Connect with us

News

Hong Kong finds 90-year-old cardinal guilty over pro-democracy protest fund | CNN

Published

on

Hong Kong finds 90-year-old cardinal guilty over pro-democracy protest fund | CNN


Hong Kong
CNN
 — 

A 90-year-old former bishop and outspoken critic of China’s ruling Communist Occasion was discovered responsible Friday on a cost referring to his position in a reduction fund for Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests in 2019.

Cardinal Joseph Zen and 5 others, together with the Cantopop singer Denise Ho, contravened the Societies Ordinance by failing to register the now-defunct “612 Humanitarian Aid Fund” that was partly used to pay protesters’ authorized and medical charges, the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts dominated.

The silver-haired cardinal, who appeared in court docket with a strolling stick, and his co-defendants had all denied the cost.

Advertisement

The case is taken into account a marker of political freedom in Hong Kong throughout an ongoing crackdown on the pro-democracy motion, and comes at a delicate time for the Vatican, which is getting ready to resume a controversial take care of Beijing over the appointment of bishops in China.

Outdoors the court docket, Zen instructed reporters that he hoped individuals wouldn’t hyperlink his conviction to spiritual freedom.

“I noticed many individuals abroad are involved a few cardinal being arrested. It isn’t associated to spiritual freedom. I’m a part of the fund. (Hong Kong) has not seen injury (to) its spiritual freedom,” Zen stated.

Zen and 4 different trustees of the fund – singer Ho, barrister Margaret Ng, scholar Hui Po Keung, and politician Cyd Ho – have been sentenced to fines of HK$4,000 ($510) every.

A sixth defendant, Sze Ching-wee, who was the fund’s secretary, was fined HK$2,500 ($320).

Advertisement

All had initially been charged underneath the controversial Beijing-backed nationwide safety regulation for colluding with international forces, which carries a most penalty of life imprisonment. These prices have been dropped and so they as a substitute confronted a lesser cost underneath the Societies Ordinance, a century-old colonial-era regulation punishable with fines of as much as HK$10,000 ($1,274) however not jail time for first-time offenders.

The court docket heard in September that the authorized fund raised the equal of $34.4 million via 100,000 deposits.

Along with offering monetary support to protesters, the fund was additionally used to sponsor pro-democracy rallies, corresponding to paying for audio gear used in 2019 throughout road protests to withstand Beijing’s tightening grip.

Though Zen and the opposite 5 defendants have been spared from being charged underneath the nationwide safety regulation, the laws imposed by Beijing over Hong Kong in June 2020 in a bid to quell the protests has repeatedly been used to curb dissent.

For the reason that imposition of the regulation, a lot of the metropolis’s outstanding pro-democracy figures have both been arrested or gone into exile, whereas a number of unbiased media retailers and non-government organizations have been shuttered.

Advertisement

The Hong Kong authorities has repeatedly denied criticism that the regulation – which criminalizes acts of secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with international forces – has stifled freedoms, claiming as a substitute it has restored order within the metropolis after the 2019 protest motion.

Hong Kong’s prosecution of one in every of Asia’s most senior clergyman has solid the connection between Beijing and the Holy See into sharp focus.

Zen has strongly opposed a controversial settlement struck in 2018 between the Vatican and China over the appointment of bishops. Beforehand each side had demanded the ultimate say on bishop appointments in mainland China, the place spiritual actions are closely monitored and generally banned.

Born to Catholic mother and father in Shanghai in 1932, Zen fled to Hong Kong along with his household to flee looming Communist rule as an adolescent. He was ordained as a priest in 1961 and made Bishop of Hong Kong in 2002, earlier than retiring in 2009.

Generally known as the “conscience of Hong Kong” amongst his supporters, Zen has lengthy been a outstanding advocate for democracy, human rights and spiritual freedom. He has been on the entrance traces of a few of the metropolis’s most necessary protests, from the mass rally in opposition to nationwide safety laws in 2003 to the “Umbrella Motion” demanding common suffrage in 2014.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Japan says ‘every option’ on table against Donald Trump’s 25% car tariffs

Published

on

Japan says ‘every option’ on table against Donald Trump’s 25% car tariffs

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Japan’s prime minister said “every option” was under consideration and South Korea promised an emergency response after Donald Trump stepped up his trade war by unveiling 25 per cent tariffs on car imports to the US.

Shigeru Ishiba’s comments in Japan’s parliament came after Trump’s latest trade salvo, which he said would go into effect on April 2. Washington is expected to apply a range of reciprocal tariffs against US partners and allies on the same day.

Asian carmakers are expected to be among the worst affected. Shares of Japanese automakers tumbled between 2 per cent and 5 per cent on Thursday, while those of South Korea’s largest carmakers Hyundai and its affiliate Kia dropped about 4 per cent.

Advertisement

“We need to think about the best option for Japan’s national interest,” said Ishiba. “We are considering every option in order to reach the most appropriate response.”

His comments came after European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said the EU was also assessing its options.

Japan’s top spokesperson Yoshimasa Hayashi described the tariffs, which would hit an industry widely seen as the driving force of the economy, as “extremely regrettable”. He added that the Trump administration’s emerging trade policy could have a major impact on bilateral ties, the global economy and the multilateral trading system.

Ishiba’s February meeting with Trump in Washington had initially been hailed as a success for reasserting the strength of the US-Japan alliance.

But traders in Tokyo said the bluntness of Ishiba’s tone — along with the “every option” language — hinted at rising panic in Japan over the solidity of the relationship.

Advertisement

Japan has in recent weeks lobbied Washington for an exemption from tariffs, highlighting its status as the biggest supplier of foreign direct investment into the US.

The country’s economy and trade minister visited Washington this month, but the efforts have not secured the exemptions Japan had hoped for.

“Japan is the biggest investor into the United States, so we wonder if it makes sense for [the Trump administration] to apply uniform tariffs to all countries. That is a point we’ve been raising and will continue to do so,” said Ishiba.

Japanese carmakers have built significant production facilities in the US but their supply chains are heavily reliant on Canada and Mexico.

Japan is the largest exporter of finished vehicles to the US after Mexico, where Japanese companies are the dominant manufacturers. Japan sent $40bn worth of cars to the US in 2024, representing 28.3 per cent of its overall exports to the US.

Advertisement

Goldman Sachs analysts said the impact on Japanese exports could be “large” because cars and parts account for such a large proportion of exports to the US.

But they said the overall economic impact would be “somewhat limited” as Japan would not lose competitiveness against other car imports, estimating the hit to GDP at 0.1 percentage points.

Masanori Katayama, chair of the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, a lobby group, had previously warned that “significant production adjustment” would be required if US tariffs were introduced against vehicle imports from Japan, Mexico and Canada.

But Julie Boote, an analyst at Pelham Smithers, said tariff pressure could “ironically” force Japan’s fragmented carmaking industry to consolidate as smaller groups would need support.

South Korea’s industry minister Ahn Duk-geun said Korean carmakers would experience “considerable difficulties” due to the tariffs and promised to announce emergency measures next month, following a meeting on Thursday with industry executives.

Advertisement

Hyundai, whose $7.6bn hybrid and electric vehicle factory in Georgia began operations on Thursday, has also unveiled plans to expand US production capacity in anticipation of the Trump tariffs.

The carmaker on Tuesday announced $21bn of investment in the US, including a $5.8bn steel plant in Louisiana, as well as a target of producing 1.2mn vehicles annually in the country, up from 700,000 currently.

Continue Reading

News

ICE arrests Tufts University doctoral student and revokes her visa, school says

Published

on

ICE arrests Tufts University doctoral student and revokes her visa, school says

Federal immigration authorities arrested a Tufts University doctoral student from Turkey on Tuesday night, the latest in a string of arrests targeting international students for their Palestinian advocacy.

Rumeysa Ozturk, a PhD student in the graduate school of arts and sciences at the Massachusetts university, was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers outside her off-campus apartment on her way to an Iftar dinner with friends, according to her attorney and activists.

In an email to the Tufts community, university president Sunil Kumar said the school was told that federal authorities terminated her visa status, “and we seek to confirm whether that information is true.”

The Independent has requested comment from ICE.

Advertisement

Ozturk, who is in the United States on a non-immigrant F-1 visa for international students, was meeting with friends to break her Ramadan fast when she was detained near her home in Somerville, attorney Mahsa Khanbabai said in a statement to The Independent.

“We are unaware of her whereabouts and have not been able to contact her,” she said.

Surveillance footage of the arrest shows plainclothes agents approaching her from the street. One officer, whose head is covered by sweatshirt hood, appears to approach her without identifying himself and then grabs her arm. Another officer approaches and takes her phone while she is placed in handcuffs. Three officers cover their faces with neck gaiters.

Tufts did not have any prior knowledge of the arrest “and did not share any information with federal authorities prior to the event,” Kumar wrote.

Kumar issued a reminder that the university has a protocol for how to respond to federal agents making “unannounced visits” on or off campus.

Advertisement
Tufts University doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk was arrested by ICE officers on March 25, according to the school

Tufts University doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk was arrested by ICE officers on March 25, according to the school (REUTERS)

Ozturk’s attorney has filed a petition of habeas corpus challenging her arrest and detention. Massachusetts District Judge Indira Talwani is giving federal officials until Friday to respond to the complaint, and Ozturk cannot be moved outside the state without at least 48 hours of advance notice to the court, according to Talwani’s order.

Ozturk is a student at the university’s doctoral program for Child Study and Human Development, and graduated with a master’s degree from the Teachers College at Columbia University, according to her LinkedIn.

“I am passionate about researching children’s and adolescents’ digital media and technologies for caring, kind, and compassionate media environments,” she writes. “As an interdisciplinary media researcher and developmental scientist in training, I research children’s and adolescents’ positive development in a media-embedded, globalized, and connected world.”

Last year, in response to Israel’s ongoing devastation of Gaza, Ozturk co-authored an op-ed in The Tufts Daily newspaper calling on Kumar to “acknowledge the Palestinian genocide” and for the university to divest from companies with direct or indirect ties to Israel.

Advertisement

Ozturk is among dozens of students and professors identified by Canary Mission, a pro-Israel campaign that maintains a database intended to blacklist and intimidate activists the group accuses of promoting “hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews.”

“Efforts to deport students based on their speech or protected activism undermine America’s commitment to free expression,” Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told The Independent. “If ICE detained Ozturk based on her op-ed or activism, it’s a worrying escalation in an already fraught environment for college students here on student visas.”

Her arrest follows similar actions from federal authorities targeting student activists and students who have merely spoken in support of Palestine, none of whom have been accused of committing any crime. Donald Trump’s administration has zeroed in on campus activism at prestigious universities, where Israel’s war in Gaza has provoked a wave of demonstrations and protest encampments demanding an end to U.S. support for Israel’s devastation.

Students have been accused of supporting terrorism and violating the president’s executive orders directing federal agencies investigate and potentially remove non-citizens who “bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles” and “advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.”

Demonstrations across the country have

Advertisement
Demonstrations across the country have (EPA)

On Tuesday, university professors and academic organizations from across the country filed a lawsuit accusing the Trump administration of violating the First Amendment through a “climate of fear and repression” on college campuses.

“Out of fear that they might be arrested and deported for lawful expression and association, some noncitizen students and faculty have stopped attending public protests or resigned from campus groups that engage in political advocacy,” according to the lawsuit.

“Others have declined opportunities to publish commentary and scholarship, stopped contributing to classroom discussions, or deleted past work from online databases and websites,” attorneys wrote. “Many now hesitate to address political issues on social media, or even in private texts. The [policy], in other words, is accomplishing its purpose: it is terrorizing students and faculty for their exercise of First Amendment rights in the past, intimidating them from exercising those rights now, and silencing political viewpoints that the government disfavor.”

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Manhattan blocked the Trump administration from deporting Yunseo Chung, a Columbia University student and lawful permanent resident who was the victim of the government’s “shocking overreach,” vilifying her political views and constitutionally protected right to protest, according to her attorneys.

Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident and prominent student activist accused of organizing “pro-Hamas” attacks on campus, is currently battling his removal from the United States after his shocking arrest in front of his wife, a U.S. citizen who is eight months pregnant, earlier this month. He is currently detained in Louisiana as his case moves jurisdictions to a federal court in New Jersey.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Trump Is Trying to Gain More Power Over Elections. Is His Effort Legal?

Published

on

Trump Is Trying to Gain More Power Over Elections. Is His Effort Legal?

President Trump pushed on Tuesday to hand the executive branch unprecedented influence over how federal elections are run, signing a far-reaching and legally dubious order to change U.S. voting rules.

The executive order, which seeks to require proof of citizenship to register to vote as well as the return of all mail ballots by Election Day, is an attempt to upend centuries of settled election law and federal-state relations.

The Constitution gives the president no explicit authority to regulate elections. Instead, it gives states the power to set the “times, places and manner” of elections, leaving them to decide the rules, oversee voting and try to prevent fraud. Congress can also pass election laws or override state legislation, as it did with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Yet Mr. Trump’s order, which follows a yearslong Republican push to tighten voting laws out of a false belief that the 2020 election was rigged, bypasses both the states and Congress. Republican lawmakers in Washington are trying to pass many of the same voting restrictions, but they are unlikely to make it through the Senate.

The order’s most eye-catching provisions are the requirements of proof of citizenship and the return of mail ballots by Election Day.

Advertisement

But the order, which threatens to withhold federal funding from states that do not comply with it, includes a range of other measures.

It seeks to give federal agencies, including the Elon Musk-led team known as the Department of Government Efficiency, access to state voter rolls to check “for consistency with federal requirements.” It aims to set new rules for election equipment, which could force states to replace voting machines that use bar codes or QR codes. And it instructs the U.S. attorney general to hunt for and prosecute election crimes.

Probably not all of it, legal experts say — and voting rights groups and state attorneys general are already signaling that they will file challenges.

Several experts predicted that provisions of the order might well be found unlawful, though they said that others, like directions to Mr. Trump’s attorney general and other cabinet members, fell within legal bounds.

“It’s an attempt at a power grab,” said Richard L. Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The president has been seen in the past as having no role to play when it comes to the conduct of federal elections, and this attempt to assert authority over the conduct of federal elections would take power away from both an independent federal agency and from the states.”

Advertisement

A central question surrounds Mr. Trump’s attempt to use the Election Assistance Commission, a federal agency that Congress created in 2002 to help election officials with their work, to enforce the proof-of-citizenship requirement.

Currently, Americans may register to vote in federal elections either through their state or by using a federal form created by the E.A.C. The form includes a box that registrants check to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are U.S. citizens, but it does not require documentation as proof.

The executive order would force the E.A.C. to change that process to require a passport, state identification that includes citizenship information or military identification.

Legal experts dispute that Mr. Trump has the authority to force the agency, which Congress designated as “independent” and which includes two commissioners from each party, to take any action.

“He can ask nicely,” said Justin Levitt, a professor of constitutional law at Loyola Marymount University who served in the Biden administration. “But he thinks he’s got a power that, at least so far, he does not have. It would take a change in the law and the Supreme Court affirmatively approving a radical expansion of power of the executive.”

Advertisement

Legal experts say the provision requiring all ballots to arrive by Election Day also probably exceeds the president’s legal authority, particularly the threat to withhold federal funding from those states that do not comply. (Seventeen states currently allow mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive soon afterward.)

“If the president is basically usurping the power of the purse by imposing limits on these grants that Congress itself did not impose, that could be the basis for constitutionally challenging these conditions,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School.

Mr. Trump’s attempt to force states to turn over voter data to Mr. Musk’s team and federal agencies recalls a similar program from the first Trump administration, a commission on “election integrity” led by Kris Kobach, who is now the Kansas attorney general.

The commission sought data from all 50 states, but 44 of them refused to comply. The Republican secretary of state in Mississippi told the commission to “go jump in the Gulf of Mexico.”

If the full order were to stand, it could potentially disenfranchise millions of Americans and cost state and local governments millions of dollars.

Advertisement

About 21.3 million people do not have proof of citizenship readily available, according to a 2023 study by the Brennan Center for Justice, a voting rights and democracy group. Nearly four million people do not have the documents at all because they were lost, destroyed or stolen. The executive order does not allow for birth certificates to prove citizenship.

It is also unclear whether women who have changed their surname after marriage will face new hurdles in proving their citizenship.

The order could also lead election officials to throw out sizable numbers of ballots that arrive after Election Day. For example, in Nevada’s two largest counties in the 2022 general election, about 45,000 ballots arrived after Election Day and were counted, according to state data. In Washington State, Kim Wyman, a Republican former secretary of state, estimated that “about a third of the ballots in any given election” arrived on the Wednesday or Thursday after Election Day.

The order could put states in deep budget holes, as well. Many states, including the battlegrounds of Georgia and Pennsylvania, use voting machines with bar codes or QR codes. Replacing them would cost millions of dollars that the order does not provide.

Mr. Trump has made specious claims about voter fraud for decades, but since his 2020 election loss and the 2021 Capitol riot, he has pushed the issue to the center of Republican politics.

Advertisement

Even though voter fraud is exceedingly rare, nearly every speech of Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign included false claims that noncitizens were voting in American elections. He also railed against mail voting, even as Republican groups successfully pushed more of the party’s voters to cast ballots that way.

Jason Snead, the executive director of the Honest Elections Project, a conservative advocacy group tied to the activist Leonard Leo, said the executive order was simply enforcing laws already passed by Congress. He referred to a ruling from a federal appeals court that found that Congress’s selection of a federal Election Day meant all voting must be completed by that day, with no late-arriving ballots permitted.

“The executive order is acting well within the four corners of those existing laws, so we’re not breaking new ground in terms of legal authority,” Mr. Snead said. “We’re not breaking new ground in terms of the relationship between the federal government and the states.”

Continue Reading

Trending