MIAMI: A prominent human rights attorney has quietly parted ways with the International Criminal Court to protest what he sees as an unjustified failure of its chief prosecutor to indict members of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro ‘s government for crimes against humanity, The Associated Press has learned.
The Chilean-born Claudio Grossman, a former law school dean at American University in Washington and past president of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, was appointed special adviser to ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan in November 2021. In that unpaid position, he advised Khan on the deteriorating human rights situation in Venezuela.
In a harshly worded email last month to Khan, Grossman said his ethical standards no longer allow him to stand by silently as Maduro’s government continues to commit abuses, expel foreign diplomats and obstruct the work of human rights monitors from the United Nations — without any action from the ICC.
“I can no longer justify the choice not to take correspondingly serious action against the perpetrators of the grave violations,” Grossman wrote in an email rejecting an offer by Khan’s office in September to renew his contract.
A copy of the email, which has not been made public, was provided to the AP by someone familiar with the ICC investigation into Venezuela. A phone call by Khan asking Grossman to reconsider also failed, according to the person on the condition of anonymity to discuss the politically sensitive investigation.
Following AP’s inquiries with Khan’s office, Grossman’s name was removed from the court’s website listing him as a special adviser.
“The Prosecutor is extremely grateful to Professor Grossman for the expertise and work he has rendered,” the prosecutor’s office said in a statement without addressing Grossman’s stated reasons for cutting ties with the court based in The Hague, Netherlands. Grossman declined to comment.
The pressure on Khan to indict Venezuelan officials, including Maduro himself, comes as he battles allegations of misconduct with a female aide and the threat of US sanctions over his decision to seek the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for alleged war crimes in Gaza.
The Rome Statute that established the court took effect in 2002, with a mandate to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide — but only when domestic courts fail to initiate their own investigations.
Calls for faster progress in the court’s only ever investigation in Latin America have grown louder as Maduro tightens his grip on power, preparing to be sworn in for a third term Jan. 10 following an election marred by serious allegations of ballot box fraud and a post-election crackdown. More than 2,000 people were arrested and 20 killed following the vote.
The US and even some fellow leftist leaders in Latin America have demanded authorities present voting records, as they have in the past, to refute tally sheets presented by Maduro’s opponents showing their candidate, Edmundo González, prevailed by a two-to-one margin.
Many in Venezuela’s opposition have complained that the ICC is applying a double standard, moving aggressively to seek the arrest of Netanyahu and Russia’s Vladimir Putin for atrocities in Gaza and Ukraine while showing undue leniency with Venezuelan officials Khan has been investigating for more than three years.
“There is no justification whatsoever for the inaction,” González and opposition leader María Corina Machado wrote in a recent letter to Grossman and 18 other special advisers to the court appealing for their help.
“What is at stake is the life and well-being of Venezuelans,” they added in the letter, which was also provided to the AP by the person familiar with the ICC investigation. “This unjustifiable delay will cast legitimate doubts about the integrity of a system of accountability that has been an aspiration for the whole world.”
At the request of several Latin American governments, Khan three years ago opened an investigation into Venezuelan security forces’ jailing, torture and killing of anti-government demonstrators. At the same time, he promised technical assistance to give local authorities an opportunity to take action before the ICC, a tribunal of last resort.
Earlier this month, Khan delivered some of his harshest comments to date about the human rights situation in Venezuela, warning that officials’ repeated promises to investigate alleged abuses “cannot be a never-ending story.”
“I have not seen the concrete implementation of laws and practices in Venezuela that I hoped for,” he said in a speech at ICC headquarters. “The ball is in Venezuela’s court. The track of complementarity is running out of road.”
Maduro’s government, in response, said in a statement that it “deeply regrets that the prosecutor is being led astray by campaigns that have emerged on social networks promoted by the extreme right, Zionism and Western powers seeking to apply legal colonialism against Venezuela.”
Some Venezuelan critics have linked what they view as foot-dragging to a potential conflict of interest involving Khan’s sister-in-law, international criminal lawyer Venkateswari Alagendra, who has appeared on behalf of the Venezuelan government in two hearings before the court.
An ICC code of conduct directs prosecutors to abstain from any conflicts that may arise from “personal interest in the case, including a spousal, parental or other close family, personal or professional relationship with any of the parties.” Alagendra has previously worked with Khan and his wife defending Seif Al-Islam Qaddafi, the son of the Libyan dictator, at the ICC.
Khan’s office declined to comment about the relationship. But in a filing this month seeking dismissal of a request for recusal filed by the Washington-based Arcadia Foundation, he said a sister-in-law is not a close enough personal relationship requiring automatic disqualification and that he doesn’t recall ever discussing the Venezuela probe with Alagendra, who is just one of several attorneys defending the South American government.
“No fair minded and informed observer would conclude that there is a real possibility of bias,” Khan wrote, adding that he continues to actively and independently investigate the situation in Venezuela.
Those claiming to be victims of the Maduro government have pushed for the court to wrap up its investigation without taking a position on whether Khan should be recused.
After millions of Venezuelans have fled Maduro’s rule, many for neighboring countries, regional governments are also anxiously awaiting progress.
“Many in Latin America expect the ICC prosecutor to have a more muscular response,” said Juan Papier, deputy director for the Americas at Human Rights Watch. “The prosecutor’s office has spent too much time, so far fruitlessly, trying to work with Venezuela authorities to push for domestic investigations. Widespread impunity and lack of judicial independence in Venezuela make the ICC the most viable path for justice.”
Prominent human rights attorney quits international court over failure to prosecute Venezuela
https://arab.news/894re
Prominent human rights attorney quits international court over failure to prosecute Venezuela
- Grossman said his ethical standards no longer allow him to stand by silently as Maduro’s government
Trump issues orders to promote school choice, end “anti-American” teaching
- Order prioritizes federal funding for school choice programs
- Second order aims to block federal funding related to “gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology” in schools
President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed executive orders to promote parental choice in school selection and end federal funding for curricula that he called the “indoctrination” of students in “anti-American” ideologies on race and gender.
The two directives, which come a week after Trump was sworn into his second term of office, are in keeping with his campaign promise to remake the country’s education system in line with a rigorous conservative agenda that Democrats say could undermine public schools.
The first order directs the Department of Education to issue guidance on how states can use federal education funds to support “choice initiatives,” without providing further details.
“It is the policy of my Administration to support parents in choosing and directing the upbringing and education of their children,” the president said in the order. “Too many children do not thrive in their assigned, government-run K-12 school.”
His second directive aims to stop schools from using federal funds for curriculum, teacher certification and other purposes related to “gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology.”
“In recent years, however, parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight,” it reads.
Trump and his allies throughout the campaign have accused public schools of teaching white children to be ashamed of themselves and their ancestors due to the country’s history of slavery and discrimination against people of color.
The second order, without evidence, claims that teachers have been “demanding acquiescence” to concepts of “white privilege” or “unconscious bias” and thereby promoting racism and undermining national unity.
The executive order will have a “chilling effect” on subjects related to race and ethnicity in schools, said Basil Smikle Jr., a political strategist.
“I would imagine that it would restrict the kind of reading materials that are even available to students outside of the classroom,” he said.
Although that order does not invoke the term “critical race theory” by name, it employs the language often used by CRT opponents to criticize teaching about institutional racism.
A once-obscure academic concept, the theory has become a fixture in the fierce US debate over how to teach children about the country’s history and structural racism. An academic framework most often taught in law schools but not in primary and secondary schools, it rests on the premise that racial bias — intentional or not — is baked into US laws and institutions.
Conservatives have invoked the term to denounce curricula they consider too liberal or excessively focused on America’s history of racial discrimination. Supporters say understanding institutional racism is necessary to address inequality.
Christina Greer, an associate professor of political science at Fordham University, said the order came as no surprise.
“As a candidate, he said there was radical indoctrination of students,” she said. “He’s making sure to frighten students and educators across the country so they can’t teach the real history of the United States.”
It was not clear how the order issued on Wednesday would affect how the history of race relations is taught in American schools. During his inaugural address last week, Trump criticized education that “teaches our children to be ashamed of themselves — in many cases, to hate our country.”
SCHOOL CHOICE
The first order also directs the US Department of Education to prioritize federal funding for school choice programs, a longstanding goal for conservatives who say public schools are failing to meet academic standards while pushing liberal ideas.
Many Democrats and teachers’ unions, on the other hand, say school choice undermines the public system that educates 50 million US children.
Federal test scores released by the National Assessment of Educational Progress on Wednesday underscored the challenge faced by educators in the wake of widespread learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The scores showed that one-third of eighth graders tested below NAEP’s “basic” reading level, the most in the test’s three-decade history, while some 40 percent of fourth-graders also fell below that basic threshold.
That executive order also directs US states on how they could use block grants to support alternatives to public education, such as private and religious schools.
US education is primarily funded via states and local taxes, with federal sources accounting for about 14 percent of the funding of public K-12 schools, according to Census data.
Trump’s order could affect some $30 billion to $40 billion in federal grants, estimated Frederick Hess, an education expert at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute.
“This stuff is directionally significant,” said Hess, adding that Trump’s directive represented “the most emphatic support for school choice we’ve ever seen at the federal level.”
The first order also calls for allowing military families to use Pentagon funds to send their children to the school of their choosing. It also mandates that Native American families with students in the Bureau of Indian Education be allowed to use federal funds in selecting their schools.
A number of Republican-leaning states have in recent years adopted universal or near-universal school choice policies, paving the way for vouchers or other methods that allocate taxpayer funds for homeschooling or private tuition.
Josh Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University, said that Trump’s executive order is aimed at sending “an aggressive statement about his position on vouchers” even if his power to reallocate funds is limited.
Cowen said the bigger potential financial impact on education lies with a bill reintroduced in Congress this week that would create a federal school voucher program with an estimated $10 billion in annual tax credits.
Rohingya refugees stranded on boat off Indonesia
- Authorities block migrants from disembarking at tourist beach ‘in case they escape’
JAKARTA: At least 75 Rohingya refugees including four children were stranded aboard a migrant boat off the coast of western Indonesia on Wednesday after authorities blocked them from landing at a tourist beach.
Security officers prevented the Rohingya from disembarking at Leuge beach in Aceh province and ordered them to stay aboard the boat. Police were deployed to monitor the beach, while local residents took photos of the boat and provided the refugees with food.
“For now, they are not allowed to disembark, considering today is a public holiday. Many tourist activities are taking place ... there are concerns that they might blend in with the crowd and escape,” local official Rizalihadi said.
“The temporary policy is for them to remain on the boat while waiting for representatives from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration to arrive.”
The Muslim minority Rohingya are persecuted in Myanmar, and thousands risk their lives each year on long and dangerous sea journeys to Malaysia or Indonesia.
Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
WASHINGTON: Meta has agreed to pay $25 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against the company after it suspended his accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, according to three people familiar with the matter.
It’s the latest instance of a large corporation settling litigation with the president, who has threatened retribution on his critics and rivals, and comes as Meta and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, have joined other large technology companies in trying to ingratiate themselves with the new Trump administration.
The people familiar with the matter spoke on the condition of anonymity Wednesday to discuss the agreement. Two people said that terms of the agreement include $22 million going to the nonprofit that will become Trump’s future presidential library and the balance going to legal fees and other litigants.
Zuckerberg visited Trump in November at his private Florida club as part of a series of technology, business and government officials to make a pilgrimage to Palm Beach to try to mend fences with the incoming president. At the dinner, Trump brought up the litigation and suggested they try to resolve it, kickstarting two months of negotiations between the parties, the people said.
Meta also made a $1 million donation to Trump’s inaugural committee and Zuckerberg was among several billionaires granted prime seating during Trump’s swearing-in last week in the Capitol Rotunda, along with Google’s Sundar Pichai, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, who now owns the platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
Ahead of Trump’s inauguration, Meta also announced that it was dropping fact-checking on its platform — a longtime priority of Trump and his allies.
Trump filed the suit months after leaving office, calling the action by the social media companies “illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”
Twitter, Facebook and Google are all private companies, and users must agree to their terms of service to use their products. Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.” The law also generally exempts Internet companies from liability for the material that users post.
But Trump and some other politicians have long argued that X, formerly known as Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms, have abused that protection and should lose their immunity — or at least have it curtailed.
The Meta settlement comes after ABC News agreed last month to pay $15 million toward Trump’s presidential library to settle a defamation lawsuit over anchor George Stephanopoulos’ inaccurate on-air assertion that the president-elect had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll.
The network also agreed to pay $1 million in legal fees to the law firm of Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito.
The settlement agreement describes ABC’s presidential library payment as a “charitable contribution,” with the money earmarked for a non-profit organization that is being established in connection with the yet-to-be-built library.
The Wall Street Journal was first to report on the settlement.
Trump officials discussing tightening curbs on Nvidia’s China sales, sources say
- Conversations to restrict shipments of those chips to China are in very early stages
US President Donald Trump’s administration is considering tightening restrictions on artificial intelligence leader Nvidia’s sales of its H20 chips designed for the China market, three people familiar with the matter said.
Conversations to restrict shipments of those chips to China are in very early stages among Trump officials, the people said, adding the idea has been under consideration since Democratic former President Joe Biden’s administration. H20 chips can be used to run AI software and were designed to comply with existing US curbs on shipments to China, spearheaded by Biden.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment. Nvidia said in a statement it is “ready to work with the administration as it pursues its own approach to AI.”
Nvidia shares, which were already down for the day, added slightly to losses after the news, first reported by Bloomberg.
Worries are mounting that China is catching up to the US in AI development after China’s DeepSeek
last week launched a free assistant
it says uses less data at a fraction of the cost of incumbent players’ models, possibly marking a turning point in the level of investment needed for AI.
“This topic has been discussed for more than half a year,” among high-level officials, said Lennart Heim, a researcher at RAND, saying it was a recommendation made during the Biden administration as well. “DeepSeek highlights it,” he added.
Biden, who left office this month, put in place a raft of restrictions barring exports of AI chips to China and capping their shipment to a host of other countries. However, some AI chips, including Nvidia’s H20 can still be lawfully shipped to China.
Trump White House rescinds memo freezing federal money after widespread confusion
- Although Trump had promised to turn Washington upside down if elected to a second term, the effects of his effort to pause funding were being felt far from the nation’s capital
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump’s budget office on Wednesday rescinded a memo freezing spending on federal loans and grants, less than two days after it sparked widespread confusion and legal challenges across the country.
The memo, which was issued Monday by the Office of Management and Budget, had frightened states, schools and organizations that rely on trillions of dollars from Washington.
Administration officials said the pause was necessary to review whether spending aligned with Trump’s executive orders on issues like climate change and diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
But on Wednesday, they sent out a two-sentence notice rescinding the original memo. The reversal was the latest sign that even with unified control of Washington, Trump’s plans to dramatically and rapidly reshape the government has limits.
Administration officials insisted that despite the confusion, their actions still had the intended effect by underscoring to federal agencies their obligations to abide by Trump’s executive orders.
“The Executive Orders issued by the President on funding reviews remain in full force and effect and will be rigorously implemented by all agencies and departments,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, blaming the confusion on the courts and news outlets, not the administration. “This action should effectively end the court case and allow the government to focus on enforcing the President’s orders on controlling federal spending.”
The White House’s change in direction caught Congress off guard, particularly Trump’s Republicans allies who had defended him throughout the brief saga.
“This is Donald Trump. He throws hand grenades in the middle of the room, and then cleans it up afterwards,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota. “I just think the guy’s a genius.”
Cramer acknowledged the initial memo may have generated too much political heat, with red and blue states raising alarms over the funding freeze. But the senator suggested Trump “maybe didn’t understand the breadth” of what had been proposed.
But Democrats said the White House had overreached beyond what Americans want.
“Most people voted for cheaper eggs,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico. “They did not vote for this chaos.”
The funding pause was scheduled to go into effect at 5 p.m. Tuesday. It was stayed by a federal judge until at least Monday after an emergency hearing requested by nonprofit groups that receive federal grants. An additional lawsuit by Democratic state attorneys general was also pending.
After the initial memo was distributed, federal agencies were directed to answer a series of yes or no questions about each program by Feb. 7. The questions included “does this program promote gender ideology?” and “does this program promote or support in any way abortion?”
Although Trump had promised to turn Washington upside down if elected to a second term, the effects of his effort to pause funding were being felt far from the nation’s capital. Organizations like Meals on Wheels, which receives federal money to deliver food to the elderly, were worried about getting cut off. Even temporary interruptions in funding could cause layoffs or delays in public services.
On Tuesday, Trump administration officials said programs that provide direct assistance to Americans, including Medicare, Social Security, student loans and food stamps, would not be affected.
However, they sometimes struggled to provide a clear picture. Leavitt initially would not say whether Medicaid was exempted from the freeze, but the administration later clarified that it was.
Democratic critics of the order moved swiftly to celebrate the memo’s rescinding.
“This is an important victory for the American people whose voices were heard after massive pressure from every corner of this country,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. She said Trump had “caused real harm and chaos for millions.”
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that “Americans fought back and Donald Trump backed off.”
