dispute

Wilfredo Engalla, a 51-year-old Filipino immigrant, alleged in a medical malpractice case that Kaiser doctors misdiagnosed him with colds and allergies for years before eventually informing him he had terminal lung cancer.

He died before his complaint could be heard by an arbitrator, which his Kaiser policy required. His case prompted a withering rebuke from the California Supreme Court, which said Kaiser’s system of arbitrating legal disputes was subject to long delays and unfair to its members. The year was 1997.

Nearly three decades after the landmark decision, the HMO giant — which made a series of sweeping reforms after the ruling — is once again facing questions over whether its arbitration system is stacked against the interests of its members.

Plaintiffs attorneys, legislators and patients say Kaiser’s private and confidential process for arbitrating legal disputes over medical care still has key flaws that favor Kaiser over patients bringing malpractice cases. The company insures about 25% of Californians, including some employees of the Los Angeles Times.

“Kaiser has really lost its way,” said Assemblyman Robert Garcia (D-Rancho Cucamonga). Garcia, who is a longtime Kaiser member, recently introduced a bill to require the California attorney general to oversee arbitrations mandated by any health plan.

Kaiser defended its arbitration system, saying in a statement that it was fair for both patients and the nonprofit.

Many companies and other organizations, including some hospitals, HMOs and physician groups, require their customers or patients to take their complaints to private arbitration rather than to court.

But unlike most other companies, which send claims to large arbitration firms, Kaiser created its own system back in 1971.

Under Kaiser’s system, once a neutral arbitrator is selected, either party can opt to disqualify that person without cause. There is no limit on the number of disqualifications.

Although the health plan designed the system to be fair, patients and their lawyers have alleged that in reality Kaiser’s greater knowledge of arbitrators’ past rulings and its ability to veto arbitrators give it an advantage to pick favorable judges.

Critics such as Arlan Cohen, a physician and attorney who has brought more than two dozen cases against the health plan, say the system also provides a financial incentive to arbitrators to rule in Kaiser’s favor in order to be selected for future cases.

While Kaiser has access to all the decisions made by arbitrators in its system, the patient’s family gets a more limited disclosure of an arbitrator’s history of cases, lawyers say, adding that it’s not easy to see which arbitrators have ruled frequently for Kaiser.

Kaiser said it disagreed that the system allowed it to select favored arbitrators.

“The appointment process is not influenced by whether the arbitrator has ruled for or against KP or has a record of ruling against Kaiser Permanente,” its statement said.

“As required by law, both parties receive information about potential arbitrators and can decline to move forward with any they are not comfortable,” the statement said.

One problem is what experts call the “repeat player effect,” in which a large company appearing repeatedly before the same panel of arbitrators allegedly gains an advantage over the individual bringing a single complaint.

David Allen Larson, past chair of the American Bar Assn.’s dispute resolution section, said the repeat player effect happens because the patient will likely be choosing an arbitrator on the health plan’s system just once, while “Kaiser is selecting them every single day.”

“They know the system. They know the rules,” Larson said of Kaiser. “The entire process gives them an advantage.”

Alan Kang, a lawyer, in a recent petition filed in L.A. County Superior Court, contends that the fees the arbitrators earn from hearing cases — as much as $2,000 an hour — give them an incentive to rule in Kaiser’s favor so they are chosen to hear more cases.

“When a judge’s future income is at stake, it is impossible to be impartial,” Kang wrote in the petition.

The petition seeks to void the December decision of an arbitrator who ruled against the family of Evangelina Aquino, a Kaiser employee who died of cancer at age 40.

Kang, the Aquino family and the medical experts they hired for the case say her cancer would have been treatable if Kaiser doctors had found it with a test they said her symptoms called for. Kaiser argued it was a different kind of cancer that was aggressive and untreatable. The arbitrator agreed with Kaiser in the December decision.

After the ruling, Kang began analyzing data from Kaiser’s system.

His review of dozens of cases in the last six years found that judges overseeing the most cases nearly always ruled for Kaiser.

“The message is clear: deliver wins for Kaiser and you will get additional business,” Kang wrote in his court petition.

The Oakland-based health plan declined to answer questions about its arbitration system and Kang’s claims, but said in a statement that its “arbitration process is designed to be fair, impartial, and accessible to all members. While some arbitrators may handle multiple Kaiser Permanente-related cases, they are not employed by Kaiser Permanente, and they are selected by both parties, in accordance with the law.”

“We recognize that arbitration cases often involve difficult and deeply personal experiences for patients and families,” the statement said, “and we take all concerns raised through these processes seriously.”

Kaiser’s unique arbitration system

Arbitration can have advantages over the court system, including allowing Kaiser to save on legal costs, which otherwise would raise the price of premiums it charges to families, employers and governments.

Kaiser offers to pay the arbitrators’ fees, which can save families tens of thousands of dollars.

Arbitration may also lead to faster outcomes, possibly avoiding years of litigation. Unlike civil litigation, arbitration decisions are especially difficult to appeal.

After the criticism by the state Supreme Court in 1997, Kaiser reformed the system by creating the Office of the Independent Administrator. The office is funded by a Kaiser trust and the $150 fee each patient filing a claim must pay, said Marcella Bell, who serves as the independent administrator.

Bell said the office works independently from Kaiser.

The office selected 195 retired judges and lawyers to serve on a panel that patients and Kaiser can choose from when selecting a neutral arbitrator to oversee and decide a malpractice case.

Rules written by the independent administrator, in consultation with the health plan and an advisory board, allow Kaiser and the family to cut an arbitrator they don’t like, at multiple steps in the process.

The administrator’s office randomly selects 12 members from its panel. Both sides can each remove any four of those arbitrators. The two sides then rank the remaining arbitrators in order of preference. The administrator selects the top-ranked arbitrator to hear the case.

The two parties then still have the ability to disqualify that selection without cause.

Members of the United Nurses Assns. of California and Union of Healthcare Professionals strike outside Kaiser Permanente in Oakland on Jan. 28.

(Jessica Christian / San Francisco Chronicle)

Last year, Kaiser’s arbitration system closed 529 arbitration cases.

The arbitrators threw out 14% of the cases, ruling in favor of Kaiser’s motion for summary judgment, and dismissed an additional 5% of cases on technical or procedural grounds.

Only 23 cases, or 4% of the total, went to a hearing. Among those, the arbitrator decided for Kaiser in 17, with the patient winning the remaining six.

Patients and their families withdrew their claim in 20% of the cases. About half of those patients did not have a lawyer and had tried to represent themselves.

The parties settled for an undisclosed sum in 57% of the cases. The settlements are confidential.

Patient safety questions

Those who have studied the use of arbitration by Kaiser and other HMOs for medical malpractice claims say the secrecy of the settlements and the closed hearings could keep safety problems from coming to light.

“The secrecy of arbitration proceedings may prevent publicity that could reveal poor doctors,” the California Research Bureau warned in a report in 2000 that analyzed Kaiser’s system. That compares with public court cases that could deter “bad behavior” in the future, the researchers wrote.

In December 2023, 53-year-old Francisco Delgadillo arrived at the Kaiser ER in Vallejo with severe chest pain. After an initial assessment, he waited eight hours for care, according to state regulators.

He died in the lobby. A state and federal investigation found multiple violations, including that Kaiser failed to have a licensed nurse monitoring the dozens of patients in the ER’s waiting room.

The Delgadillo family filed an arbitration claim. Their lawyer Jeff Mitchell said the case settled for a confidential sum and he could not discuss it.

Mitchell agreed that the secrecy raised patient safety concerns.

“They love the system, otherwise they would not be so hellbent to keep it,” Mitchell said of Kaiser’s repeated efforts to dispel criticism. “They don’t want these cases to get in front of juries.”

A licensed practical nurse attends to a patient at a Kaiser Permanente in Culver City in September.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Calls for reform

Despite the changes Kaiser made after the 1997 court decision, patients and their families have continued to complain.

According to the administrator’s 2025 annual report, the “most common” complaint the office heard last year was about the neutral arbitrator.

“Most complained that the arbitrator was biased, partisan, unjust, and in Kaiser’s favor,” the report said.

Stephen Martinez, a retired aerospace engineer from Bellflower, is leading the effort to pass the state bill introduced by Garcia.

At an April hearing in the state Assembly, Martinez spoke about how his wife had found a lump in her breast and asked for an appointment with her longtime caregiver at Kaiser to examine it. Instead she was sent to a physician assistant, who dismissed it, he said.

“The PA prescribed warm compresses, a sports bra, and limited chocolate,” Martinez testified. “We would later find that Lindalee did have breast cancer that had already spread.”

Martinez and his wife said they spent $175,000 on lawyers and medical experts to bring that arbitration case. A chief breast surgeon at Kaiser and another surgeon who had retired from that job both testified that the Kaiser physician assistant failed to follow the health system’s guidelines.

Kaiser’s expert argued that the physician assistant did an appropriate exam and that his low suspicion of breast cancer was reasonable. The neutral arbitrator concurred and ruled against the couple.

After passing the Assembly, Assembly Bill 1770 is now in the state Senate for consideration. The bill lets the attorney general decide what actions they will take to ensure health plan arbitrations are handled fairly and transparently. If the bill passes, the state would add four deputy attorneys general, a legal analyst and three legal secretaries to do that work, according to a legislative analyst’s report.

Kaiser says it has concerns about the bill, including that it would “create overlapping state oversight and duplicative reporting requirements.”

Kaiser Permanente’s corporate offices in downtown Oakland in January 2025.

(Jane Tyska / East Bay Times via Getty Images)

Questions of a missed diagnosis

When Janene Fowler was 22, her body seemed to turn against her. She grew weak, pain shot through her hands and feet, her heart raced. She soon required a wheelchair.

Fowler’s medical chart detailed what could have caused her disabling problems. A test eight years before had found a deficiency of vitamin B12, according to the chart. Over the years, Kaiser doctors noted problems such as depression, unexplained pain, shortness of breath, a sore tongue and an abnormal gait — all possible symptoms of vitamin B12 deficiency.

In February 2022, after her family complained about her not being able to see a neurologist, she got an appointment. The specialist noted her vitamin deficiency, telling the nurse to start her on a supplement at once. But the treatment did not begin because the paperwork was lost, her medical records show.

Two weeks later, Fowler left Kaiser to see a doctor at UCLA. A doctor there quickly started injections of B12.

Her symptoms gradually got better, but her new doctors say the years-long deficiency left permanent damage. She still can’t walk without help.

The arbitrator, a retired judge, sided with Kaiser’s doctors and experts, who questioned whether Fowler’s problems were caused by a deficiency of vitamin B12. While one test showed a deficiency, he noted that a second test failed to confirm it. He wrote that Fowler and her lawyers had failed to prove that Kaiser “breached its duty of care.”

Cohen, Fowler’s lawyer, asserted that the retired judge’s decision was contrary to UCLA medical records, which detail her deficiency and treatment.

Fowler now spends most of her time at home. She can’t drive. She often falls when she tries to get around with a cane. She loves to cook, but said she burns herself when she tries.

“My hands don’t really do what I tell them,” she said.

Kaiser declined to answer questions about her case, citing patients’ privacy rights.

Fowler said she’s angry about how the health plan’s doctors and its arbitration system treated her.

“I thought I was going to die, and no one at Kaiser seemed to care,” she said. “What justice can you have in a system that is run by those you are trying to sue?”

BRASILIA, Brazil, July 17 (UPI) — Brazil’s government has delayed plans to invoke its Reciprocity Law after the United States imposed a 25% tariff on Brazilian exports. It opted instead for a more cautious strategy aimed at avoiding a broader trade conflict.

After meetings between the government’s economic team and the country’s leading industrial groups, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva‘s administration paused previous plans for immediate retaliatory measures.

According to Brazilian media reports, officials are concerned that reciprocal tariffs could trigger a trade war, increase the cost of imported inputs and drive up consumer prices in Brazil.

Industrial associations argued that the production chains of both countries are highly integrated, and that making U.S. imports more expensive would also hurt Brazilian manufacturers, CNN Brasil reported.

The Brazilian government also announced a support program for companies affected by the U.S. tariff.

“We already have mechanisms to protect our companies and our jobs,” Deputy Finance Minister Dario Durigan said. He added that, in coordination with affected industries, the government will strengthen the Brazil Sovereign Plan, which supports businesses “unfairly harmed by the increase in U.S. tariffs,” according to G1.

Analysts say Lula’s administration is expected to exhaust all negotiation channels before escalating the dispute, although they acknowledge that the prospects for direct bilateral negotiations with Washington are limited.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has concluded its Section 301 investigation, determining that Brazil maintains “unfair trade practices.” That finding has left Brazilian diplomats with little room to continue technical negotiations.

Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira on Thursday rejected Washington’s demands as “excessive and unreasonable.” He said U.S. negotiators had sought concessions that would undermine Brazil’s economic sovereignty in sensitive areas, including the country’s Pix instant payment system and environmental regulations.

Brazil’s manufacturing sector, particularly higher value-added industries, is expected to suffer the greatest impact from the 25% tariffs scheduled to take effect July 22. The measure will affect about 3,000 Brazilian products, representing nearly 18% of Brazil’s exports to the U.S. market, according to O Globo.

To limit the impact on everyday consumer goods in the United States, the Trump administration excluded products such as coffee, oranges and concentrated orange juice, beef and grains from the new tariffs.

With little indication that the White House will soften its position, Brazil has shifted its strategy away from direct bilateral negotiations and toward legal challenges before the World Trade Organization and the gradual use of its Reciprocity Law.

The government’s primary legal strategy will be to challenge the legality of the unilateral tariffs before the World Trade Organization.

Brazil has not ruled out using the Reciprocity Law, which was unanimously approved by Congress. The legislation authorizes Brazil to impose tariffs on the 76% of U.S. products that currently enter the country duty-free and even suspend intellectual property rights.

However, officials said implementation will be delayed while the government evaluates the economic impact of the U.S. measures.

“It is important to emphasize that we have the Reciprocity Law, unanimously approved by the National Congress, and the government will know how to implement it at the appropriate time,” Vice President Geraldo Alckmin said.

He said the law is not intended as retaliation but rather as a measure “that defends the national interest, the interests of Brazilians and the Brazilian economy.”

EXPLAINER

Iran and the US clash over nuclear inspections and Hormuz as negotiators push for a final deal within 60 days.

Iran and the United States have offered conflicting accounts of key issues as negotiators work towards a final agreement within a 60-day window. Differences remain over nuclear oversight and the implementation of any deal, underscoring the challenges facing both sides.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Iran would not be allowed to charge tolls in the Strait of Hormuz under a final agreement, stressing that the strategic waterway must remain open to international shipping.

Meanwhile, Iran rejected US claims that it had agreed to allow nuclear inspectors back into the country after President Donald Trump said Tehran had accepted the “highest level” of monitoring. The conflicting statements highlight the gaps that negotiators are still trying to bridge.

Here is what has happened:

In Iran

• Iran’s military shifts to ‘offensive doctrine’: General Ahmad Reza Pourdastan, head of Iran’s Army Strategic Studies and Research Center, said Tehran has moved away from a purely defensive posture and now includes preemptive operations in its military strategy. Quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency, Pourdastan said Iran could “severely surprise the enemy” if national interests required it and added that much of the country’s military capability has yet to be used.
• Iran says no IAEA inspections planned: Tohid Asadi, reporting from the Strait of Hormuz, says the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei has denied reports of a meeting with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi and said there are currently no plans for visits or inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog. Baghaei said Iran’s dealings with the IAEA would be governed by existing procedures, its safeguards obligations, parliamentary legislation and decisions by the Supreme National Security Council. Iran suspended cooperation with the IAEA after US and Israeli strikes on its nuclear facilities in June 2025, and while diplomacy continues under a 60-day framework, Tehran says it has not granted permission for inspectors to return.

War diplomacy:

• ‘No way’ US and Iran can finalise deal in 60 days, analyst says: Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera there is “no way” Washington and Tehran can complete a final agreement within the 60-day timeframe repeatedly cited by President Donald Trump. “I think we’re talking about at least into the next calendar year,” he said, adding that he would not be surprised if both sides simply “run out the clock” by continuing negotiations and keeping the Strait of Hormuz open without reaching a final deal before the end of Trump’s presidency.
• Qatar says LNG production could return to normal within weeks: Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani told the Financial Times that Qatar is preparing to restore normal liquefied natural gas (LNG) production after the interim US-Iran deal. Qatar, the world’s second-largest LNG producer, halted output in March following an Iranian drone attack on the Ras Laffan facility. Sheikh Mohammed said most production could resume within weeks, except at the damaged site, adding that QatarEnergy would only lift its force majeure declaration once it is satisfied that all safety and operational concerns have been addressed.

In the Gulf:

• Rubio ‘trying to sell the deal’ with Iran on Gulf tour: Alan Fisher, reporting from Washington, DC, said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is visiting the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain, three Gulf countries seen as having been among the most affected by the war with Iran. Rubio, who also serves as Trump’s national security adviser, is expected to reassure regional allies that US security commitments remain intact. He will also address the Gulf Cooperation Council in Bahrain, where he is “really trying to sell the deal”, amid concerns over Washington’s response to Iranian attacks.

In the US

• US Senate approves resolution to curb Trump’s war powers on Iran: The Senate voted 50-48 to pass a measure requiring congressional approval for further US military action against Iran, marking the first time a war powers resolution on the conflict has cleared both chambers of Congress. Four Republicans – Bill Cassidy, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Rand Paul – joined nearly all Democrats in backing the measure, while Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman voted against it. The resolution is expected to face a veto from President Trump.

In Israel

• US ‘very naive’ on Iran, Ben-Gvir says: Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said the US would be “very naive” if it believed Iran would abandon its nuclear programme, and hinted that Israel may act independently against Tehran. “It is Israel’s responsibility to confront this Iranian threat and act against it alone,” he told Israel’s Channel 7, adding that “no circumstances” could force Israel to act “according to the dictates of a friend, even if that friend is truly great”. His remarks come amid reported tensions between Washington and Tel Aviv over Israel’s attacks on Lebanon and ongoing US-Iran negotiations. Last week, US Vice President JD Vance publicly criticised Israeli cabinet ministers for “attacking” Washington, calling the US Israel’s “only powerful ally” left in the world.

In Lebanon

• UN says ceasefire ‘largely holding’ in southern Lebanon: The United Nations said the ceasefire in southern Lebanon appears to be “largely holding”, although peacekeepers continue to observe Israeli military ground and air activity. UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said UNIFIL troops witnessed “heavy” machine-gun fire and three tank rounds fired by Israeli forces near Biyyada on Monday, while drones were also seen “apparently to monitor UNIFIL peacekeepers”. The incident came a day after peacekeepers reported the first day without exchanges of fire since fighting escalated on March 2. The UN urged all sides to “adhere fully to the ceasefire and refrain from any escalation, particularly during this delicate period of ongoing negotiations”.

The move comes after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was stripped of Poland’s top honour.

Top Ukrainian officials have said they are returning Polish awards after President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was stripped of Warsaw’s top honour in a dispute between the allies over World War II massacres.

Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, Kyrylo Budanov; Ukraine’s ambassador to Warsaw, Vasyl Bodnar; and Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said on Saturday they would relinquish awards bestowed by Poland.

“Our nations have long-standing relations and ⁠different pages of history – both ⁠heroic and tragic,” Budanov posted on social media. “However, this should be an occasion for deep reflection, not crude political speculation.”

Zelenskyy angered many in Poland over his naming of a military unit after a Ukrainian paramilitary organisation accused of massacring Poles during World War II.

In a decree on May 26, Zelenskyy named a military unit the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) – the name of a group that operated in the 1940s and 1950s.

On Friday, Polish President Karol Nawrocki announced he would strip Zelenskyy of the Order of the White Eagle, which was bestowed on him by Former Polish President Andrzej Duda in 2023 for services to security, resilience and the defence of human rights.

For most in Poland, “the Ukrainian Insurgent Army remains above all a formation responsible for cruel crimes against the citizens of the Polish Republic during World War II,” Nawrocki said on social media, adding that the decision would not end Poland’s support for Ukraine against Russia.

Ukrainian officials criticised the decision as one that played into Russia’s hands. Budanov, the Ukrainian Presidential Office chief, wrote on Telegram that it was “an unfriendly act toward our people” and “a gift to the Moscow aggressor, which will certainly use it against both of our countries”.

Foreign Minister Sybiha called it a “strategic mistake” while Bodnar said it was “especially painful” as Ukraine fends off Russian attacks.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a political rival of President Nawrocki, urged both sides to “calm tensions” in a post on X on Friday.

Conflict between Poland and Ukraine “delights Putin and shocks our allies”, he said.

The UPA fought against both Nazi German and Soviet forces, but is also accused of mass killings of Poles in Nazi-occupied areas. Ukrainians say UPA and Polish underground forces launched large-scale attacks and reprisals against each other that led to deaths among Ukrainian and Polish civilians.

Published on
11/06/2026 – 17:25 GMT+2

German MEP Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee, has warned that the long-running Airbus-Boeing dispute could jeopardise the EU-US trade agreement struck last summer if transatlantic tensions flare again in the coming weeks.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The implementation of the Turnberry Agreement, clinched in July 2025 by US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Scotland, is entering its final stretch, with EU lawmakers expected to approve it in a vote next Tuesday.

However, the five-year truce between US aerospace giant Boeing and its European rival Airbus over mutual subsidy allegations expires on 11 July, with the Trump administration and the European Commission yet to agree to extend it.

“Will this lead to another escalation? Nobody knows,” Lange, the Parliament’s lead negotiator on the EU-US deal, told journalists on Thursday during a meeting with fellow Socialist lawmakers.

The MEP is concerned that a renewed aerospace dispute could further strain transatlantic trade ties after a year of intense tensions.

“I hope this will not blow up,” Lange told Euronews.

Turnberry deal remains fragile

The battle between Boeing and Airbus dates back more than two decades. The US first brought a case before the World Trade Organization arguing that the EU was illegally subsidising Airbus. Brussels responded with its own complaint, accusing Washington of unlawfully supporting Boeing.

The dispute eventually spiralled into a tariff war, with both sides imposing punitive duties on products ranging from wine and spirits to cheese and tobacco, affecting $11.5 billion worth of trade.

A truce was reached in 2021 under the Biden administration, taking effect on 11 July that year and suspending retaliatory measures for five years. However no extension has been announced since.

“Discussions with the US are ongoing to ensure stability and certainty and to continue the suspension of countermeasures on both sides,” Commission deputy chief spokesperson Olof Gill told Euronews.

In its Trade Policy Agenda 2026, the Trump administration said the US Trade Representative would decide in July “whether to take action in the Section 301 investigation involving the enforcement of US rights in the World Trade Organization disputes involving large civil aircraft”.

The US is able to impose tariffs on trading partners under section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Last week, Washington threatened to impose 10 percent tariffs on EU goods over forced labour following a Section 301 investigation. If implemented, those duties would be added to existing most-favoured-nation tariffs, pushing average US tariffs on EU goods above the 15 percent ceiling agreed under the Turnberry deal.

Under the agreement, which EU lawmakers are expected to adopt next week, the EU committed on its side to eliminate its duties on US goods. However, lawmakers fought hard to include safeguards to protect the deal from future US tariff threats and ensure the 15 percent cap is respected.

The agreement has always appeared fragile. Trump has repeatedly used tariffs as leverage in non-trade disputes, from his push for the acquisition of Greenland earlier this year to his more recent threat to impose 25 percent tariffs on EU cars after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz criticised the war with Iran.

Should the Airbus-Boeing dispute reignite, it could give the US president another pretext to unravel the 2025 agreement.

June 5 (Asia Today) — Protesters who had blocked a polling station in Seoul’s Songpa district for two nights and three days moved Friday to a vote-counting center, demanding a new election after ballot shortages disrupted voting in the June 3 local elections.

The ballot boxes from the No. 2 polling station in Jamsil 7-dong were transferred and counted after about 1,000 police officers were deployed. But protesters said they could not accept the result and effectively occupied the entrance area of the counting center, calling for a revote.

About 300 people, including citizens and conservative YouTubers, gathered near the entrance of the Olympic Park handball arena, according to an unofficial police estimate.

Even after the counting was completed, protesters chanted slogans including “revote” and “invalidate the vote.” Some protesters have alleged election fraud, but election authorities have attributed the disruption to a shortage of ballot papers during voting.

The atmosphere grew tense as access for election workers and arena employees was effectively blocked. Some arena employees who tried to leave were reportedly stopped by protesters and remained inside.

Police continued to guard the area around the arena after the vote count ended. Officials at the scene were considering sending election commission workers home first and removing vote-counting materials separately.

The protest followed a broader ballot shortage controversy in South Korea’s local elections. The National Election Commission said ballot shortages occurred at 50 polling stations nationwide and temporarily halted voting at 22 sites. The disruption drew public criticism and led the commission’s chairman, Roh Tae-ak, to announce his resignation Friday.

Earlier, protesters blocked the removal of ballot boxes from Jamsil 7-dong’s No. 2 polling station after a ballot shortage left voters waiting for hours. Police later escorted officials to retrieve the remaining ballot boxes, and the final count ended Friday afternoon.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260605010001909

June 1 (UPI) — At least seven people, including the suspected shooter, are dead Monday following a series of shootings in an Iowa city that authorities said stemmed from a domestic dispute.

The suspect was identified as Ryan Willis McFarland, 52, of Muscatine, located along the eastern Iowa border with Illinois.

Authorities said he shot six people, all believed to be family members, before dying from a self-inflicted gunshot wound that was fired after being confronted by police on the Riverfront Trail near a pedestrian bridge.

“Today, I simply do not have the words [for] this act of evil and what it has done to our community,” Muscatine Police Chief Anthony Kies told reporters at a press briefing.

The identities of the victims were not made public, but Kies said they are all believed to be related to McFarland.

The investigation began at about 12:12 p.m. CDT when police received a report of a shooting at 210 Park Avenue. Officers arrived to find four people who had sustained gunshot wounds and were pronounced dead at the scene.

McFarland was identified as a suspect and was then confronted. EMS personnel rendered aid after McFarland shot himself, but he was soon after pronounced dead at the scene, Kies said.

As the investigation progressed, investigators developed information indicating there may be additional victims, leading to the discovery of two men dead from apparent gunshots — one inside a 1509 Mill Street residence and the other inside a 808 Grandview Avenue business.

“Preliminary findings indicate that the shootings stemmed from a domestic-related dispute,” Muscatine Police Department said in a release.

Kies told reporters that the suspect had a criminal record, but would not elaborate. The weapon used in the shooting was also not mentioned.

The investigation is ongoing, authorities said.

According to The Gun Violence Archive, the Muscatine incident is the second mass shooting involving four or more victims in the United States in the last 24 hours. There have also been more than 163 mass shootings in the country so far this year, the organization’s statistics show.

THE HAGUE — Venezuela ’s acting President Delcy Rodríguez told journalists Monday that her country had no plans to become the 51st U.S. state after President Trump said he was “seriously considering” the move.

Rodríguez was speaking at the International Court of Justice in The Hague on the final day of hearings in a dispute between her country and neighboring Guyana over the massive mineral- and oil-rich Essequibo region.

“We will continue to defend our integrity, our sovereignty, our independence, our history,” said Rodríguez, who assumed power in January following a U.S. military operation that ousted then-President Nicolás Maduro. Venezuela is “not a colony, but a free country,” she added.

Speaking to Fox News earlier on Monday, Trump said he was “seriously considering making Venezuela the 51st U.S. state,” according to a post by Fox News’ co-anchor John Roberts on social media. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the matter.

Trump has made similar comments about Canada.

Rodríguez went on to say that Venezuelan and U.S. officials have been in touch and are working on “cooperation and understanding.”

Before addressing Trump’s comments, Rodríguez defended her country’s claim to Essequibo at the United Nations’ highest court, telling judges that political negotiations — not a judicial ruling — will resolve the century-old territorial dispute.

The 62,000-square-mile territory, which makes up two-thirds of Guyana, is rich in gold, diamonds, timber and other natural resources. It also sits near massive offshore oil deposits currently producing an average 900,000 barrels a day.

That output is close to Venezuela’s daily production of about 1 million barrels a day and has transformed one of the smallest countries in South America into a significant energy producer.

Venezuela has considered Essequibo its own since the Spanish colonial period, when the jungle region fell within its boundaries. But an 1899 decision by arbitrators from Britain, Russia and the United States drew the border along the Essequibo River largely in favor of Guyana.

Venezuela has argued that a 1966 agreement sealed in Geneva to resolve the dispute effectively nullified the 19th-century arbitration. In 2018, however, three years after ExxonMobil announced a significant oil discovery off the Essequibo coast, Guyana’s government went to the International Court of Justice and asked judges to uphold the 1899 ruling.

Tensions between the countries further flared in 2023, when Rodríguez’s predecessor, Maduro, threatened to annex the region by force after holding a referendum asking voters if Essequibo should be turned into a Venezuelan state. Maduro was captured Jan. 3 during a U.S. military operation in Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, and taken to New York to face drug trafficking charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

Rodríguez did not address the referendum in her remarks, but she told the court that the 1966 agreement is designed to allow negotiations between Venezuela and Guyana to resolve the territorial dispute. And she accused Guyana’s government of undermining the agreement with the “opportunistic” decision to ask the court to address the dispute.

“At a time when the mechanisms established in the Geneva agreement were still fully in force, Guyana unilaterally chose to shift the dispute from the negotiating arena to a judicial resolution,” she said. “This change was not accidental; it coincided with the discovery in 2015 of the oil field that would become world-renowned.”

When hearings opened last week, Guyana’s foreign minister, Hugh Hilton Todd, told the panel of international judges that the dispute “has been a blight on our existence as a sovereign state from the very beginning.” He said that 70% of Guyana’s territory is at stake.

The court is likely to take months to issue a final and legally binding ruling in the case.

Venezuela has warned that its participation in the hearings does not mean either consent to, or recognition of, the court’s jurisdiction.

Quell and Cano write for the Associated Press. Garcia Cano reported from Mexico City.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge told the U.S. government Monday not to cut down more than 10 trees without first providing notice amid a legal dispute at a historic Washington golf course that President Trump plans to renovate.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes said during a remote hearing that she wasn’t going to issue a temporary restraining order just yet in the case brought by the DC Preservation League. She also told the National Park Service that it should first discuss any plans with government lawyers if it was going to cut down more than 10 trees.

Monday’s hearing came after the plaintiff’s emergency petition seeking to stop work at the course, citing news reports that major renovations were to begin Monday.

Kevin Griess, the superintendent of the National Mall and Memorial Parks for the Park Service, said during the hearing there was no plan to begin such work Monday but added that a safety assessment was underway.

Reyes told the parties she didn’t want to play the role of the “Parks and Rec” department, an allusion to the sitcom, but said she also didn’t want trees being bulldozed.

“I’m no Amy Poehler,” she said referring to the show’s star.

At one point during Monday’s hearing, the judge said she was made aware that closure signs had been put up at the site, which led to Griess’ asking someone to check. He later reported that there were no such signs. Reyes asked that if any such signs were found that the government’s attorney be told.

The complaint filed against the Department of the Interior argues that the Trump administration’s reconstruction of East Potomac Park, including the East Potomac Golf Course, would violate the congressional act that created the park in 1897. The roughly 130-year-old act established the park for the “recreation and the pleasure of the people.” The course itself opened in 1919.

Trump, an avid golfer, also plans on renovating a military golf course just outside Washington that has been used by past presidents going back decades.

“Mr. Nobody Against Putin” filmmaker Pavel “Pasha” Talankin will soon be reunited with his Oscar statuette after it went missing amid his recent travels.

A spokesperson for European airline Lufthansa confirmed Friday in a statement shared with outlets that the coveted golden statuette has been located and is “safely in our care.” Lufthansa spoke on the missing Oscar after Talankin’s co-director Dave Borenstein raised the flag Thursday on social media. “Mr. Nobody Against Putin” won the documentary feature film category at the 98th Academy Awards in March.

According to Borenstein, Talankin arrived at the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York “to fly home to Europe” and had the Oscar in tow as a carry-on. Airport security allegedly stopped Talankin from bringing the Oscar on board, citing concerns it could be used as a weapon. Borenstein said the film’s executive producer tried to smooth things but ultimately, “TSA put the Oscar in a box and sent it to the bottom of the plane” because Pavel did not have a check-in bag to place it in. He shared a photo of the cardboard box and Deadline published video of airport workers wrapping the statuette in bubble wrap and yellow tape.

Borenstein concluded his post noting the Oscar “never arrived” in Frankfurt, Germany, and speculated whether his co-director was on the receiving end of unfair treatment. “Would Pavel have been treated the same way if he were a famous actor? Or a fluent English speaker?” he wrote, tagging the Instagram account for the Transportation Security Administration. He also tagged Lufthansa and urged them to assist.

In response, Lufthansa commented on Borenstein’s post that it was on the missing Oscar case, and they are taking it “super serious.” Less than a day after their comment, the airline’s spokesperson said in their statement that it is “in direct contact with the guest to arrange its personal return as quickly as possible.”

“We sincerely regret the inconvenience caused and have apologized to the owner,” the spokesperson added.

Borenstein celebrated the development on Instagram, posting a clip of his interview with the BBC about the update and thanking a Lufthansa rep for their help and followers for spreading the word.

“Mr. Nobody Against Putin” features Talankin, a schoolteacher near the Ural Mountains, as he documents Russian propaganda efforts — from chants and songs — to energize young students around the war in Ukraine. During the Oscars in March, Talankin delivered a poignant message in Russian.

“In the name of our future, in the name of all of our children, stop all of these wars now,” he said through a translator.

WASHINGTON — After weeks of delay, the House voted Thursday to fund much of the Department of Homeland Security, but not its immigration enforcement operations, and send the bipartisan package to President Trump to sign, ending the longest agency shutdown in history.

The White House had warned that temporary funding Trump had tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other agency personnel would “soon run out,” and that sparked new threats of airport disruptions.

DHS has been without routine funds since Feb. 14, causing hardship for workers, though much of Trump’s immigration agenda that is central to the dispute is being funded separately.

“It is about damn time,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who proposed the bill more than 70 days ago.

The House swiftly voted by voice, without a formal roll call, to pass the measure.

The House’s narrow Republican majority has repeatedly stalled out under House Speaker Mike Johnson, with his own party tangled in internal disputes on a range of pending issues, including the homeland security funding. While the Senate unanimously approved the bipartisan package a month ago, the bill languished in the House.

Democrats refused to fund U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal agents during protests against an immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. Republicans would no go along with a plan pushed by Democrats to fund TSA and the other parts of DHS without the money for ICE and Border Patrol.

To break the impasse, Republicans in both the House and Senate decided to tackle the immigration enforcement funding on their own through what is called budget reconciliation, a cumbersome weekslong process ahead.

By beginning that budget process Johnson, R-La., was able to unlock a broader bipartisan bill for TSA agents and the rest of DHS. House Republicans late Wednesday adopted budget resolution on a largely party-line vote, 215-211, that is focused on eventually providing $70 billion for immigration enforcement and deportations for the remainder of Trump’s time in office and ensure Democrats can no longer block funding. Trump’s term ends in January 2029.

One key Republican, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, said isolating the immigration-related money on a separate track is “offensive to the men and women who serve in ICE and Border Patrol, and are serving this country every single day.”

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

NICOSIA, Cyprus — Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Friday refused to be drawn into a dispute with the United States over reports that the Pentagon is weighing whether to punish members of NATO that fail to support American operations in the Iran war.

Among those in the firing line is Spain, which has refused to allow U.S. forces involved in the war to use bases on its territory or airspace. Spain says that U.S.-Israeli actions in the Iran war contravenes international law.

France and the U.K. also refuse to give U.S. forces free rein to use their territory for the bombing campaign.

The Pentagon is reported to be mulling whether to suspend Spain from NATO, according to an unidentified U.S. official referring to a U.S. Defense Department email, and quoted by the Reuters news agency. The Associated Press hasn’t seen the email or had confirmation of its content. It has asked the Pentagon for comment, but received no immediate response.

“Well, we do not work with emails,” Sánchez told reporters at a European Union summit in Cyprus. “We work with official documents and positions taken, in this case, by the government of the United States.”

“The position of the government of Spain is clear: absolute collaboration with the allies, but always within the framework of international legality,” he said.

The Trump administration has routinely floated plans or ideas that are neither acted upon nor become policy.

The email also suggested reassessing U.S. support for the United Kingdom’s claim to the Falkland Islands, near Argentina, which are also known as Islas Malvinas.

Dave Pares, a spokesman for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, said the U.K. position on the islands is “longstanding and it’s unchanged: Sovereignty rests with the U.K., and the islanders’ right to self-determination is paramount.”

Pares noted “the Falkland Islands have previously voted overwhelmingly in favor of remaining a U.K. overseas territory.”

NATO staying out of the war

NATO operates by consensus, and all 32 member countries must agree for it to act.

The trans-Atlantic alliance’s founding treaty has no mechanism for suspending or ejecting any of the members, although nations may leave of their own accord one year after notifying the other allies. As an organization, NATO has no direct role in the Iran war except to defend its own territory.

Asked for comment, NATO headquarters said: “NATO’s Founding Treaty does not foresee any provision for suspension of NATO membership, or expulsion.”

President Trump has been angered by what he sees as the failure of some NATO members to back American actions in the Iran war and to help police the Strait of Hormuz, a major trade route. He has questioned the purpose of U.S. membership in the military organization.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas appeared perplexed by the U.S. criticism, given that the United Kingdom and France are leading an effort to help secure trade in the strait once the war is over.

“When we have had contacts with the American counterparts, then actually their asks for us have been exactly what we are able to offer after the cessation of hostilities,” she said. “Demining, escorting of ships, all of this that we have been discussing.”

But the United States has “long-standing arrangements and agreements with European allies on overflight, on basing” that should be respected, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has said, in implicit criticism of some allies like Spain, but also France.

While Spain restricted U.S. military activity related to the Iran war, U.S. warplanes have flown over other NATO allies’ airspace and used U.S. bases in other NATO countries for war-related operations.

Trump has even threatened to cut trade with Spain over its refusal to allow the use of its bases and airspace. More broadly, Spain has also disappointed its allies by failing to commit to spend as much as they plan to do on defense.

Security without the U.S.

As the reality sinks in that the U.S. commitment to NATO and Europe’s security under Trump has waned, the EU leaders debated how best to use European laws to come to each other’s aid should one of them come under attack.

Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides, whose country holds the bloc’s presidency until July, said that the leaders had tasked the European Commission to “prepare a blueprint on how we respond” should a member seek help under Article 42.7 of the EU treaties.

It’s only ever been used once, by France after the Paris terror attacks in 2015.

EU envoys and ministers are set next month to conduct “table-top exercises” to game out how the treaty article might be used, drawing on the bloc’s military capacities, but also other assets not available to NATO, like trade, border and visa policies.

Hadjicostis and Cook write for the Associated Press. Cook reported from Brussels. Jill Lawless in London contributed to this report.