has drawn so much attention to its host country’s human rights issues. This is a really good opportunity to explore and discover China’s human rights issues, including Uyghurs, Tibetans, Hong Kongers, Taiwanese… and also citizens, human rights activists, and dissidents like us who are in mainland China now,” said Hu.

“I hope the world will see this clearly and pay more attention to human rights issues…not just during the Winter Olympics…but also keep watching democracy, human rights, and the future of China,” he said.

Read original article here

Beijing nails coffin shut on dissent in Hong Kong

Authorities in Beijing last week forced the closure of Stand News, one of the last independent news outlets in Hong Kong, and levied new charges against Apple Daily, the city’s once-biggest pro-democracy newspaper.

On Wednesday, hundreds of Hong Kong police descended onto Stand News’ offices and arrested seven people for “conspiracy to publish seditious publication.” Within hours, the news organization’s site announced it would be shutting down.

Public dissent is now all but a thing of the past there.

“Stand News’s editorial policy was to be independent and committed to safeguarding Hong Kong’s core values of democracy, human rights, freedom, the rule of law and justice,” the Web site said. “Thank you, readers, for your continued support.”

Among those arrested: top editor Patrick Lam, pop singer Denise Ho and former lawmaker Margaret Ng, the latter two former board members. Police also arrested former top editor Chung Pui-kuen, whose wife — former Apple Daily associate publisher Chan Pui-man — has been imprisoned since July.

Officials cited the city’s new national-security law for the move. John Lee, Hong Kong’s No. 2 honcho, said journalism can be used as a cover for threatening national security. But it shouldn’t be a crime to report the truth.

Last year, Beijing did the same thing to Apple Daily, conducting multiple raids and arresting several of its top editors, including founder Jimmy Lai, who has been in jail for a year this week. That forced the outlet to close.

And Tuesday, Beijing upped the ante, announcing new sedition charges against Lai, who faces up to life in prison under the new law, and six former senior employees.

While the Chinese Communist Party nails the coffin shut on dissent, its message is clear: It won’t tolerate truth or freedom in Hong Kong.

Read original article here

U.S. Booster Policy Is in Flux as Studies Add to Dissent

WASHINGTON — Almost a month ago, President Biden announced a plan to make coronavirus booster shots available to most adults in the United States eight months after they received their second dose. But a week before the plan is to roll out, its contours are up in the air amid a chorus of dissent inside and outside the government.

The White House has already been forced to delay offering boosters to recipients of the Moderna vaccine, and for now it is planning third shots only for those who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Depending on what two public health agencies decide in the coming days, the administration may have to change course again, perhaps restricting extra shots to older Americans and others who are particularly vulnerable to serious illness.

A series of dueling reviews this week illustrated the fierce argument among scientists about whether boosters are needed, and if so, for whom. A study released on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine appears to bolster the case made by the White House and its senior health advisers, stating that those who received a third shot of the Pfizer vaccine in Israel were far less likely to develop severe Covid than those who received two injections.

But a review by regulators at the Food and Drug Administration, also made public on Wednesday, looked at broader evidence on third doses of the Pfizer vaccine and raised caveats.

And in The Lancet this week, an article written by two of the Food and Drug Administration’s top vaccine scientists, among others, argued that there was no credible evidence that the vaccines’ potency against severe disease declined substantially over time. The two scientists had announced that they would leave the agency this fall, but their public opposition to the administration’s plan caught the F.D.A.’s top leaders by surprise and forced the White House on the defensive.

Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, stressed on Wednesday that the administration’s most senior health officials — including Dr. Janet Woodcock, the acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, and Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — had signed a statement announcing Mr. Biden’s booster plan. “Nothing has changed as it relates to the eight top doctors who put out that statement, almost a month ago,” Ms. Psaki said.

What comes next partly depends on crucial meetings of expert advisory committees to both the F.D.A., which is responsible for authorizing vaccines, and the C.D.C., which typically has the final word on vaccination policies.

The F.D.A. committee will meet on Friday to discuss and vote on Pfizer-BioNTech’s application to offer third shots to people 16 and older. The C.D.C. panel is expected to meet next week. Agency officials are not required to follow the recommendations of their outside expert panels, but they generally do so.

Depending on the experts’ reaction to the data review that F.D.A. regulators posted on Wednesday, the agency could decide to scale back an authorization. Even if the Food and Drug Administration approves the application as it currently stands, however, the C.D.C. might recommend boosters only for those 65 and older or others who are particularly at risk, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The plan to start offering extra shots next week was announced when the White House was under growing pressure to move on boosters. Because of the highly contagious Delta variant, hospitalizations and deaths were soaring, albeit largely among the unvaccinated. Breakthrough infections were becoming more common. France, Germany and Israel were moving faster than the United States to offer boosters. And several governors were publicly calling on Mr. Biden to follow suit.

Administration officials have started making the case that offering boosters only to older people would not be a huge change from the president’s original plan. Because older adults were vaccinated first, they make up a disproportionate number of those who were vaccinated at least eight months ago.

Several officials suggested that the difference from Mr. Biden’s original announcement would be minimal as long as some people are offered boosters next week — even if it is only older people who received the Pfizer vaccine.

John P. Moore, a virologist at Weill Cornell Medicine, said that the White House was under political pressure after declaring that boosters were necessary and that they would be available next week pending regulatory approval.

“Weeks ago, the administration decided that the public needs cake and deserves cake, and so shall have cake,” he said. “Now, the public expects cake and would be very annoyed if its cake was taken away at this point.”

The backpedaling is a result of what some describe as a double mistake by the White House: First, officials pinpointed a specific week when additional shots would be rolled out. Second, they announced a broad plan covering the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines before regulators had time to review or even gather all the necessary data.

“We just got things turned around,” said Dr. Jesse L. Goodman, a former chief scientist at the Food and Drug Administration. “The administration and the leaders of the scientific agencies who signed on got out in front of any public discussion, airing of the data or vetting of it. That put the F.D.A. and the C.D.C. and their advisory committees in a corner.”

Dr. Woodcock, the acting F.D.A. commissioner, privately warned that it was risky to announce a timetable, especially for multiple vaccines, according to people familiar with the discussions. The F.D.A. and the C.D.C. meetings in the coming days and Pfizer’s application for approval of its booster dose appear to be conforming to the timetable the administration proposed in August.

Like other senior health officials, Dr. Woodcock had hoped that booster shots could be offered this month not only for Pfizer and Moderna recipients, but for recipients of Johnson & Johnson’s one-dose vaccine as well, according to people familiar with the deliberations. But the administration had to limit its plan to Pfizer recipients, officials said, because neither Moderna nor Johnson & Johnson delivered the expected data in time.

While Mr. Biden publicly noted that his strategy depended on regulatory action, he also made the plan sound all but definite. “It’s simple,” he said at the time. “Eight months after your second shot, get your booster shot.”

In interviews, senior administration officials defended the decision to specify a date for the rollout, saying that precious time would have been lost if pharmacies, providers and state officials were not prepared.

The data from Israel, which offered boosters first, was particularly concerning to U.S. health officials.

In the New England Journal of Medicine article on Wednesday, researchers said they analyzed health records of more than 1.1 million people in Israel who had received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine at least five months earlier. They found that the rate of severe disease among people over 60 who had received a third shot at least 12 days earlier was nearly twentyfold lower than among those who had received two injections.

The Food and Drug Administration has invited Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, Israel’s head of public health services and a co-author of the study, to describe her country’s experience with boosters to the advisory committee on Friday. In an interview, Dr. Alroy-Preis said Israel had vaccinated more of its population faster than other countries and therefore saw the effect of waning immunity much earlier.

If the United States does not start offering booster shots, she said, more fully vaccinated people will contract severe Covid-19, as they did in Israel. “I am sure of that,” she said.

Before Israel’s government began offering third shots in August, Dr. Alroy-Preis said, people who were fully immunized with the Pfizer vaccine made up at least half of severely or critically ill Covid patients. The number of those patients is now less than half what officials had previously projected, she said, and the spread of the virus has slowed.

“We are beginning to control the fourth wave,” Dr. Alroy-Preis said, “mainly by vaccinating people with third doses.”

Yet vaccine experts said on Wednesday that what the Israeli data show — that a booster can enhance protection for a few weeks in older adults — is unsurprising and does not necessarily indicate long-term benefit. There are differences between Israel and the United States that could lead to different outcomes, scientists have warned.

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday cautioned its advisory committee not to put too much weight on the experiences of other countries.

“While observational studies can enable understanding of real-world effectiveness, there are known and unknown biases that can affect their reliability,” regulators wrote in a briefing paper. Studies conducted in the United States “may most accurately represent vaccine effectiveness in the U.S. population,” they added.

The Food and Drug Administration’s analysis also noted that Pfizer had gathered data on immune responses against the Delta variant in only two dozen people. The company said in a separate filing that one month after a third injection, levels of neutralizing antibodies against the Delta variant were about five to seven times as high as they were a month after the second dose.

Whatever the Food and Drug Administration decides, it should clearly and publicly explain its reasoning, said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, a vice dean at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and a former principal deputy commissioner of the agency.

“F.D.A. does the best in situations when there are strongly held but conflicting views, when they’re forthcoming with the data and really explain decisions,” he said. “It’s important for the F.D.A. not to say, ‘Here’s our decision, mic drop.’”

He added, “It’s much better for them to say, ‘Here’s how we looked at the data, here are the conclusions we made from the data, and here’s why we’re making the conclusions.’”

Isabel Kershner contributed reporting from Jerusalem.



Read original article here