GENEVA: United Nations human rights experts say Russia violated international law by imprisoning Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and should release him “immediately.”
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, made up of independent experts convened by the UN’s top human rights body, said there was a “striking lack of any factual or legal substantiation” for spying charges leveled against Gershkovich, 32.
The five-member group said Gershkovich’s United States nationality has been a factor in his detention, and as a result the case against him was discriminatory.
Matthew Gillett, the working group’s chair, said its opinion was grounded in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was adopted in 1966 and nearly all UN member countries have ratified.
“The covenant is something that Russia has freely signed up to and accepted the obligations under, and therefore as a matter of international law, it is obliged to implement the provisions of the covenant,” he said in an interview.
Gillett said Russia should provide Gershkovich “proper reparations” for holding him for over a year in detention without a legitimate basis.
Gershkovich went on trial behind closed doors on Wednesday in the Russian city Yekaterinburg, where he was arrested on March 29, 2023, while on a reporting trip on espionage charges that he, his employer and the US government vehemently deny.
The UN group said in its findings that because the detention of Gershkovich was arbitrary, no trial should take place. The group cannot compel any response from Russia, and is mandated to look into cases in which countries violate international commitments that they make.
“Taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release Mr. Gershkovich immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law,” the United Nations group said.
Almar Latour, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, commended the UN panel and said: “Evan’s wrongful detention is a flagrant violation of his fundamental human rights.”
“As the UN working group recognizes, Russia is violating international law by imprisoning Evan for his journalism, silencing critical reporting, and depriving him of due process and other rights,” Latour said, calling on the US and world leaders “to do everything they can to bring Evan home now.”
Gershkovich, the US-born son of immigrants from the USSR, is the first Western journalist arrested on espionage charges in post-Soviet Russia. Russian authorities, without presenting evidence, claimed he was gathering secret information for the United States.
He faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted, which is almost a certainty since Russian courts convict more than 99 percent of the defendants who come before them.
The State Department has declared Gershkovich “wrongfully detained,” thereby committing the government to assertively seek his release.
Russia has signaled the possibility of a prisoner swap involving Gershkovich, but it says a verdict — which could take months — would have to come first.
UN experts say Russia violated international law by imprisoning Wall Street Journal reporter
https://arab.news/vvwsa
UN experts say Russia violated international law by imprisoning Wall Street Journal reporter
- Russia should provide Evan Gershkovich ‘proper reparations’ for holding him for over a year in detention without a legitimate basis
- Wall Street Journal reporter went on trial behind closed doors in Yekaterinburg, where he was arrested on March 29, 2023
Pro-Gaza candidates dent Labour’s UK election victory
- Senior Labour figure Ashworth loses seat
- Four pro-Gaza independents beat Labour to win seats
The party, which has long counted on the backing of Muslim and other minority groups, saw its vote fall on average by 10 points in seats where more than 10 percent of the population identify as Muslim.
Jonathan Ashworth, who had been expected to serve in Keir Starmer’s Labour government, lost his seat to independent Shockat Adam, one of at least four pro-Gaza candidates to win. Several other Labour candidates came close to losing.
“This is for the people of Gaza,” Adam said, holding up a Palestinian keffiyeh scarf at the end of his acceptance speech on winning in the Leicester South constituency.
Pro-Gaza independents also won in Blackburn, and Dewsbury & Batley, beating Labour into second in both. Labour also failed to win in Islington North, where its former leader, veteran left-winger and ardent pro-Palestinian activist Jeremy Corbyn won as an independent.
While Labour has said it wants the fighting in Gaza to stop, it has also backed Israel’s right to defend itself, angering some among the 3.9 million Muslims who make up 6.5 percent of Britain’s population.
Starmer has faced criticism for only gradually shifting toward calling for a ceasefire. While the party has committed to recognizing a Palestinian state, it has not set out a definitive timetable for doing so.
A Savanta poll last month found that 44 percent of Muslim voters ranked the conflict as one of the top five issues and, of those, 86 percent said they would consider backing an independent running on the issue. “The Muslim Vote” campaign called on voters to pick pro-Palestine candidates running as independents or from smaller parties like the left-wing Workers Party, which put up over 150 candidates. There were 230 more independent candidates than at the last election in 2019.
The Workers Party’s outspoken leader George Galloway won a by-election in March for a vacant parliamentary seat in Rochdale, which has a big Muslim population, after Labour withdrew support from its candidate over a recording espousing conspiracy theories about Israel.
Labour won the seat back from Galloway on Friday.
Other Labour lawmakers only just held on to their seats, as they were challenged by pro-Gaza candidates.
Wes Streeting, Labour’s health chief and a senior member of the party, won by just 528 votes over British-Palestinian Leanne Mohamad in Ilford North.
Jess Philipps beat the Workers Party candidate Jody McIntire by just 693 votes and then struggled to give a speech amid booing and jeering by pro-Palestinian activists.
Philipps was one of several of leader Keir Starmer’s “shadow cabinet” to leave their high-profile policy roles over the party’s Gaza policies.
Keir Starmer: Who is the UK’s new PM and what has he promised?
- Starmer faces immediate tests with few resources, slow change could shorten ‘honeymoon period’
- Former lawyer is known for his cautious approach, on campaign trail, Starmer was keen not to raise high hopes
LONDON: Keir Starmer enters power with one of the longest lists of problems ever to face an incoming prime minister and few resources to deal with them — a situation that could curtail any “honeymoon period” offered by the British people.
It is a situation not lost on the 61-year-old Labour leader and former lawyer, who spent much of the election campaign listening to voters’ concerns about health care, education, and the cost of living, but promising only to try to make the lives of British voters a little better — over time.
“I’m not going to stand here and say there’s some magic wand that I can wave the day after the election and find money that isn’t there,” he said in a head-to-head debate with his predecessor Rishi Sunak before the election. “Huge damage has been done to our economy. It is going to take time.”
It is not an easy sell.
Despite being on course for a massive majority in the parliamentary election, many voters are disenchanted with politicians after years of what became an increasingly chaotic and scandal-ridden Conservative government and what was an often divided Labour opposition, dogged antisemitism accusations.
Hailing his party’s victory at a speech to supporters, Starmer said on Friday: “We did it. Change begins now, and it feels good. I have to be honest.”
“Today, we start the next chapter, begin the work of change, the mission of national renewal and start to rebuild our country.”
Starmer says he leads a changed Labour Party, having instilled a sense of discipline after it all but tore itself apart during the Brexit years under his predecessor, veteran left-winger Jeremy Corbyn.
That message dominated the six-week campaign, with no really new policy offerings beyond those which had been, according to Labour, fully funded and costed. He has tried not to raise hopes for swift change too high, putting wealth creation and political and economic stability at the heart of his pitch to voters.
CAUTIOUS AND METHODICAL
The strategy is very much a product of Starmer, who turned to politics in his 50s in a career that has been marked by a cautious and methodical approach, relying on competence and pragmatism rather than being driven by an overriding ideology.
Named after the founder of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, Starmer was brought up in a left-wing household. As a barrister, he often defended underdogs and worked to get people off death row around the world.
He became a Labour lawmaker in 2015, a year after he received a knighthood for his services to law and criminal justice and was appointed Labour leader in 2020 following the party’s worst election showing since 1935.
He implemented a plan to turn the party around and guide its priorities, with one person who worked with Starmer saying: “He thinks about the best way to take people with him.”
This approach has led to the charge that he is dull. He has drawn negative comparisons with Tony Blair, who led the party to victory with a landslide majority in 1997.
“I think he’s got a good heart but he’s got no charisma. And people do buy charisma. That’s how Tony Blair got in,” said Valerie Palmer, 80, a voter in the seaside town of Clacton-on-Sea.
NOT IN LOVE WITH LABOUR
Unwilling to make promises that could not be costed, his approach has also prompted critics to say the party’s manifesto offered only a partial view of what Labour would do in government — something the Conservatives tried to capitalize on by saying Starmer would raise taxes.
Starmer denied this, saying he would not raise income tax rates, employees’ national insurance contributions, value-added tax or corporation tax.
Some businesses say they look forward to a period of calm after 14 years of turbulent Conservative government, marked by Britain’s vote to leave the European Union in 2016 and the cost of living crisis that followed the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
One FTSE-100 CEO told Reuters they had met Labour’s top team several times and the party had made a strong “pitch” to business.
Laura Foll, portfolio manager at Janus Henderson Investors, said it looked like Britain was returning to an era when “boring is good.”
But for voters, real-life difficulties are more of a pressing concern, with people crying out for Labour to tackle the ailing health service, widen educational opportunities and improve living standards.
For some, although they wanted the Conservatives out of power, they had not fallen in love with Labour, or with Starmer.
“I’m excited about change, but I don’t really love the Labour Party,” said Ellie O’Connell, 28, at the Glastonbury music festival.
Sitting in the courtyard of a doctors’ surgery, Starmer sipped tea with patients before the election, listening to them complain about how difficult it was to get an appointment.
His offer of helping train more doctors, reducing bureaucracy and getting better control over budgets missed out one thing that might help — more money, something his new government will not have much of.
Asked by Reuters how he would better retain doctors who say their salaries are uncompetitive internationally, he said: “I don’t have a wand that I can wave to fix all the problems when it comes to salaries overnight if we win the election.”
With only 9 billion pounds ($11 billion) of so-called fiscal headroom — barely a third of the average for governments since 2010 — Starmer might have to keep pressing the message that change will take time.
That may cut short any political honeymoon — the respite voters and newspapers offer incoming administrations from criticism.
This cautious approach has also alienated some on the left of the party. Asked how he thought Starmer would be as prime minister, James Schneider, former director of communications for Corbyn, said: “When push comes to shove, he will be on the side of bosses over workers.”
India’s Modi heads to Moscow for first visit since Ukraine invasion
- Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India, but its isolation from West and growing friendship with China have impacted partnership with New Delhi
- The United States and its Western allies have in recent years cultivated ties with India as a bulwark against Beijing and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific region
MUMBAI: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday makes his first visit to Russia since the invasion of Ukraine, walking a fine line between maintaining a longstanding Moscow alliance while courting closer Western security ties.
Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India, but its isolation from the West and growing friendship with China have impacted its time-honored partnership with New Delhi.
The United States and its Western allies have in recent years cultivated ties with India as a bulwark against Beijing and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific, while also pressuring it to distance itself from Russia.
Modi, who was returned to power last month as leader of the world’s most populous country, last visited Russia in 2019 and hosted President Vladimir Putin in New Delhi two years later, weeks before the invasion.
Russia’s war in Ukraine has “transformed” ties with India, said Swasti Rao, from a think tank funded by India’s defense ministry, the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyzes.
“There is no decline in goodwill between India and Russia per se,” she said. “But there are challenges that have cropped up.
“These are external factors, which have been strong enough to bring in a paradigm shift in India-Russia bilateral issues,” she added.
Nandan Unnikrishnan of the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation said the upcoming in-person meeting showed the two sides were looking for ways forward.
“There have been pressures on India, and there have been pressures on the India-Russia relationship,” Unnikrishnan said.
“Face-to-face interactions help in working out positions,” he added. “I’m sure Mr.Modi would like an assessment from Putin on the Ukraine war.”
New Delhi has shied away from explicit condemnation of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and has abstained on United Nations resolutions censuring Moscow.
But Russia’s war in Ukraine has also had a human cost for India.
New Delhi said in February it was pushing Russia to release some of its citizens who had signed up for “support jobs” with the Russian military, following reports some were killed after being forced to fight in Ukraine.
Moscow’s deepening ties with Beijing have also raised concerns for New Delhi.
China and India, the world’s two most populous nations, are intense rivals competing for strategic influence across South Asia.
India is part of the Quad grouping with the United States, Japan and Australia that positions itself against China’s growing assertiveness in the Asia-Pacific region.
The United States and the European Union accuse China of selling components and equipment that have strengthened Russia’s military industry — allegations Beijing strenuously denies.
That leaves India with a dilemma.
Their “relationship has to evolve,” said Rao.
“Some say India should strongly engage with Russia so it doesn’t fall into the lap of China,” said Rao. “Others would say, that ship has sailed.”
New Delhi and Moscow have forged a tight relationship since the Cold War, and Russia was for a long time India’s biggest arms supplier.
But Ukraine has stretched Russia’s arms supplies, and India is eyeing other sources — including growing its own defense industry.
Russia’s share of Indian imports of weapons has shrunk considerably in recent years, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
It dropped from 76 percent in 2009-13 to 36 percent in 2019-23, SIPRI said, noting France is now a close second, providing 33 percent.
“India has instead looked to Western suppliers, most notably France and the USA, and its own arms industry,” SIPRI said, adding that its arms procurement plans “seemingly do not include any Russian options.”
Rao said the Ukraine war had “accelerated” India’s push to diversify its defense purchases.
“The Ukraine war has become one of grinding attrition,” she said.
“There are genuine concerns about Russia’s export capabilities, and its focus and priorities.”
At the same time, India has also become a major buyer of discounted Russian oil, providing a much-needed export market for Moscow after it was cut off from traditional buyers in Europe.
That has dramatically reshaped energy ties, with India saving itself billions of dollars while bolstering Moscow’s war coffers.
India’s month-on-month imports of Russian crude “increased by eight percent in May, to the highest levels since July 2023,” according to commodity tracking data compiled by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
“Russian crude comprised 41 percent of India’s total crude imports in May, and with new agreements in place to conduct payments in rubles, the trade might grow significantly,” the research center said.
But this has also resulted in India’s trade deficit with Russia rising to a little over $57 billion in the past financial year.
From Moscow, Modi will travel to Vienna for the first visit to the Austrian capital by an Indian leader since Indira Gandhi in 1983.
India’s Modi heads to Moscow for first visit since Ukraine invasion
- Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India
- Modi last visited Russia in 2019 and hosted President Vladimir Putin in New Delhi two years later
MUMBAI: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday makes his first visit to Russia since the invasion of Ukraine, walking a fine line between maintaining a longstanding Moscow alliance while courting closer Western security ties.
Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India, but its isolation from the West and growing friendship with China have impacted its time-honored partnership with New Delhi.
The United States and its Western allies have in recent years cultivated ties with India as a bulwark against Beijing and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific, while also pressuring it to distance itself from Russia.
Modi, who was returned to power last month as leader of the world’s most populous country, last visited Russia in 2019 and hosted President Vladimir Putin in New Delhi two years later, weeks before the invasion.
Russia’s war in Ukraine has “transformed” ties with India, said Swasti Rao, from a think tank funded by India’s defense ministry, the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyzes.
“There is no decline in goodwill between India and Russia per se,” she said. “But there are challenges that have cropped up.
“These are external factors, which have been strong enough to bring in a paradigm shift in India-Russia bilateral issues,” she added.
Nandan Unnikrishnan of the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation said the upcoming in-person meeting showed the two sides were looking for ways forward.
“There have been pressures on India, and there have been pressures on the India-Russia relationship,” Unnikrishnan said.
“Face-to-face interactions help in working out positions,” he added. “I’m sure Mr.Modi would like an assessment from Putin on the Ukraine war.”
New Delhi has shied away from explicit condemnation of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and has abstained on United Nations resolutions censuring Moscow.
But Russia’s war in Ukraine has also had a human cost for India.
New Delhi said in February it was pushing Russia to release some of its citizens who had signed up for “support jobs” with the Russian military, following reports some were killed after being forced to fight in Ukraine.
Moscow’s deepening ties with Beijing have also raised concerns for New Delhi.
China and India, the world’s two most populous nations, are intense rivals competing for strategic influence across South Asia.
India is part of the Quad grouping with the United States, Japan and Australia that positions itself against China’s growing assertiveness in the Asia-Pacific region.
The United States and the European Union accuse China of selling components and equipment that have strengthened Russia’s military industry — allegations Beijing strenuously denies.
That leaves India with a dilemma.
Their “relationship has to evolve,” said Rao.
“Some say India should strongly engage with Russia so it doesn’t fall into the lap of China,” said Rao. “Others would say, that ship has sailed.”
New Delhi and Moscow have forged a tight relationship since the Cold War, and Russia was for a long time India’s biggest arms supplier.
But Ukraine has stretched Russia’s arms supplies, and India is eyeing other sources — including growing its own defense industry.
Russia’s share of Indian imports of weapons has shrunk considerably in recent years, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
It dropped from 76 percent in 2009-13 to 36 percent in 2019-23, SIPRI said, noting France is now a close second, providing 33 percent.
“India has instead looked to Western suppliers, most notably France and the USA, and its own arms industry,” SIPRI said, adding that its arms procurement plans “seemingly do not include any Russian options.”
Rao said the Ukraine war had “accelerated” India’s push to diversify its defense purchases.
“The Ukraine war has become one of grinding attrition,” she said.
“There are genuine concerns about Russia’s export capabilities, and its focus and priorities.”
At the same time, India has also become a major buyer of discounted Russian oil, providing a much-needed export market for Moscow after it was cut off from traditional buyers in Europe.
That has dramatically reshaped energy ties, with India saving itself billions of dollars while bolstering Moscow’s war coffers.
India’s month-on-month imports of Russian crude “increased by eight percent in May, to the highest levels since July 2023,” according to commodity tracking data compiled by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
“Russian crude comprised 41 percent of India’s total crude imports in May, and with new agreements in place to conduct payments in rubles, the trade might grow significantly,” the research center said.
But this has also resulted in India’s trade deficit with Russia rising to a little over $57 billion in the past financial year.
From Moscow, Modi will travel to Vienna for the first visit to the Austrian capital by an Indian leader since Indira Gandhi in 1983.
Britain’s Labour Party has won enough seats to have majority in UK Parliament
- Britain’s exit poll is conducted by pollster Ipsos and asks people at polling stations to fill out a replica ballot showing how they have voted
- Labour’s apparent victory comes against a gloomy backdrop of economic malaise, mounting distrust in institutions and a fraying social fabric
LONDON: Britain’s Labour Party headed for a landslide victory Friday in a parliamentary election, an exit poll and partial returns indicated, as voters punished the governing Conservatives after 14 years of economic and political upheaval.
As the sun rose, official results showed Labour had 326 of the 650 seats, as vote counting continued. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak had already acknowledged the defeat and said he called center-left Labour’s leader Keir Starmer to congratulate him on becoming the country’s next prime minister.
Starmer will face a jaded electorate impatient for change against a gloomy backdrop of economic malaise, mounting distrust in institutions and a fraying social fabric.
“Tonight people here and around the country have spoken, and they’re ready for change,” Starmer told supporters in his constituency in north London, as the official count showed he’d won his seat. “You have voted. It is now time for us to deliver.”
As thousands of electoral staff tallied millions of ballot papers at counting centers across the country, the Conservatives absorbed the shock of a historic defeat that would leave the depleted party in disarray and likely spark a contest to replace Sunak as leader.
“Nothing has gone well in the last 14 years,” said London voter James Erskine, who was optimistic for change in the hours before polls closed. “I just see this as the potential for a seismic shift, and that’s what I’m hoping for.”
While the result tallied so far suggest Britain will buck recent rightward electoral shifts in Europe, including in France and Italy, many of those same populist undercurrents flow in the country. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has roiled the race with his party’s anti-immigrant “take our country back” sentiment and undercut support for the Conservatives, who already faced dismal prospects.
The exit poll suggested it was on course to win about 410 seats in the 650-seat House of Commons and the Conservatives 131.
With more than half of the official results in, the broad picture of a Labour landslide was borne out, though estimates of the final tally varied. The BBC projected that Labour would end up with 410 seats and the Conservatives with 144. Even that higher tally for the Tories would leave the party with its fewest seats in its nearly two-century history and cause disarray.
“It’s clear tonight that Britain will have a new government in the morning,” said soon-to-be former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps after losing his seat — one of a clutch of Conservative Cabinet ministers who went down to defeat.
In a sign of the volatile public mood and anger at the system, some smaller parties appeared to have done well, including the centrist Liberal Democrats and Reform UK. Farage won his race in the seaside town of Clacton-on-Sea, securing a seat in Parliament on his eighth attempt.
A key unknown remained whether Farage’s hard-right party could convert its success in grabbing attention into more than a handful of seats in Parliament.
Britons vote on paper ballots, marking their choice in pencil, that are then counted by hand. Final results are expected later Friday morning.
Britain has experienced a run of turbulent years — some of it of the Conservatives’ own making and some of it not — that has left many voters pessimistic about their country’s future. The UK’s exit from the European Union followed by the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine battered the economy, while lockdown-breaching parties held by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his staff caused widespread anger.
Johnson’s successor, Liz Truss, rocked the economy further with a package of drastic tax cuts and lasted just 49 days in office. Rising poverty and cuts to state services have led to gripes about “Broken Britain.”
Hundreds of communities were locked in tight contests in which traditional party loyalties come second to more immediate concerns about the economy, crumbling infrastructure and the National Health Service.
In Henley-on-Thames, about 40 miles (65 kilometers) west of London, voters like Patricia Mulcahy, who is retired, sensed the nation was looking for something different. The community, which normally votes Conservative, may change its stripes this time.
“The younger generation are far more interested in change,’’ Mulcahy said. “So, I think whatever happens in Henley, in the country, there will be a big shift. But whoever gets in, they’ve got a heck of a job ahead of them. It’s not going to be easy.”
Anand Menon, professor of European Politics and Foreign Affairs at King’s College London, said British voters were about to see a marked change in political atmosphere from the tumultuous “politics as pantomime” of the last few years.
“I think we’re going to have to get used again to relatively stable government, with ministers staying in power for quite a long time, and with government being able to think beyond the very short term to medium-term objectives,” he said.
Labour has not set pulses racing with its pledges to get the sluggish economy growing, invest in infrastructure and make Britain a “clean energy superpower.”
But nothing really went wrong in its campaign, either. The party has won the support of large chunks of the business community and endorsements from traditionally conservative newspapers, including the Rupert Murdoch-owned Sun tabloid, which praised Starmer for “dragging his party back to the center ground of British politics.”
The Conservatives, meanwhile, have been plagued by gaffes. The campaign got off to an inauspicious start when rain drenched Sunak as he made the announcement outside 10 Downing St. Then, Sunak went home early from commemorations in France marking the 80th anniversary of the D-Day invasion.
Several Conservatives close to Sunak are being investigated over suspicions they used inside information to place bets on the date of the election before it was announced.
Sunak has struggled to shake off the taint of political chaos and mismanagement that’s gathered around the Conservatives.
But for many voters, the lack of trust applies not just to the governing party, but to politicians in general.
“I don’t know who’s for me as a working person,” said Michelle Bird, a port worker in Southampton on England’s south coast who was undecided about whether to vote Labour or Conservative in the days before the elections. “I don’t know whether it’s the devil you know or the devil you don’t.”
