appeal

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres appeals for immediate truce as fighting intensifies in Darfur and Kordofan regions.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called for an immediate ceasefire in Sudan’s brutal civil war, which the UN says has created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

Guterres’s appeal, made late on Friday, follows a peace initiative presented by Sudan’s Prime Minister Kamil Idris to the UN Security Council on Monday, which called for the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to disarm.

The plan was rejected by the RSF as “wishful thinking”.

The war erupted in April 2023 when a power struggle broke out between the Sudanese army and the RSF paramilitary group. Since then, the conflict has displaced 9.6 million people internally and forced 4.3 million to flee to neighbouring countries, while 30.4 million Sudanese now need humanitarian assistance, according to UN figures.

UN Assistant Secretary-General Mohamed Khaled Khiari told the UNSC this week that fears of intensified fighting during the dry season had been confirmed.

“Each passing day brings staggering levels of violence and destruction,” he said. “Civilians are enduring immense, unimaginable suffering, with no end in sight.”

The conflict has shifted in recent weeks to Sudan’s central Kordofan region, where the RSF captured the strategic Heglig oilfield on December 8. The seizure prompted South Sudanese forces to cross into Sudan to protect the infrastructure, which Khiari warned reflects “the increasingly complex nature of the conflict and its expanding regional dimensions”.

The RSF has also launched a final push to consolidate full control over North Darfur state, attacking towns in the Dar Zaghawa region near the Chad border since December 24. The offensive threatens to close the last escape corridor for civilians fleeing the country to Chad.

The violence spilled across Sudan’s borders on Friday when a drone attack killed two Chadian soldiers at a military camp in the border town of Tine.

A Chadian military intelligence officer told Reuters news agency the drone came from Sudan, though it remained unclear whether it was launched by the army or the RSF. Chad has placed its air force on high alert and warned it would “exercise our right to retaliate” if the strike is confirmed as deliberate.

Despite the intensifying conflict, the UN achieved a rare breakthrough, saying on Friday that it conducted its first assessment mission to el-Fasher since the city fell to the RSF.

UN Humanitarian Coordinator Denise Brown said the mission followed “months of intense fighting, siege, and widespread violations against civilians and humanitarian workers,” adding that “hundreds of thousands of civilians have had to flee el-Fasher and surrounding areas”.

Earlier this month, Yale University released a report documenting systematic mass killings by the RSF in el-Fasher, with satellite imagery showing evidence of burning and the burial of human remains on a mass scale.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned last week that the fighting was “horrifying” and “atrocious”, telling a news conference that “one day the story of what’s actually happened there is going to be known, and everyone involved is going to look bad”.

Rubio said he wanted the war to end before the New Year, but there is no strong indication that progress has been made.

Prime Minister Idris’s peace plan proposed an immediate UN-monitored ceasefire and complete RSF withdrawal from the roughly 40 percent of Sudan it controls. But an adviser to RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo dismissed the proposal as “closer to fantasy than to politics”.

Upon returning to Port Sudan on Friday, Idris laid down a red line, saying the government would reject international peacekeeping forces because Sudan had been “burned” by them in the past.

Dec. 24 (UPI) — Sean “Diddy” Combs’ attorney filed an expedited federal appeal in seeking his immediate appeal from federal prison on the hip-hop mogul’s two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

The appeal was filed Tuesday with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, seeking an acquittal or vacating his conviction and remand for resentencing.

In the 84-page appeal, attorney Alexandra A.E. Shapiro argued U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian “acted as the 13th juror” and found that Combs “coerced,” “exploited” and “forced” his girlfriends to have sex and led a criminal conspiracy, which “trumped the verdict.

The speedy appeal process was granted last month. The federal governor’s brief is due by Feb. 20 and Comb’s reply is due by March 13.

Combs, 56, is serving a 50-month prison sentence. He is now in a low-security prison in Fort Dix, N.J. He was moved there after being detained in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., since his arrest on Sept. 16, 2024.

On July 2, a jury in Manhattan convicted Combs after two days of deliberations and a six-week trial. He was found not guilty of one count of racketeering conspiracy and two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion.

Later that day, Subramanian denied his bail request because he said it would be impossible for him to prove he does not pose a danger.

The defense proposed travel restrictions, regular drug testing and a $1 million bond co-signed by himself, his mother, his sister and the mother of his oldest daughter.

Prosecutor Maurene Comey also opposed the request.

“There is serious, serious conduct here that will mandate a lengthy period of incarceration,” Comey said.

He was sentenced on Oct. 5, along with five years of supervised release after his prison term and a maximum fine of $500,000. Comb has an estimated $400 million net worth.

“There is a light at the end of the tunnel,” the judge said. “These letters, all those letters that I saw, show that you have a universe of people who love you. Let them lift you up now, just like you’ve lifted them up for so many years.”

His expected release date is May 25, 2028, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Shapiro wrote prosecutors failed to provide their case and noted girlfriends and third parties were adults who “willingly and enthusiastically” participated in so-called freak-offs, which are days-long, drug-fueled sexual encounters.

And the sentence was illegal because it was “draconian.”

She said the enhanced sentence violates his constitutional rights.

Shapiro also noted her client had already served 16 months of his sentence, which is the average one for what he was convicted of.

“If the court does not overturn Combs’ conviction, it should release him immediately and instruct the district court to resentence him only for the conduct of which he was convicted,” the filing reads.

This case isn’t Combs’ only legal situation with more than 70 civil lawsuits filed. In October, Texas-based attorney Tony Buzbee announced he would represent 120 accusers.

The alleged victims include children, teens and adults. There are short-term and long-term romantic partners.

He has denied all of the allegations and claimed that security footage in which Combs is seen beating ex-R&B star Casandra “Cassie” Ventura Fin was altered. His ex-girlfriend testified during the trial.

During sentencing, he addressed the court after he submitted a four-page letter to the judge that included an apology to the victims.

Combs apologized to Fin and another ex-girlfriend, identified as “Jane.”

“I want to personally apologize again to Cassie Ventura for any harm or hurt that I caused to her, emotionally or physically. My actions were disgusting, shameful and sick,” Combs said.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court ruled against President Trump on Tuesday and said he did not have legal authority to deploy the National Guard in Chicago to protect federal immigration agents.

Acting on a 6-3 vote, the justices denied Trump’s appeal and upheld orders from a federal district judge and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that said the president had exaggerated the threat and overstepped his authority.

The decision is a major defeat for Trump and his broad claim that he had the power to deploy military forces in U.S. cities.

In an unsigned order, the court said the Militia Act allows the president to deploy the National Guard only if U.S. military forces were unable to quell violence.

“At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois. The President has not invoked a statute that provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act,” the court said.

Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had allowed the deployments in Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., after ruling that judges must defer to the president.

But U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled Dec. 10 that the federalized National Guard troops in Los Angeles must be returned to the control of California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Trump’s lawyers had not claimed in their appeal that the president had the authority to deploy the military for ordinary law enforcement in the city. Instead, they said the Guard troops would be deployed “to protect federal officers and federal property.”

The two sides in the Chicago case, like in Portland, told dramatically different stories about the circumstances leading to Trump’s order.

Democratic officials in Illinois said small groups of protesters objected to the aggressive enforcement tactics used by federal immigration agents. They said police were able to contain the protests, clear the entrances and prevent violence.

By contrast, administration officials described repeated instances of disruption, confrontation and violence in Chicago. They said immigration agents were harassed and blocked from doing their jobs, and they needed the protection the National Guard could supply.

Trump Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said the president had the authority to deploy the Guard if agents could not enforce the immigration laws.

“Confronted with intolerable risks of harm to federal agents and coordinated, violent opposition to the enforcement of federal law,” Trump called up the National Guard “to defend federal personnel, property, and functions in the face of ongoing violence,” he told the court in an emergency appeal filed in mid-October.

Illinois state lawyers disputed the administration’s account.

“The evidence shows that federal facilities in Illinois remain open, the individuals who have violated the law by attacking federal authorities have been arrested, and enforcement of immigration law in Illinois has only increased in recent weeks,” state Solicitor Gen. Jane Elinor Notz said in response to the administration’s appeal.

The Constitution gives Congress the power “to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.”

The Militia Act of 1903 says the president may call up and deploy the National Guard if he faces an invasion, a rebellion or is “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”

Trump’s lawyers said that referred to police and federal agents. But after taking a closer look, the court concluded it referred to the regular military forces. By that standard, the president’s authority to deploy the National Guard comes only after the military has failed to quell violence.

But on Oct. 29, the justices asked both sides to explain what the law meant when it referred to the “regular forces.”

Until then, both sides had assumed it referred to federal agents and police, not the military.

Trump’s lawyers stuck to their position. They said the law referred to the “civilian forces that regularly execute the laws,” not the military.

If those civilians cannot enforce the law, “there is a strong tradition in this country of favoring the use of the military rather than the standing military to quell domestic disturbances,” they said.

State attorneys for Illinois said the “regular forces” are the “full-time, professional military.” And they said the president could not “even plausibly argue” that the U.S. soldiers were required to enforce the law in Chicago.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Newsom filed a brief in the Chicago case that warned of the danger of the president using the military in American cities.

“On June 7, for the first time in our Nation’s history, the President invoked [U.S. law] to federalize a State’s National Guard over the objections of the State’s Governor,” they said.

“President Trump and Defense Secretary Hegseth transferred 4,000 members of California’s National Guard — one in three of the Guard’s total active members — to federal control to serve in a civilian law enforcement role on the streets of Los Angeles and other communities in Southern California.”

That has proved to be “the opening salvo in an effort to transform the role of the military in American society,” they said. “At no prior point in our history has the President used the military this way: as his own personal police force, to be deployed for whatever law enforcement missions he deems appropriate.

“What the federal government seeks is a standing army, drawn from state militias, deployed at the direction of the President on a nationwide basis, for civilian law enforcement purposes, for an indefinite period of time,” they said.

The Delaware Supreme Court rules in favour of Musk and his $56bn compensation package.

Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package from Tesla, once worth $56bn, has been restored by the Delaware Supreme Court, in the United States, two years after a lower court struck down the compensation deal as “unfathomable”.

Friday’s ruling overturns a decision that had prompted a furious backlash from Musk and damaged Delaware’s business-friendly reputation.

The pay package was by far the largest ever, until Tesla shareholders approved a new, even larger pay plan of nearly $1 trillion in November.

The ruling means that Musk can finally get paid for his work since 2018, when he transformed Tesla from a struggling startup to one of the world’s most valuable companies.

The 2018 pay deal provided Musk options to acquire about 304 million Tesla shares at a deeply discounted price if the company hit various milestones, which it did.

Tesla estimated in 2018 that the plan was potentially worth $56bn, although given the rise in the stock price, the value ballooned to about $120bn by early November. The options represent approximately 9 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock.

Musk never collected his stock options because, soon after shareholders approved the 2018 compensation, the board was sued by Richard Tornetta, an investor with just nine Tesla shares.

In 2024, after a five-day trial, Delaware Judge Kathaleen McCormick concluded that Tesla’s directors were conflicted and key facts were hidden from shareholders when they voted to approve the plan. She ordered that the 2018 plan be rescinded.

Musk accused Delaware judges of being activists, hostile to tech founders, and he urged businesses to follow Tesla and reincorporate elsewhere.

Dropbox, Roblox, The Trade Desk and Coinbase were among the handful of large companies that moved their legal homes to Nevada or Texas. However, Delaware remains by far the most popular legal home for US public companies.

Tesla’s board has warned that Musk, the world’s richest person who also leads the SpaceX rocket venture and the artificial intelligence startup xAI, could leave the electric car company if he does not get the pay he wants and an increase in his voting power.

In November, shareholders approved a new pay package that could be worth $878bn if Tesla meets targets for self-driving vehicles, a robotaxi network and sales of humanoid robots.

Tesla has taken steps to reduce the risk that a shareholder could tie up the 2025 package in the courts.

The Austin-based company is now incorporated in Texas, which allows Tesla to require that any investor or group of investors must own 3 percent of the company stock before suing for an alleged corporate law violation. A stake of that size would be worth about $30bn, and Musk is the only individual with that much stock.