World
EBU woes deepen as political parties excluded from EU election debate
The broadcaster says only parliamentary groups fielding a lead candidate in June’s election can be represented at the televised stand-off.
The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) is under further scrutiny after it was accused by two political parties of excluding them from its Eurovision election debate.
The far-right Identity and Democracy (ID) party and the regionalist, separatist European Free Alliance (EFA) both say they have been intentionally shunned by the organisers of the debate, set to take place at the European Parliament in Brussels on May 23 ahead of June’s European elections.
In correspondence seen by Euronews, the ID Party – which harbours the likes of France’s Rassemblement National, Italy’s Lega and Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland and which forms its own group in the European Parliament – was told by the EBU that it could not be represented at the debate because it had not fielded an official lead candidate, known as Spitzenkandidat, for the ballot.
The Spitzenkandidat process requires all major European parties to select a lead candidate to bid for the role of president of the European Commission, the bloc’s powerful executive arm. But the process has been notoriously spurned in the past, with current president Ursula von der Leyen parachuted to the role in 2019 despite not officially running.
In a letter addressed to European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, also seen by Euronews, the ID group’s co-chairs claim the EBU’s rules are inconsistent. Other parties fielding more than one lead candidate, which ID says also “goes against” the principle of the Spitzenkandidat, have been invited to the debate.
Renew Europe, which is fielding three lead candidates, will be represented by Sandro Gozi, while the Greens, who have two lead candidates, will send Terry Reintke to the televised stand-off.
The EBU says that it sent invitations to parties from the seven political groups in the European Parliament and made clear that the Eurovision debate was a “forum for lead candidates for the position of European Commission President” under the Spitzenkandidat system.
“Two parties, the ECR and ID, declined to nominate a lead candidate and have therefore made themselves ineligible for this particular debate,” the Geneva-based broadcasting union said in a statement shared with Euronews.
ID has urged President Metsola to weigh in and urge the EBU to retract the decision and allow MEP Anders Vistisen of the far-right populist Danish People’s Party to participate on behalf of the group.
The EBU debate is one of three electoral debates taking place ahead of June’s vote. Vistisen represented the ID group in the Maastricht debate held in April while Maylis Roßberg took part on behalf of the EFA.
EFA also criticises its exclusion
The European Free Alliance (EFA), home to Europe’s regionalist and separatist parties, also published a statement on Tuesday alleging it had been deliberately excluded from the debate.
The party sits along with the Greens as part of the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament. According to the EBU, its rules mean only one candidate from each of the parliament’s seven political groups can take place in the debate, in this case the Greens’ Terry Reintke.
“In coordination with the European Parliament, the EBU invited political parties in the European Parliament to nominate one Lead Candidate from each of the 7 official political groups represented,” the EBU told Euronews in a statement.
“The parties within those groups made the selection of the lead candidate. For the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, the lead candidate put forward was Terry Reintke, from the party of European Greens,” it adds.
EFA has nominated two lead candidates for June’s election, 23-year-old Roßberg from the Danish-German border region and Catalan independentist Raül Romeva, a former MEP sentenced to a 12-year prison term in 2019 on charges of sedition, but pardoned by Spanish prime minister Pedro Sánchez in 2021.
In its statement, EFA claims that the parliament’s spokesperson Jaume Duch had asked the party to nominate a responsible contact person for discussions with the EBU in January and that a kick-off meeting was held, but that no communication was then received.
It says that the rules limiting speakers to one lead candidate per political group were communicated to them on 30 April 2024, and denounces the EBU for its “lack of communication and transparency.”
“We want to express our deepest disappointment and unconformity with this decision. European democracy deserves more. By shutting the door on our participation, the EBU is not only silencing the voices of smaller parties but also undermining the principles of democracy and inclusivity,” the party said.
The EBU maintains that its rules were made clear to all parties, and that it looks forward to a “successful and meaningful political debate at a crucial time for European politics.”
Both the ID group and the EFA are calling on the EBU to rectify its decision.
Adding fuel to fire
The allegations come just a day after the European Commission censured the EBU’s decision to ban EU flags at the Eurovision Song Contest in Malmö, Sweden over the weekend.
Commission Vice-President Margaritis Schinas sent a letter to the broadcaster on Monday asking for the “rationale” behind the ban and for it to attribute “responsibility where it is due”.
The EBU said its decision was linked to “heightened geopolitical tensions” around the song contest, during which pro-Palestinian protesters marched against the participation of Israel due to its ongoing offensive in the Gaza Strip.
World
Acid Attack in Indonesia Evokes Brutality of Suharto Era
Andrie Yunus, an outspoken critic of the military’s expanding power in Indonesia, was riding his motorbike last month in Jakarta when two men rode past and threw acid in his face. He suffered burns to 24 percent of his body and damage to his right eye.
The ambush, which recalled Indonesia’s decades under a military dictatorship, was captured on street surveillance cameras. Within days, the authorities arrested four members of a military intelligence unit — a captain, two lieutenants and a sergeant. Their trial in a military court began Wednesday.
But human rights activists say that many more people were involved in the attack, and that the rush to try the four men is part of an attempt to shield the mastermind who authorized it.
“This was an intelligence operation,” said Fadhil Alfathan, a member of the Advocacy Team for Democracy, a coalition of rights groups backing Mr. Andrie. “It was a well-planned and well-trained operation, starting with surveillance, stalking, then tailing, execution and escape.”
The assault on Mr. Andrie, 27, the deputy coordinator for the prominent rights group, Kontras, is reminiscent of the brutality of the 32-year dictatorship under Suharto, who stepped down in 1998 in the face of massive pro-democracy protests. Now rights activists fear that the military’s influence is growing again under the current president, Prabowo Subianto, Suharto’s former son-in-law and once a widely feared general.
Mr. Andrie’s supporters say the acid attack on the evening of March 12 was a premeditated attempt to kill him because of his criticism of the military’s increasing role in government, including a law adopted after Mr. Prabowo took office that allows active armed forces officers to hold more government posts.
More than 420 rights groups and hundreds of activists around the world have signed a statement condemning the attack and calling for it to be investigated “thoroughly and transparently.”
The police conducted an initial investigation of the attack and quickly identified two suspects who belonged to the military.
The Advocacy Team for Democracy obtained and analyzed street surveillance videos from the weeks before the assault and concluded that at least 16 operatives were involved in following and surveilling Mr. Andrie.
Mr. Prabowo promised a thorough investigation.
“This is a barbaric act, we must pursue it,” the president said in remarks released a week after the attack. “We must investigate. Who ordered them, who paid.”
Days later, the general who headed the military’s main intelligence arm, the Strategic Intelligence Agency, quietly resigned. He is not known to be facing any charges.
But on March 31, the police announced that the case had been transferred to the military, which meant that military prosecutors would have the ability to limit the scope of the investigation and determine what information is made public.
Mr. Andrie came to public attention in March of last year when he led a small group of protesters who barged into a closed parliamentary meeting at a luxury hotel in Jakarta. The lawmakers were discussing the measure to let active military officers hold government posts.
In a scene captured on video, Mr. Andrie railed against the legislation before security officers pushed the protesters from the room.
The measure was later approved by Parliament and signed into law by Mr. Prabowo.
In a letter this month to Constitutional Court judges who are reviewing the law,Mr. Andrie objected to the transfer of the assault case to a military court, saying such courts have been “a hotbed of impunity for soldiers who commit human rights violations.”
“In this case, if it is not tried in the public court,” he added, “it is a serious violation of the principle of equality before the law.”
The military prosecutor handling the case announced in mid-April that the attack by the four operatives was motivated by a “personal vendetta” against Mr. Andrie.
The suspects are charged with assault causing serious injury and premeditated assault. They face a maximum of 12 years in prison.
Mr. Andrie has been hospitalized since the attack. He has not been interviewed by anyone from the police or the military, said Lakso Anindito, a lawyer from the Advocacy Team for Democracy who is representing him.
Mr. Lakso said he does not expect that his client will be called to testify.
He said he believes the attackers moved to silence him a year after the hotel protest because he was relentless in his criticism of the military and the 2025 law.
“It’s because Andrie never stops,” he said. “He is persistent in fighting this law. And an attack like this doesn’t just happen. It takes at least two months for them before it leads to that day.”
The attackers were so bold that they rode up to him and threw acid in his face despite the visible presence of numerous surveillance cameras in the area.
One video that captures Mr. Andrie seconds after the ambush shows him jumping off his motorbike, ripping off his shirt and screaming in agony as a crowd quickly gathers. Doctors say he suffered severe chemical burns on his face, hands, neck and chest. His helmet and visor saved him from even more serious harm.
Doctors have operated on Mr. Andrie five times in an effort to save the sight in his right eye.
In a letter to the president, Mr. Andrie called on him to ensure that the trial of his accused attackers adheres to the principle of due process, free from “corrupt interests.”
“This case is not solely about me,” he concluded, “but about the state’s commitment to protecting its citizens and upholding the law fairly.”
Indonesia has a history of impunity in the handling of attacks on human rights activists and corruption fighters.
The assault on Mr. Andrie is similar to a 2017 acid attack against a leading anti-corruption investigator, Novel Baswedan. Two police officers were found guilty of splashing sulfuric acid in Mr. Novel’s face as they rode by on a motorbike. The attack left him blind in one eye and half-blind in the other.
Mr. Novel, a senior investigator for Indonesia’s respected Corruption Eradication Commission, has said he was never able to determine who was behind the attack but believes it was someone he investigated. The police officers were sentenced to 18 and 24 months.
Mr. Andrie’s case also recalled the 2004 murder of Munir Said Thalib, the Kontras founder. Mr. Munir, a prominent critic of the military, was poisoned with arsenic while flying from Jakarta to Amsterdam and died before the plane landed. An off-duty Garuda airline pilot was found guilty of planning the murder but allegations that the state intelligence agency was behind the killing were never fully investigated.
World
Tourist dies at luxury resort after cobra from snake show climbs up pants, bites him: police
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A German tourist has died after a venomous cobra featured in a snake show reportedly slithered up his pants and bit him on the leg, authorities said.
The freak accident occurred early April at a luxury resort destination in Egypt, according to the Bavarian State Police in Germany, which released details Monday.
“During the snake charmer’s performance, one of the snakes crawled into the trousers of a 57-year-old man, resulting in a bite to the German tourist’s leg,” officials said.
Police said the victim, whose identity was not released, was on vacation with two family members from the Unterallgäu region of Germany.
BILLIONAIRE’S DEATH AFTER SWALLOWING BEE RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT RARE CARDIAC REACTION
A King Cobra stis up freely while inside a building in April 2010. (Patrick Aventurier)
Authorities said the snake charmer event was part of a hotel entertainment program in the resort city of Hurghada, a popular Red Sea destination known for its upscale all-inclusive packages, as well as nearby desert and water excursions.
Two snakes, believed to be cobras, were used in the show, officials said.
Investigators indicated that it is not uncommon for performers to allow snakes to interact closely with audience members, as some of the snakes were reportedly placed around guests’ necks during the act.
However, during one segment of the performance, a snake reportedly bit the German tourist after crawling into his clothing.
“He subsequently exhibited clear symptoms of poisoning and required resuscitation,” officials said.
He reportedly died shortly after arriving at a local hospital.
LAW STUDENT KILLED BY ELEPHANT DURING VACATION TO THAILAND: OFFICIALS
Tourists swim in the Sunny Days Elpalacio beach in the Egyptian Red Sea resort city of Hurghada. (MOHAMED EL-SHAHED / AFP)
The results of a toxicological examination are still pending, Bavarian police said.
The investigation is being handled by Germany’s Memmingen Criminal Police Inspectorate under the direction of the Memmingen Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPPO).
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Tourists swimming at the Red Sea Egyptian resort of Hurghada on June 18, 2020 (KHALED DESOUKI/AFP)
Cobras are known for being highly venomous snakes. Their bite can lead to rapid respiratory failure and paralysis without prompt medical treatment.
Fox News Digital has reached out to MPPO for more information.
World
US appeals court rejects Trump’s immigration detention policy
In a 3-0 ruling, court says Trump administration misread a decades-old immigration law to justify mandatory detention.
A United States federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s practice of subjecting most people arrested in its immigration crackdown to mandatory detention without the opportunity to seek release on bond.
In a 3-0 ruling on Tuesday, a panel of the New York-based US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the administration relied on a novel but incorrect interpretation of a decades-old immigration law to justify the policy.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
Writing for the panel, US Circuit Judge Joseph F Bianco, a Trump appointee, warned that the government’s reading “would send a seismic shock through our immigration detention system and society”, straining already overcrowded facilities, separating families and disrupting communities.
Lawyers for the Trump administration say the mandatory detention policy is legal under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, passed in 1996.
But Bianco said the government had made “an attempt to muddy” the law’s “textually clear waters”, arguing that the administration’s interpretation “defies the statute’s context, structure, history, and purpose” and contradicts “longstanding executive branch practice”.
Under the Trump administration policy, the Department of Homeland Security last year took the position that non-citizens already living in the US, not just those arriving at the border, qualify as “applicants for admission” and are subject to mandatory detention.
Under federal immigration law, “applicants for admission” to the US are detained while their cases proceed in immigration courts and are ineligible for bond hearings.
The Department of Homeland Security has been denying bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country, including those who have been living in the US for years without any criminal history, the Associated Press (AP) news agency reports.
That is a departure from the practice under previous US administrations, when most non-citizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border were given the opportunity to request a bond while their cases moved through immigration court, according to AP.
In such cases, bonds were often granted to people who were deemed not to be flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to those who had just entered the country.
Amy Belsher, director of immigrants rights’ litigation at the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the appeals court ruling affirmed “that the Trump administration’s policy of detaining immigrants without any process is unlawful and cannot stand”.
“The government cannot mandatorily detain millions of noncitizens, many of whom have lived here for decades, without an opportunity to seek release. It defies the Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and basic human decency,” Belsher said in a statement.
Conflicting rulings set stage for Supreme Court review
The New York court’s decision comes after two other appeals courts ruled in favour of the Trump administration’s policy.
Acknowledging the opposing rulings, Judge Bianco said the panel was parting ways with them and instead aligning with more than 370 lower-court judges nationwide who have rejected the administration’s position as a misreading of the law.
The split among the courts increases the likelihood that the US Supreme Court will weigh in.
The latest ruling also upheld an order by a New York judge that led to the release of Brazilian national Ricardo Aparecido Barbosa da Cunha, who was arrested by immigration officials last year while driving to work after living in the US for more than 20 years.
“The court was right to conclude the Trump administration can’t just reinterpret the law at its own whim,” Michael Tan, a lawyer for Barbosa at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement.
The Department of Justice, which is defending the mandatory detention policy in court, did not respond to a request for comment.
-
Massachusetts20 seconds agoMassachusetts woman allegedly faked cancer death to avoid drunk driving, shoplifting charges
-
Minnesota6 minutes agoNHL announces start time for Dallas Stars/Minnesota Wild Game 6 on April 30 | Dallas Stars
-
Mississippi12 minutes agoMississippi Lottery Mississippi Match 5, Cash 3 results for April 28, 2026
-
Missouri18 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Mega Millions, Pick 3 winning numbers for April 28, 2026
-
Montana24 minutes agoBring your Treasures to the Montana Appraisal Fair in Billings
-
Nebraska30 minutes agoLincoln Marathon to affect City Campus traffic, parking this weekend
-
Nevada36 minutes agoNevada first responders receive autism training to improve emergency response
-
New Hampshire42 minutes agoPortsmouth Children’s Day Set For Sunday In Downtown With Block Party, Activities