access

Fifa says “key documents” relating to president Gianni Infantino’s failed plan to sell off stakes in the World Cup to private investors will be made available to members of its council.

Last month, Uefa gave football’s world governing body until 2 November to release details about the hugely controversial Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal, and to answer a list of questions relating to its governance and decision-making.

That followed a council meeting at which Infantino apologised for the abandoned sell-off plot but failed to offer a full explanation for how the proposal was devised, asking that questions be submitted in writing.

Just hours before the deadline from European football’s governing body passed, Fifa secretary general Mattias Grafstrom wrote to members of its main decision-making body – saying they will be able to view “key documents”, but only in person at the organisation’s headquarters in Zurich.

In his letter – seen by BBC Sport – he says the paperwork will be available “under strict review protocols to preserve confidentiality”, with council members asked to register to see them within the next two weeks.

It is unclear which documents will be made available.

BBC Sport has been told Fifa viewed Uefa’s two-week deadline to respond to more than 100 questions as unfeasible, given their recent focus on organising a new youth World Cup in Azerbaijan and preparations for an extraordinary congress later this month.

Sources have also indicated Fifa’s ability to answer some questions is limited by legal action that Uefa launched in October in the US, requesting disclosure of evidence and documents, warning it could lodge a criminal complaint in Switzerland.

Last month, Uefa told Fifa that it had failed to address “a number of fundamental questions”.

The letter included eight pages of questions covering a number of issues, from FFE and funding to national associations, to the awarding of an inaugural Fifa Peace Prize to US President Donald Trump and the controversial suspended ban given to USA striker Folarin Balogun at the World Cup.

“The withdrawal of FFE, the acknowledgement of mistakes and the announcement of ‘potential governance reforms’ do not answer how the relevant decisions were taken or why the Fifa Council was not involved at the appropriate stage,” the letter said.

“These questions require answers now. They cannot be deferred until the next meeting of the Fifa Council – nor can future governance reforms substitute for scrutiny of decisions already taken and accountability for them.”

Uefa did not outline what steps it intended to take should Fifa not meet the deadline, but hoped it added to the pressure on Infantino before 18 November – the cut-off date for any candidates to confirm they are standing against him in next year’s presidential election.

In his letter Grafstrom says that Uefa’s demand “contains significantly more questions than the Fifa administration could reasonably have anticipated” and that it is “currently working on a response which we will share with all council members in due course.”

He adds that the FFE proposal “could not have proceeded without the cumulative and mandatory approval of the council, and a majority of member associations, and in that event, there would be and has been no penalty to Fifa for withdrawing from the proposal”.

Uefa has been approached for comment.

The plaintiffs argue they are losing access to vital information media outlets covering Trump used to provide.

A group of private citizens has sued the administration of United States President Donald Trump over its restrictions on news outlets covering the White House.

“All of the Plaintiffs rely on the White House press corps for independent reporting about the president and his administration, and all of them use that reporting in a variety of ways in their scholarship, teaching, journalism, or advocacy,” says the lawsuit, filed on Monday in a federal court in New York.

The lawsuit is the first lodged not by the news outlets being banned, but by those who consume the news and rely on it for their work.

The plaintiffs include a human rights advocate, a media watchdog, a university history professor, a high school teacher, a legal journalist and a student journalist.

Each argues they need unbiased, diverse media reporting from the White House to do their work.

“I’m gravely concerned that the Trump administration’s restrictions on White House reporters are cutting off access to crucial information,” Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a high school social studies teacher in New York City, said in a statement.

“I joined this lawsuit because my students deserve to know what’s happening in their government and to hear from a free and independent press.”

Trump already faces several legal challenges to his practice of banning journalists from outlets he dislikes from accessing the White House.

Last month, he banned journalists from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from attending news conferences at the White House. A federal judge later ruled the order was unconstitutional, a violation of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of the press, and ordered access be restored. However, the Trump administration continues to fight the ruling.

Last week, Trump dismissed reporting that he planned to evict journalists from the White House press briefing room and restore a swimming pool that was housed there starting in 1933. But he said he is still considering moving the press out of the briefing room.

“I am thinking about moving the Press, and putting them in a different location, but I will use that location for very badly needed space,” Trump said in a social media post.

Kenneth Roth, a senior fellow at Yale University and former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said the restrictions on press access were familiar postmarks in countries whose leaders have become authoritarian.

“Worldwide, I have seen how governmental leaders’ efforts to penalise independent journalists are a prelude to the rise of autocracy,” he said in a statement.

Demonstrators gathered on the sixth anniversary of a near-total abortion ban imposed by Poland’s highest court.

Thousands of people have protested in more than 20 towns and cities across Poland, calling for access to free and legal abortion services.

Demonstrators gathered on the sixth anniversary of a near-total abortion ban imposed by Poland’s highest court.

Currently, abortion is only legal in Poland when a pregnancy results from a criminal act like rape or incest, or when it threatens the life or health of the mother.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s government promised to liberalise abortion laws ahead of its 2023 election victory, but divisions within the coalition have slowed progress.

The demonstrations come days after parliament passed two bills that would ease abortion restrictions in the mostly Catholic country, but are likely to be vetoed by Poland’s conservative President Karol Nawrocki.

Passing the draft laws now, a year before the next parliamentary election, is a case of “token gestures” rather than a genuine effort to reform abortion law, said Zofia Marcinek of the Abortion Dream Team, a reproductive rights activist group in Warsaw.

She said the liberal government knew the draft laws stand no chance of withstanding Nawrocki’s veto, and has merely tried to create the impression of taking action because it needs women’s support to win elections next year.

In the capital, Warsaw, about 1,000 protesters demonstrated in front of parliament despite rain.

“Over the last six years, nothing has really changed,” said 36-year-old Emilia Niemiec, who manages the AboTak abortion centre, which provides women with access to resources, including pills, and a space to be able to seek support or carry out a pharmacological abortion.

Abortion laws tightened

Restrictive abortion laws have been in place in Poland since 1993, with Polish women leading calls for the legalisation of abortion ever since. In 2016, nationwide demonstrations took place, with women donning black as a sign of protest.

But rather than being relaxed, Poland’s abortion laws were tightened further, banning abortions of foetuses with congenital defects in 2020 under the national-conservative Law and Justice (PiS) government.

Despite the laws, abortions remain common in Poland, with the overwhelming majority carried out by women at home using pills obtained from outside the country. Women who undergo abortions, including by taking pills, do not face criminal responsibility under Polish law. But people helping them, including doctors and family, can potentially be prosecuted.

Polish hospitals performed 573 abortions in the first half of 2026, compared with 452 in the whole of 2022 before Tusk came to power, according to data from the National Health Fund. But activists say tens of thousands of abortions happen yearly outside of hospitals.

Campaigners organising Thursday’s protests are claiming the Tusk government has betrayed Polish women – and that Tusk’s claims that women’s access to abortion has improved during his administration have actually complicated getting care for some women.

“The government’s promises act as a type of disinformation,” Marcinek said. “Women getting pregnant hear the prime minister say that everything is OK, that there is access to abortion, and then they end up in the hospital and see that is not the case. So they come to us when it’s very late and very complicated and expensive to help them.”

US secretary of state says Ukraine has requested access to military-grade version of Starlink for strikes deep inside Russia.

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Starshield, the military-grade version of the Starlink satellite service, is currently unavailable to Ukraine, but a request from Kyiv to access the system for attacks deep inside Russia is “under discussion”.

Speaking to reporters on Saturday, Rubio stressed Starshield’s distinction with Starlink, the internet service provided by Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

“Starlink is a commercial product, okay? And so it’s regulated and handled as a commercial product. Starshield is a defence product, a military product,” said Rubio, in comments released by the Department of State.

“They’ve asked for access to it in order to conduct deep strikes inside of Russia. They do not have access to it at this moment,” he added. “That’s under conversation.”

Launched in 2022 and provided to the US government, Starshield is designed for military use as it allows for deeper encryption to process sensitive information. SpaceX says it is primarily used by US defence agencies and other “government partners”.

Last week, Ukrainian officials said restrictions on Starlink terminals had slowed some drones on the battlefield, as Ukraine tries to hold back Russian forces in their nearly five-year war.

In his comments at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland, Rubio also rejected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s suggestion that the reported disruption to Starlink services in Ukraine on Wednesday was deliberate.

“Well, I don’t know what Zelenskyy said. I’m not sure Zelenskyy knows what he’s talking about, but it wasn’t deliberate. We have nothing to do with that,” Rubio said.

Zelenskyy said on Saturday that the satellites are not tracking antennas on flying objects travelling faster than 161 kilometres per hour (100 miles per hour). This is affecting Ukrainian drones in their defence against Russian jet-powered drones and in their own medium-range attacks, he added.

Rubio said the US had not ordered Starlink speeds to be reduced and that the service had reportedly been restored to its previous level.

“No one at the White House ordered anyone to slow down internet or slow down speed so that certain drones couldn’t use it,” he said, calling the reports “categorically false”.

The remarks came as US President Donald Trump drew criticism from Democrats and Republicans after waiving sanctions on Russia and countries that buy its oil and gas, days before the restrictions were due to take effect under a law he signed last month.

Zelenskyy also criticised the sanctions waiver on Saturday, saying easing pressure on Russia would encourage further attacks.

“Financial rewards for [President Vladimir] Putin – all of this only encourages him to keep attacking,” Zelenskyy posted on social media, urging the US to maintain pressure on Moscow.