Elections

Tamil Nadu, India – Standing on top of a customised van on a hot and humid afternoon in Tirunelveli, about 600km (373 miles) south of Tamil Nadu’s capital Chennai in southern India, C Joseph Vijay tells his supporters his opponents have joined hands to stop him from becoming the state chief minister.

“My rivals might appear different from outside, but they have only one aim: that Vijay should not become the chief minister,” says the 51-year-old actor-turned-politician to a mammoth crowd that begins to chant his name, which means “victory” in Tamil, in unison.

Tamil Nadu, one of India’s most developed states with impressive human development indices, also has a long history of electing film stars as leaders, some of whom are still revered by people as demigods years after their deaths.

As Tamil Nadu votes on Thursday to elect its 234-member state legislative assembly, Vijay’s bid for power is the latest addition to the state’s trend of film star-politicians, turning a traditionally bipolar battle into a triangular contest.

‘A blessing and a curse’

Vijay entered politics with much fanfare when he launched the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) party in 2024, promising to end the decades-old dominance of the governing Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the main opposition All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK).

Incumbent Chief Minister MK Stalin leads the DMK and its 14-party Secular Progressive Alliance, in which the Indian National Congress is a junior partner. On the other hand, opposition leader Edappadi K Palaniswami of the AIADMK heads the 10-party National Democratic Alliance, which also includes Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The DMK and the AIADMK identify themselves as Dravidian parties, which derive their names from a powerful political and social justice movement in Tamil Nadu that opposed caste inequalities, championed social reforms, and rejected perceived attempts by India’s more dominant north Indian parties to impose Hindi – and upper-caste Hindu values – on the non-Hindi speaking southern states.

Dravidian parties have held power in Tamil Nadu continuously since 1967, with national parties like the Congress and the BJP playing secondary roles. While the BJP is contesting 27 seats in alliance with the AIADMK, the Congress is fighting for 28 seats as part of the DMK-led coalition.

More than 87 percent of Tamil Nadu’s 72 million people are Hindu, followed by Christians at 6.1 percent and Muslims at 5.8 percent, according to the last census conducted in 2011.

Among Hindus, the so-called “backward” or less-privileged castes constitute 45.5 percent, “extremely backward” castes 23.6 percent, while Dalits are at 20.6 percent. Dalits, formerly referred to as “untouchables”, fall at the bottom of India’s complex caste hierarchy and have faced marginalisation and violence for centuries.

Vijay, son of a Christian filmmaker father and a Hindu mother who is a background singer in films, belongs to the Vellalar community, an affluent agrarian group in Tamil Nadu with both Hindu and Christian members.

Vijay started his film career as a child actor in movies directed by his father. His 1992 debut as a hero, however, in Naalaiya Theerpu (Tomorrow’s Verdict), flopped. Following the setback, his father cast him alongside popular star Vijayakanth — who later founded his own political outfit, Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK) — in Senthoorapandi (1993), which gave his career a new lease of life.

It was the 2004 film Ghilli (Gutsy), which carried a subtle political undertone, that catapulted Vijay to superstar status. He dropped hints about his political ambitions in the 2013 hit Thalaivaa (Leader), which was launched with the tagline “Time to Lead”.

Soon, political messaging became central to many of Vijay’s subsequent films. Even the title of his yet-to-be-released Jana Nayagan (People’s Leader) — which he claims will be his final film — alludes to his political aspirations.

Riding on personal charisma, Vijay has attracted millions of supporters to his rallies, despite allegations of poor crowd management, which caused a stampede at one such gathering in September last year, killing 42 people.

He is expected to draw a share of Dalit and minority Christian votes that would have otherwise flowed to the DMK-led coalition. He is also banking on anti-incumbency votes that could have benefitted the AIADMK alliance.

Yet analysts say Vijay’s ambition of becoming the next chief minister will not be as easy as the scripted blockbusters he has built his career on, since he faces two opponents with decades of experience in real politics.

That leads political commentator R Kannan to describe Vijay as “both a blessing and a curse” for the two Dravidian coalitions.

“When the AIADMK joined the BJP-led NDA, many predicted the Dravidian party would lose heavily, with minorities and Dalits flocking to the DMK. Vijay’s entry, however, has offered the AIADMK a ray of hope — he is expected to draw a decent share of votes that would otherwise have gone to the DMK,” he said.

“At the same time, he works in the DMK’s favour by siphoning off anti-incumbency votes that might not entirely have gone to the AIADMK. For both Dravidian parties, he is at once a blessing and a curse.”

Tamil Nadu’s tryst with stars

Vijay is aiming to follow the path of illustrious predecessors: Maruthur Gopalan Ramachandran, popularly known as MGR, and his protege, Jayaram Jayalalithaa – Tamil Nadu’s most beloved on-screen pair.

Born into poverty, MGR’s rise to stardom was nothing short of phenomenal. He captured the imagination of Tamil Nadu’s working class, who idolised him in return. From his first superhit, Rajakumari (Princess) in 1947, his films cast him as a champion of the masses, battling oppression and corrupt authority.

MGR launched the AIADMK in 1972 after breaking away from the DMK and served as Tamil Nadu’s chief minister from 1977 to 1987. He introduced several welfare programmes, the most significant being the Puratchi Thalaivar MGR Nutritious Meal Scheme, which provided free meals to schoolchildren to eliminate malnutrition and boost school enrolment.

His political heir, Jayalalithaa, was a six-time chief minister between 1991 and 2016, when she became India’s first female state leader to die in office. She is remembered for launching several women-centric programmes, including all-women police stations and subsidised two-wheelers for working women, apart from her work in curbing female infanticide.

The DMK also has a history of film personalities, including the party’s founder, CN Annadurai, who rose to fame as a pathbreaking scriptwriter with films like Velaikkari (1949), and MGR as the party’s star campaigner and leader before he founded the AIADMK.

Soon, Muthuvel Karunanidhi emerged as another prominent writer, poet and screenwriter with films like Parasakthi (1952), meaning Supreme Power, often cited as a turning point in Tamil cinema. Directed by Krishnan-Panju and written by Karunanidhi, then 28 years old, the film fiercely attacked casteism and social inequality, while propelling the spread of the Dravidian ideology.

Karunanidhi, popularly known as Kalaignar (artist), wrote scripts for more than 75 films that resonated with the struggles of the working class, championing rationalism and social equality.

He won the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly election for a record 13 terms and served as the state’s chief minister for five terms between 1969 and 2011. He died at the age of 94 in 2018, when his son, Stalin, took over as chief minister and DMK chief.

Film star-politicians who embraced Tamil identity politics flourished, while those who did not fell by the wayside.

“Successful leaders such as MGR, popularly known as Puratchi Thaalaivar [Revolutionary Leader], Jayalalithaa, who earned the monikers Puratchi Thalaivi [Revolutionary Female Leader] and Amma [Mother], embraced identity politics. Another popular film actor, Sivaji Ganesan, by contrast, could not make the same mark in politics even after he tried,” said Kannan, who has written biographies of MGR and Annadurai.

In 2005, popular actor Vijayakanth added to the starry mix by launching his DMDK party, another Dravidian political outfit. He made every attempt to position his party as an alternative to the DMK and the AIADMK, but failed. The party won just one seat in 2006 — Vijayakanth’s own — and drew a blank in 2009. Though he went on to become the leader of the opposition in the assembly in 2011, the election reverses forced him to seek alliances. The DMDK, now led by his wife Premalatha, is contesting 10 seats in alliance with the DMK.

Which is where, say analysts, Vijay’s pitch for power is unlikely to make an impact in this election. They say his TVK party does not fall in the long line of Dravidian parties that have a distinct political ideology and programme that appeals to their voters.

“Tamil Nadu is an ideologically and politically evolved state. Issues such as social justice, centre-state relations, and linguistic and cultural identity are paramount here. People will not back a politician without a clear ideology,” Ramu Manivannan, former professor of political science at the University of Madras, told Al Jazeera.

Manivannan said large crowds at Vijay’s rallies should not be mistaken for potential votes. “Film stars always attract crowds. To assume all of them will translate into votes is unfair.”

Vijay’s TVK is rooted in his fan clubs, which thrive on masculine aggression, said S Anandhi, retired professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies.

“Vijay’s populist rhetoric — defying all authority — appeals strongly to the youth. But he never clarifies what he will actually do in power. He frames it as all established forces being arrayed against young men, and youngsters see this as an opportunity for a new kind of collectivisation. I would call it a dangerous class,” she told Al Jazeera.

Appeal to young, female voters

Vijay appears to be banking heavily on two voter blocs: younger voters between 18 and 39 years, who number 23 million of the state’s 57 million voters, and women, who account for more than half of them.

At his rallies packed with young people and women, Vijay has alleged that Stalin’s true allies are “bribery and corruption”, framing the contest as a personal battle between himself and the chief minister.

Stalin, for his part, has largely brushed off Vijay’s attacks. “Newly-formed parties have a wrong notion that they can survive by criticising DMK,” he said in a recent interview.

Instead, Stalin has focused his attacks on the Modi government, accusing it of depriving Tamil Nadu of its share of federal funds, and framing the election as a contest between Tamil Nadu and New Delhi – a ploy that simultaneously targets the AIADMK for allying with an “adversary”, the BJP.

The AIADMK’s Palaniswami has countered by saying Stalin raises the centre-state issue only because he has “no achievements of his own to show”.

Despite their ideological differences, all parties are competing heavily on welfare promises in a state known for freebies during elections.

The DMK has pledged to double the monthly women’s allowance to 2,000 rupees ($21), offer 8,000 rupees ($85) in home appliance coupons, and build one million homes for the poor over five years. The AIADMK, also promising a monthly allowance of 2,000 rupees for women, has additionally offered free refrigerators to the poor and a one-time family grant of 10,000 rupees ($106).

Vijay’s TVK, hoping to cash in on the ongoing global fuel crisis, has promised six free LPG cylinders annually, 2,500 rupees ($26.5) monthly support for the female heads of a household, 8gm gold and a silk saree for poor women getting married, 4,000 rupees ($42.5) stipend for unemployed college graduates, and interest-free education loans of up to 2 million rupees ($21,257).

Still, Kannan feels Vijay can at best be a disruptor in the three-cornered contest.

“Vijay’s campaign gained momentum in the final lap. He turned what was a bipolar contest into a three-cornered one. But apart from his personal charisma, he lacks proper organisational machinery. Many of his party’s candidates are unknown faces,” he said.

Waving a big Catla fish in his hands, Sharadwat Mukherjee went door to door canvassing for votes before Thursday’s election to the state legislature in the eastern Indian state of West Bengal.

Mukherjee is a candidate from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which rules nationally but has never come to power in the state, which has a greater population than Germany: more than 90 million people.

When he folds his hands to greet voters, the Catla just swings with a hook in its mouth. The big question: Can the fish also swing the election’s outcome?

Bengalis’ love for fish is legendary — on both sides of the border, in India and in Bangladesh. So much so that when a student-led uprising led to the ouster of then-Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, some of the protesters who broke into her residence after she fled were seen raiding her refrigerator and walking away with fish.

But as West Bengal votes for its next government, fish has now leapt from kitchen slabs to the campaign trail, as leaders cosy up to voters in a variety of ways — and in some cases try to distance themselves from suspicions that their wins could hit the Bengali diet adversely.

What’s happening in the West Bengal election?

Nearly 68 million people in West Bengal are expected to vote for their candidate of choice on April 23 and 29, to elect 294 lawmakers to the state assembly.

The results will be declared on May 4 in the crucial state vote, which the Hindu majoritarian BJP has never governed.

A revision of the electoral list, which controversially swept away a total of 9.1 million names from the register before polling, and has been criticised for disenfranchising minorities, was among the major polling issues. Some 2.7 million people have challenged their expulsions.

Another is identity politics.

On the campaign trail, in rallies, and in interviews, the chief minister of Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, a firebrand, centrist regional leader — who has been sometimes touted as a contender for Modi’s job in New Delhi, if the opposition were to win — has doubled down on identity politics to corner the BJP, analysts say.

BJP-led governments in several states have imposed bans or restrictions on the sale of meat. Far-right mobs have carried out lynchings of Muslims in BJP-ruled states over accusations that they were transporting beef.

Banerjee, who is seeking a fourth consecutive term, has time and again warned that if the BJP were to come to power, they would “ban fish, meat, and even eggs” — effectively labelling them as outsiders, unaware of Bengali culture. The BJP has rejected these allegations.

Biswanath Chakraborty, a psephologist and political analyst in West Bengal who has authored several books on voting behaviour, told Al Jazeera that the whole issue surrounding fish had been “constructed by Mamata Banerjee.”

“For long, she has peddled that fish is parallel to Bengali politics,” he said. “In election campaigning, every issue is constructed, and Mamata is the champion of that.”

Chakraborty argued that by fiercely pushing back against these allegations, the BJP had ended up helping the governing party in Bengal make sure the debate over fish remained a campaign highlight with voters.

“They [the BJP] are entering, or rather trapped, into the discourse set by Mamata,” the analyst said.

Why fish, though?

“Fish is very crucial in Bengal, very crucial,” said Utsa Ray, an assistant professor at Jadavpur University, in West Bengal’s capital Kolkata. She also authored a 2015 book on Bengal’s culinary evolution in colonial India, titled Culinary Culture in Colonial India: A Cosmopolitan Platter and the Middle-Class.

“First of all, due to Bengal’s geographical location itself – along the Bay of Bengal – [and as] a place situated near rivers and streams, fish have been the most available item,” she told Al Jazeera.

Fish has also been an integral part of many rituals in Bengal on auspicious days for both Hindus and Muslims, Ray said, adding, however, that there were sects of people in Bengal who refrain from eating fish.

A 2024 study found that nearly 65 percent of people in West Bengal consume fish weekly.

Against that backdrop, Ray told Al Jazeera that Banerjee’s party was looking to leverage “regional identity or the Bengali identity”.

Banojyotsna Lahiri, a social activist and voter in West Bengal, described the BJP’s response, with candidates like Mukherjee campaigning with fish, as a “gimmick”.

“In Bengal, [the BJP] have suddenly realised that they appear as aliens with their vegetarian posturing because both fish and meat are integral to the Bengal culinary choices, caste or religion notwithstanding,” she told Al Jazeera. ”

What’s up with the BJP and food choices?

In the run-up to the voting on Thursday, the BJP rushed to find a senior leader who could eat a fish in front of the cameras. They finally managed to get Anurag Thakur, a member of parliament from Himachal Pradesh, to do that on Tuesday.

“Questions of what food people will eat, especially non-vegetarian [food], have been associated with the BJP’s politics to impose restrictions and dictate food options,” said Neelanjan Sircar, a senior visiting fellow at the think tank Centre for Policy Research, in Delhi.

The BJP has been dictating food choices in northern India’s Hindi-speaking belt, with its “hyper masculine, Hindutva, and vegetarianism,” said Ray. “There have been cases of lynching for eating non-vegetarian food.”

However, that falls flat in Benga.

Still, both Sircar and Ray agreed that the display of fish on the campaign trail was a novelty — even in the often-bizarre world of Indian politics.

“Creating these new images for the BJP is important,” said Sircar. “So, to create another image in voters’ minds leads to these outlandish displays.”

Washington, DC – The latest battle in United States congressional redistricting has been decided, with voters in Virginia approving redrawing the state’s electoral map.

The result of Tuesday’s referendum on Virginia redistricting is widely expected to benefit Democrats in their fight to retake control of the slimly Republican-controlled US House of Representatives in the midterm vote in November.

While redistricting is typically conducted every 10 years, following the US Census count of the country’s population, the election season has seen an unprecedented flurry of states moving to redraw their legislative maps early, initially spurred by pressure on US President Donald Trump to urge his fellow Republicans in Texas to do the same.

Democrats may be up at the moment, but several scenarios – including a redistricting push in Florida – could soon spoil those gains.

Experts, meanwhile, warn of the long-term implications of the election season’s norm-busting political manoeuvres, which they say could transform how and when electoral maps are drawn for years to come.

“Virginia’s unorthodox redistricting isn’t just a map redraw, it’s a mid-decade power play in a national arms race,” Rina Shah, a political adviser and strategist, told Al Jazeera.

“In a cycle defined by retaliation over reform, this sets a precedent: when one side bends the rules, the other follows, until courts or voters draw the final line.”

Democrats gain – for now

Trump has not been timid about his desire to redraw state congressional maps to benefit his Republican Party.

In July 2025, he confirmed the plan to reporters: “Texas would be the biggest one,” he said. “Just a very simple redrawing, we pick up five seats.”

By August, Texas’s Republican-controlled State House had passed a new map favouring Republicans, setting the party on course to secure five more seats in the US House of Representatives compared to the earlier map.

The move was soon followed by changes in Missouri, whose new maps are expected to net Republicans one additional seat, while redistricting in North Carolina and Ohio is expected to give the party two to three new Republican-dominated districts.

Democrats in several states responded in kind, pushing for redistricting in California and Utah that resulted in about six new Democrat-dominated districts. Virginia’s victory largely neutralised Republican gains, adding between two and four seats for Democrats.

“This could shift Virginia from a 6-5 split to something like 10-1 Democratic,” political adviser Shah said, referring to Virginia’s 11 congressional districts and noting this would result in “delivering up to four net seats and dramatically tightening the fight for House control in the 2026 midterms”.

This comes as Republicans are already expected to face a punishing election season, with wariness over the US-Israeli war in Iran and the stubbornly high cost of living in the US.

Democratic control of either chamber of Congress – or of both – would give the party the ability to largely curtail Trump’s agenda in the final two years of his presidency.

As of Wednesday, Sabato’s Crystal Ball, a midterm predictor published by the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, rated 217 Congressional districts across the country as leaning towards Democrats, with 205 leaning towards Republicans and 13 rated toss-ups.

Good for Democrats, ‘terrible’ for democracy

In the short term, Democrats are “winning” from the redistricting battle, according to Samuel Wang, a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University who runs the Princeton Gerrymandering Project.

“But from a non-partisan good government standpoint, it’s just a terrible event,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

He explained the “incredible” flurry of redistricting in recent months opens the possibility of a new age of heightened gerrymandering, the process by which congressional boundaries are drawn to benefit one political group.

Prior to this election cycle, there had been just three instances of mid-decade redistricting over the last five decades. Wang described the recent spurt as a “complete busting of norms”.

“It’s bad in the sense of reducing competition. Gerrymandering on both sides, basically, removes voters from the equation everywhere it happens,” he said.

Top Democrats have largely argued their hands were forced in mirroring the Republican strategy, rather than yield to the opposing party ahead of a consequential election.

“We fought back,” Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the House, told the Associated Press after Virginia’s vote. “When they go low, we hit back hard.”

But some Democrats have echoed concerns over the new precedent being set.

John Fetterman, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who has regularly sided with Republicans, told Newsmax on Wednesday, “Whether it’s a red state or whether it’s a blue state, our democracy is degraded.”

Attention turns to Florida

To be sure, while opportunities for further redistricting are diminishing following the vote in Virginia, the final congressional maps ahead of the midterms may not yet be set.

The Virginia vote now shifts pressure on Republicans in Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis is set to hold a special legislative session on April 28 to discuss possible redistricting.

A new map could add up to five Republican-dominated congressional districts in the state, but could be scuttled by strict language in Florida’s constitution related to the process.

Democrat Jeffries, in a statement on Wednesday, vowed to surge resources to the state to take down Republican incumbents if the map is redrawn. “Maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time,” he pledged.

Several challenges to Virginia’s redistricting ballot measure are also currently being heard before the state’s Supreme Court, which could hinder the implementation of the new map.

Trump on Wednesday decried the Virginia vote as “rigged”, without providing any evidence to back up the claim.

Meanwhile, a case pending before the US Supreme Court could beckon in another slate of redistricting in the US South.

In Louisiana v Callais, the justices will determine whether the creation of two Black-majority congressional districts is in line with the Voting Rights Act, which seeks to assure minority representation in states with a history of racist election policies.

A ruling could open the door to redrawing maps in several states that would have previously been banned due to so-called “racial gerrymandering”, a process of drawing congressional lines based on racial makeup to dilute the electoral power of a minority group.

A pathway to reform?

A handful of states have created independent commissions to oversee redistricting, in an effort to assure the process remains non-partisan.

But the vast majority rely on their state legislatures to draw the maps, which can lead to outsized influence over the party in control, barring legal challenges. That largely remains true whether redistricting is conducted every decade or, as the current election season could portend, more frequently.

But amid the current cavalcade of congressional map changes, Princeton’s Wang, who is himself running in the Democratic primary for Congress in New Jersey’s 12th district, sees a rare opportunity for federal reform.

That could take the form of Congress creating independent commissions to oversee redistricting.

“Now that mid-decade redistricting is backfiring on Republicans, it creates the possibility that both parties can see clearly that gerrymandering is a zero-sum game,” Wang said.

“It opens a path for possible bipartisan action.”

Virginia voters have narrowly approved a referendum to redraw the state’s congressional map, with about 51.5 percent voting yes and 48.6 percent voting no, and 97 percent of ballots counted, according to The Associated Press news agency.

The map redraws the boundaries of Virginia’s congressional districts, changes that can directly shape which party wins seats in the United States House of Representatives.

With most votes counted, the result remained close, but Democratic-leaning areas helped push it through.

The vote is part of a broader national fight over district lines – a battle that could decide who controls Congress.

Republicans in Florida, for instance, are planning a special session of the state legislature next Tuesday where they are expected to seek to redraw their state’s political map – a move that could help them gain as many as five seats, potentially wiping out any Democratic gain in Virginia.

Here are five key takeaways:

Democrats gain a major advantage in the House race

Currently, Virginia sends 11 members to the US House. At the moment, they comprise six Democrats and five Republicans.

The new map changes how those seats are drawn. By reshaping district boundaries, it makes most areas more favourable to Democrats by clumping together voters who lean towards the party strategically, while splintering communities that typically vote Republican.

• Eight districts would be safely Democratic
• Two would be competitive but lean Democratic
• Only one would be safely Republican.

Because of this, Democrats could realistically win at least eight and possibly up to 10 of the 11 seats in the US house, instead of just six.

This shift follows a high-stakes political battle, with total spending estimated at $100m.

Democratic leaders, including Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger, framed the new map as a direct response to efforts by US President Donald Trump and Republicans to redraw districts in their favour in other states.

However, even with this win, “there’s no guarantee they’ll send a delegation dominated by Democrats to Washington,” Al Jazeera’s Rosiland Jordan said, reporting from Virginia.

There are still six months until the midterm elections, and voter behaviour can shift. Even favourable maps can produce unexpected outcomes.

Virginia is one part of a bigger battle

Virginia is just one part of a bigger fight over who controls the US House.

After the 2024 election, Trump pushed Republican-led states to redraw congressional maps before the usual timeline to improve their chances in the 2026 midterms.

Republicans moved first in states like Texas, where new maps could give them up to five more seats.

Democrats responded with their own moves. In California, voters approved a plan backed by Governor Gavin Newsom that allowed lawmakers to draw a new, more partisan map. This is expected to give Democrats up to five extra seats.

The Virginia result fits into this bigger picture. If Democrats gain up to four seats there, it could help cancel out Republican gains in other states.

But the fight is not over. More changes could still happen, including in Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis is looking at redrawing the map.

“Virginia just changed the trajectory of the 2026 midterms,” Democratic state House Speaker Don Scott said in a celebratory statement.

“At a moment when Trump and his allies are trying to lock in power before voters have a say, Virginians stepped up and levelled the playing field for the entire country.”

Legal challenges could still overturn the result

The measure has been approved by voters, but its future is still uncertain.

The Supreme Court of Virginia is expected to review ongoing legal challenges that could affect whether the new map takes effect. While the court allowed the vote to go ahead, it said it would examine the case in full if the measure passed.

The challenges focus on two key issues: Whether Democratic lawmakers followed the correct legal process when putting the proposal forward, and whether the wording on the ballot may have been misleading to voters.

A narrow win

Both parties were watching the vote closely.

Democrats were happy to win, even if it was close. Republicans, meanwhile, were relieved it wasn’t a big loss.

“Virginia Democrats can’t redraw reality,” said Republican Congressman Richard Hudson. “This close margin reinforces that Virginia is a purple state that shouldn’t be represented by a severe partisan gerrymander.”

Gerrymandering is the process of redrawing electoral maps in ways that can benefit one party over another.

Democrats said the tight result was partly down to voter confusion, which they blamed on Republican messaging. Democrats framed the effort as a response to Trump, promoting the plan with advertisements featuring former US President Barack Obama.

Opponents pushed back by pointing to past comments from Obama and Spanberger, both of whom have previously criticised gerrymandering, using that to question the Democrats’ position.

Gerrymandering is at the centre of the fight

The vote highlights the growing importance of partisan map-drawing in US politics.

Democrats say this balances Republican advantages elsewhere. Republicans call it a power grab in a competitive state.

Either way, redistricting is now a key tool shaping election outcomes, not just reflecting them.

Ballot delivery delays and other missteps on election day have contributed to frustration with electoral authorities.

The head of Peru’s election authority has resigned from his role amid widespread anger over the country’s chaotic general election earlier this month, with vote counting still under way.

Piero Corvetto said in a social media post on Tuesday that he was stepping down as head of the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), a government body tasked with organising elections in Peru.

In a letter to the National Board of Justice (JNJ), Corvetto denied that irregularities had taken place, as some politicians have alleged.

But he explained that he was leaving in a bid to increase public confidence, ahead of an anticipated second round of voting in the presidential race on June 7.

The first round of the election, held on April 12, was marred by logistical issues that led to the extension of voting hours around the capital Lima and elsewhere.

Election observers have acknowledged missteps with the electoral process but cautioned that there is no firm evidence of fraud.

Peru’s National Jury of Elections (JNE) said the voting results will be finalised no later than May 15, with the top two presidential candidates advancing to the final round.

Right-wing candidate Keiko Fujimori leads with about 17 percent of the vote and is likely to advance to the run-off.

But who will face her remains a mystery. Left-wing Congressman Roberto Sanchez and Lima’s former far-right mayor Rafael Lopez Aliaga remain virtually tied, with 12 percent and 11.9 percent respectively.

The hectic first round of voting could deepen dissatisfaction with the country’s political system at a time of protracted instability and sloping trust in government institutions.

Even before the April election, about 68 percent of Peruvians said that they had little to no trust in the country’s election authorities, according to a poll conducted by the Institute for Peruvian Studies (IEP) and the Institute Bartolome de las Casas (IBC).

Some presidential candidates, including Lopez Aliaga, have pushed unconfirmed claims of fraud and have called for the first round of voting to be nullified.

Election authorities have begun to review thousands of contested ballots that were challenged due to inconsistencies, missing details or tally sheet errors.

Voters in Virginia head to the polls on Tuesday to decide on a measure that could redraw the state’s congressional map and potentially shift the balance of power in Washington.

Major political figures, including former President Barack Obama and House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson, have weighed in on the high-stakes vote, with nearly $100m spent on campaigning around it.

Part of a broader redistricting battle that began in Texas and spread nationwide, the vote may be the Democrats’ last chance this year to gain seats by changing district maps. The vote comes about six months before the 2026 midterm elections.

Here is what we know:

What is Virginia voting on?

Virginia currently sends 11 members to the House. At the moment, six of them are Democrats, and five are Republicans, reflecting the state’s balance.

Democrats now want to redraw the map to favour them in a way that could help them win up to 10 of the 11 seats. Under the proposal, most districts would be safely Democratic or lean towards the party, with only one strongly Republican.

A breakdown would be:

• Eight districts would be safely Democratic
• Two would be competitive but lean Democratic
• Only one would be safely Republican

If approved, this could give the Democrats several extra seats in Congress, helping them win back or strengthen control of the House in Washington, where majorities are often decided by just a few seats.

That would be a big political shift for the state, which was once closely contested but has become more Democratic-leaning in recent years.

How would the vote work?

Voters in Virginia can cast their ballots either early or on Election Day.

Polling stations will be open across the state on Tuesday:

• Polls open at 10:00 GMT
• Polls close at 23:00 GMT

Votes will be counted after polls close, with early results expected later that evening and fuller results overnight or the next day.

What are voters being asked to decide?

The proposed constitutional amendment is the only statewide contest on the ballot.

It reads:

“Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?”

A “yes” vote would support allowing the General Assembly to redraw congressional districts before the midterms.

A “no” vote would leave current boundaries unchanged until the next round of regularly scheduled redistricting after the 2030 census.

What do the latest polls suggest?

The result is expected to be close.

A recent poll by State Navigate, a nonpartisan research group, suggests a small lead for supporters, with about 53 percent in favour and 47 percent against.

Why do district lines matter so much?

District lines decide how voters are grouped, which can shape who wins elections.

Moving the lines can make a district more favourable to a Democratic or Republican win, by adding or removing neighbourhoods and communities that lean one way or the other.

It can turn a close race into a safe seat, or the other way around. It affects which communities are kept together and who represents them.

This process, often called gerrymandering, allows parties to draw maps that benefit them.

In a closely divided state like Virginia, even small changes to the map can shift several seats and influence who holds power in Congress.

A 2023 study by Harvard University researchers found that gerrymandering often creates “safe” seats for politicians, meaning their races are less competitive.

In turn, those politicians become less responsive to the needs of their constituents, who become discouraged about voting as a result.

When could new maps take effect?

If approved, the new map could be used as early as the next election cycle, including the upcoming midterms, depending on legal approval.

However, the plan could face legal challenges. Critics have questioned the ballot wording and the process used by lawmakers.

The Virginia Supreme Court has allowed the vote to go ahead while reviewing those concerns.

If it later finds that rules were broken, the results could be overturned, and the current maps would remain.

Why this vote could shape power in Washington?

A handful of seats could decide control of the US House.

Republicans currently hold a narrow 218–213 majority, but Democrats are seen as competitive heading into the midterms.

Political leaders have underscored the stakes.

Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic Party’s leader in the House, has pointed to Virginia as a crucial battleground, while Mike Johnson has said the result will be closely watched across the country.

What it means to control the US House

The party with the majority (more seats) in Congress can:

• Set the agenda, deciding which bills are brought up for debate
• Control committees, including investigations and hearings
• Pass legislation more easily (if they stay united)
• Block bills from the minority party.

The majority party also chooses the speaker of the House, who has major influence over what reaches the floor.

Where else has this happened?

Virginia’s redistricting vote is part of a larger political battle playing out in the US. Republicans in Texas, encouraged by Donald Trump, have redrawn district maps to strengthen their advantage, prompting similar efforts in other states.

In rare cases, voters have been asked to decide directly, including in California last year and now in Virginia.

In California, voters backed the changes despite concerns about fairness. Now it’s Virginia’s turn to decide.

What Democrats are saying, and why?

Democrats argue the plan is a response to Republican actions in other states, not just a power grab.

Leaders like Obama had long opposed gerrymandering in principle, but have now backed the Virginia move, even releasing a video asking voters to go out and vote for the constitutional amendment.

Bulgaria’s eighth parliamentary election in five years has concluded with former president Rumen Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria party emerging as the clear winner. Radev will be the next prime minister.

While pollsters predicted a win for Radev ahead of the election, they did not necessarily expect it to be such a large one.

With 98.3 percent of ballots tallied on Monday, official figures show Radev’s party taking 44.7 percent of the vote, and likely to secure roughly 130 of the 240 seats in parliament. The centre-left party has come in far ahead of rivals, raising hopes among voters for a more stable government after years of fragile coalitions and repeated votes.

However, questions remain over what Radev’s foreign policy will entail and what his election means for Bulgaria’s position within the European Union and NATO.

Here is what you need to know:

Who is Rumen Radev?

The 62-year-old served as Bulgaria’s president for nearly a decade before stepping down in January this year to launch his bid to become prime minister.

The former air force commander has positioned himself as an outsider, saying he wants to rid the country of its “oligarchic governance model”, amid widespread frustration with corruption and political turmoil that has gripped the country of 6.6 million people.

In 2025, Radev supported anti-corruption protests that brought down the conservative-backed government of former Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov. He urged voters to turn out in large numbers to counter vote-buying.

At a pre-election rally on Wednesday last week, he pledged to “remove the corrupt, oligarchic model of governance from political power”.

Radev’s stance on foreign policy has drawn attention in Europe, however.

Although he publicly condemned Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, he has also opposed providing military support to Ukraine and called, instead, for renewed, “practical relations with Russia based on mutual respect and equal treatment”.

Radev objected to a 10-year defence pact concluded between Bulgaria and Ukraine in March.

He has also called for the resumption of Russian imports to Europe, despite EU sanctions on Russian oil and a decision at the end of last year to cease all energy imports from Russia by 2027.

All this has led to critics labelling him “pro-Russian”. Radev, however, says he is merely taking a pragmatic approach.

“We are the only member state of the European Union that is both Slavic and Eastern Orthodox,” he said in an interview with Bulgarian journalist Martin Karbovski.

“We can be ‌a very important ⁠link in this whole mechanism … to restore relations with Russia,” he added.

Following the election, Russia congratulated Radev, welcoming his victory.

“Of course, we are impressed by the statements made by Mr Radev, who won the election, and by some other European leaders regarding their willingness to resolve problems through pragmatic dialogue,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday.

On Europe, some label Radev a eurosceptic, as he has criticised aspects of EU policy, including reliance on renewable energy and Bulgaria’s adoption of the euro.

At his campaign rally on Wednesday last week, he said: “The coalition-makers introduced the euro in Bulgaria without asking you. And now, when you pay your bills, always remember which politicians promised you that you would be in the ‘club of the rich’.”

Following his victory, he told reporters: “A strong Bulgaria and a strong Europe need critical thinking and pragmatism. Europe has fallen victim to its own ambition to be a moral leader in a world with new rules.”

Nevertheless, Radev has signalled his willingness to cooperate with pro-European parties on issues like judicial reform and has stated that Bulgaria will “continue on its European path”.

Following his win, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said: “Bulgaria is a proud member of the European family and plays an important role in tackling our common challenges.”

How significant is this result?

Since 2021, Bulgaria has been through multiple governments, many brought down by protests or parliamentary disagreements.

The election result places Radev’s party, with 44 percent of the vote, well ahead of the centre-right GERB party of former Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, which secured 13.4 percent of the vote, and the reformist PP-DB coalition, with 12.7 percent.

The margin between the parties is wider than pollsters predicted. On Friday last week, according to Bulgaria’s Alpha Research, Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria was projected to win, but with only 34.2 percent of the vote, followed by Borissov’s GERB-UDF with 19.5 percent. This led observers to predict that a coalition government would be necessary.

Despite securing a clear majority, however, Radev has yet to rule out creating a coalition with a smaller party to form a government.

“We are ready to consider different options so that Bulgaria can have a regular and stable government,” he told reporters on Sunday.

This latest election was called after former PM Zhelyazkov announced in December that his cabinet would resign, amid a looming no-confidence vote.

The election campaign centred heavily on cost-of-living pressures, corruption, and other economic concerns, with many voters expressing frustration at the lack of credible political alternatives.

What will Radev’s role as prime minister be?

Although Radev is best known for holding the title of president, that is a largely ceremonial role in Bulgaria’s political system.

The president serves as head of state, representing national unity and playing a role in foreign policy; executive power lies primarily with the prime minister and his cabinet.

The prime minister appoints his cabinet ministers, sets the government agenda, and is the key representative of Bulgaria in international affairs, including within organisations like the European Union and NATO.

The prime minister remains in office unless he chooses to resign or is removed in a no-confidence motion.

The EU’s election observer said the vote met democratic standards despite fraud allegations.

Peru’s presidential election result will not be finalised until mid-May, with challenged ballots from last Sunday’s vote still being reviewed, says the electoral authority.

With 93 percent of ballots counted, right-wing candidate Keiko Fujimori leads with 17 percent, according to officials.

Under Peru’s electoral system, the top two candidates advance to a second-round runoff. A close contest has emerged for second spot between left-wing candidate, Roberto Sanchez on 12 percent, and ultra-conservative Rafael Lopez Aliaga close behind on 11.9 percent.

The margin between the two widened slightly on Saturday to about 13,600 votes.

Yessica Clavijo, secretary general of the National Jury of Elections (JNE), said the delay was due to the review of more than 15,000 challenged ballots. About 30 percent concern the presidential race, the rest relate to legislative elections.

Lopez Aliaga, a former mayor of the capital Lima, has been the most vocal critic of the delay. He has alleged fraud without presenting evidence and called for the election to be annulled. He urged supporters of his Popular Renewal Party to protest on Sunday.

Sanchez also criticised the election process, telling reporters: “These serious organisational issues must be investigated and there must be appropriate sanctions”.

A record 35 candidates ran for president in Peru, a country that has faced years of political instability. Four of its last eight presidents have been impeached by Congress.

Voting was disrupted by delays in the delivery of election materials, forcing authorities to extend polling into Monday in parts of Lima.

Despite the setbacks, the European Union’s election observer mission said the vote met democratic standards. On Friday, prosecutors raided a warehouse belonging to the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), the body responsible for organising the election. Four officials have been reported to the JNE over alleged offences linked to voting rights.

Ruling is latest loss for Trump administration, which has sought access to state voter data ahead of the US midterms.

A federal judge in the United States has dismissed a Department of Justice lawsuit seeking to access voter data from Rhode Island.

The decision on Friday was the latest loss for the administration of President Donald Trump, which has sought to access voter data in dozens of states across the country.

In the ruling, US District Court Judge Mary McElroy sided with election officials and civil rights groups, writing that the Justice Department does not have the authority “to conduct the kind of fishing expedition it seeks here”.

Rhode Island Secretary of State Gregg Amore praised the ruling in a statement afterwards.

“The executive branch seems to have no problem taking actions that are clear Constitutional overreaches, regularly meddling in responsibilities that are the rights of the states,” Amore wrote.

“But the power of our democratic republic, built on three, coequal branches of government, is clearer than ever before.”

The Justice Department has sued at least 30 states for their voter information, maintaining it needs the information to secure election security. State officials have said that turning over the data raises an array of privacy concerns.

Under the US Constitution, state officials administer elections. Only Congress can pass laws related to how states oversee voting.

But Trump has sought to transform election administration, claiming that voting has been marred by widespread fraud.

In particular, Trump has continued to maintain that the 2020 election, in which he lost to former President Joe Biden, was “stolen”.

No evidence has ever been put forward to support the claims.

Federal judges have rejected attempts in California, Massachusetts, Michigan and Oregon to force the states to hand over voter files to the federal government. At least 12 states, however, have willingly provided or pledged to provide voter information to the Trump administration.

The push for voter information is one of several actions that have raised concerns over how the Trump administration will approach the midterm elections in November, which will decide the makeup of the US Congress.

He is currently calling on Republicans to pass the so-called SAVE America Act, a bill that would create higher documentation standards for voters to prove their citizenship when registering to vote and casting ballots.

The majority of Republican lawmakers have embraced Trump’s claim that the law is needed to prevent non-citizens from registering to vote, despite studies showing that instances of voter fraud are glancingly rare.

Critics say the measure would risk disenfranchising millions of voters, particularly those who have legally changed their names, which is a common practice in US marriages.

The vote count continues to determine who will join conservative Keiko Fujimori in Peru’s presidential run-off in June.

Calls to remove the head of Peru’s electoral authority have intensified as delays and alleged irregularities clouded the presidential vote count.

As of Friday, no clear challenger has emerged to face conservative frontrunner Keiko Fujimori in the June 7 run-off.

The general election was held on Sunday, but an extension was granted to accommodate for the difficulties in ballot distribution.

Pressure has mounted against the head of Peru’s National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), Piero Corvetto. Complaints over errors and logistical problems during Sunday’s election have been compounded by a slow tally that has rattled investor confidence and heightened uncertainty.

According to the ONPE, leftist Roberto Sanchez and ultraconservative former Lima Mayor Rafael Lopez Aliaga remain locked in a close battle for second place, separated by about 13,000 votes as of Friday.

With 93.3 percent of the ballots counted, Sanchez held 12.0 percent of the vote and Lopez Aliaga 11.9 percent.

Fujimori, meanwhile, remained firmly in first place with 17 percent, positioning her for the run-off. Final results could take up to two weeks, according to local election-monitoring group Transparencia.

The vote counting has been further delayed by the roughly 5 percent of ballots that were identified for review due to missing information or errors in polling station records, according to ONPE data. Those ballots will be reviewed by a special electoral jury before being included in the final count, officials said.

Business leaders and lawmakers from across the political spectrum have called on Corvetto to step down, arguing that a replacement should oversee the second round.

“Errors this serious have consequences,” Jorge Zapata, head of business chamber CONFIEP, told local radio station RPP.

Earlier this week, Corvetto acknowledged that there had been some logistical delays that forced voting to be extended by a day, mainly in Lima. Those delays triggered fraud allegations, notably from Lopez Aliaga, who has called for counting to be suspended. Corvetto has denied that any irregularities took place.

Even so, Peru’s top electoral court, the National Jury of Elections, filed a criminal complaint with prosecutors against Corvetto, citing alleged offences, including violations of voting rights. Representatives for Corvetto did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

An investigation is also under way after materials from four polling stations were found on a public road in Lima on Thursday, the police said. ONPE said on the social media platform X that the votes from those stations had already been recorded for counting.

European Union election observers said this week that they found no evidence of fraud.

Hungary’s newly elected leader, Peter Magyar, stormed to power last weekend after campaigning to, among other things, take a step back from Russia.

Instead, Magyar has promised voters he will steer Hungary back towards the European Union, following the 16-year rule of far-right Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who went to great lengths to deepen ties with Russia.

Under Orban, Hungary opposed most of the European Union’s stances against Russia and  blocked sanctions and obstructed military aid for Ukraine.

Above all, he and his Fidesz party entrenched Hungary’s reliance on Russian oil.

Now, following a massive electoral turnout and a landslide victory, Magyar – once a devotee of Orban and now leader of the centre-right Tisza party – has promised to end Russian oil imports by 2035. But how realistic a goal is that? And can he achieve it?

How much does Hungary depend on Russia for energy?

Hungary has been central to keeping Russian oil and gas flowing into the EU, even as Europe and the US banned some imports and imposed sanctions on anyone paying more than $60 a barrel for Russian oil.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU banned seaborne imports of Russian oil but kept land flows legal. That allowed Hungary to continue importing most of its crude by pipeline via Ukraine.

The EU first announced plans to phase out Russian energy imports in May 2022, shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In December 2025, a binding agreement was made for member nations to completely phase out Russian oil and gas imports by late 2027. But, instead of diversifying from Moscow, Hungary increased its dependency.

According to a 2026 report by the Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD), Hungary had expanded its reliance on Russian crude from 61 percent in 2021 to 93 percent by 2025.

Much of the crude oil Hungary imports from Russia comes via the Druzhba pipeline. It is one of the key pipelines that ensures the continued flow of Russian crude to both Hungary and Slovakia. At 5,500 km (3,420 miles) long, it begins in Almetyevsk in western Russia and runs into Belarus. It splits at Mozyr, with one branch going to Poland and Germany and the southern branch goes through Ukraine into Slovakia, Hungary and Czechia.

In January, the section of the pipeline running through Ukraine suffered significant damage. Ukraine blamed a Russian airstrike – Moscow denies that.

Hungary and Slovakia have complained that Ukraine has been deliberately slow to repair the damage. As a result, in March, Orban vetoed a 90 billion euro ($106bn) loan from the EU to Ukraine until the pipeline reopens.

On Tuesday this week, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said oil will flow again through the conduit by the end of April as he expects the new Hungarian leadership to lift its veto on the loan by then.

As for gas, Hungary remains one of the most dependent EU member states on Russian natural gas, accounting for roughly three-quarters of its annual imports, the CSD report shows.

Since the start of Russia’s invasion, Hungary has imported an estimated 15.6 billion euros ($18.4bn) worth of Russian gas. Long-term contracts with Russia’s state-owned Gazprom, the continued reliance on TurkStream – a natural gas pipeline running from Russia to Turkiye – and “the weak use of alternative interconnectors have locked the country into Russia’s reconfigured gas export system”, the CSD report states.

Nuclear energy dependency is yet another issue. Hungary granted Rosatom, the Russian state nuclear energy corporation, the construction contract for the expansion of its Paks atomic plant, 100km (62 miles) southwest of Budapest on the Danube River. Russia, in turn, provided Hungary with a state loan to finance most of the development of new reactors. The European Commission approved the plan in 2017 and construction started in February.

Now, Magyar says he intends to reassess the project’s financing. But the Paks plant provides 40 to 50 percent of all electricity generated in Hungary. The expansion plans will increase that to between 60 and 70 percent, which would cut reliance on imported energy, but keep Hungary tied to Russia. 

According to a 2025 joint research paper by the Center for the Study of Democracy and the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, Hungary could potentially diversify its energy supply by importing non-Russian oil via alternative sources such as the Adria pipeline. It transports crude from the Adriatic Sea to refineries in Croatia, Serbia, Hungary and Slovakia. Their refiners, which are controlled by Hungarian oil and gas company MOL, are capable of processing non-Russian crude, the research paper said.

Russian oil has been coming in at a discounted rate as a result of Western sanctions, so any diversification will likely be more expensive.

Can Hungary wean itself off its dependence on Russian oil?

It won’t be easy, and Magyar knows it. “The geographical position of neither Russia nor Hungary will change. Our energy exposure will also be here for a while,” he said before last weekend’s election. And in an interview with the Financial Times, Magyar insisted that Russian imports should remain an option. “This does not mean that by ending dependence on someone you no longer continue to buy from them,” he said.

Magyar will seek to strike a balance between respecting current contracts with Moscow to ensure Hungary’s energy security, while establishing political distance, said Pawel Zerka, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations.

“I would expect this government not to be pro-Russia in the sense of going to Moscow and keeping ties with the Russian government, but they don’t have easy options to replace Russian fuel with something else, especially considering the international situation with the Middle East,” Zerka said, referring to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf which has blocked the shipping of 20 percent of the world’s oil and LNG supplies.

Zerka added that the newly elected leader will not have political room to be particularly cordial with Russian President Vladimir Putin, considering the disapproval of Russia by his electoral base. A recent poll by the European Council on Foreign Relations shows that a majority of Tisza’s voters see Russia as an adversary or rival to compete with.

“It will be interesting to see how he combines this with energy needs,” Zerka said.

How does the EU view Hungary’s energy ties to Russia?

The strong energy ties between Russia and Hungary have long caused friction with the EU. Following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the European bloc has worked to cut imports of Russian oil and gas. Budapest has done the opposite.

In January, the EU passed legislation to completely phase out Russian gas and LNG imports by late 2027.

Orban’s government had called for all restrictions on Russian oil to be lifted as a result of the global energy crisis triggered by the war in the Middle East. While Trump has made some concessions on Russian oil already loaded on tankers at sea – causing several heading for China to head to India instead – EU leaders have maintained they will hold firm on sanctions.

In the lead-up to last weekend’s election, Magyar’s manifesto called the dependence on Russian energy a “systemic risk” and he would wean Hungary off its reliance by 2035. But whether he can do that in time to beat the EU’s 2027 deadline is likely to provoke discussion in Brussels.

Brazil’s Supreme Court has ordered a probe into whether right-wing presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro issued defamatory statements about his election rival, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

On Wednesday, a decision from Justice Alexandre de Moraes was published, allowing the Federal Police to proceed with an investigation into posts Bolsonaro published in January.

Bolsonaro, at the time, responded to news that the United States had abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro with insinuations linking Lula to crimes.

“Lula will be exposed,” Bolsonaro posted on the social media platform X, with screenshots of a handcuffed Maduro and an article about Lula.

He then predicted that the left-wing alliance known as the Sao Paulo Forum would collapse in scandal.

“It is the end of the Sao Paulo Forum: international drug and arms trafficking, money laundering, support for terrorists and dictatorships, rigged elections,” Bolsonaro wrote.

There are limitations to the freedom of speech in Brazil, and under its penal code, defamation can be a criminal offence. Prosecutors have the option of seeking heightened penalties for defamation against presidents or heads of state.

The Federal Police have a period of 60 days to carry out their initial investigation.

But in a statement to local media, a spokesperson for Bolsonaro, a senator for Rio de Janeiro, denounced the probe as a violation of his rights.

“The senator limited himself to reporting facts and detailing crimes for which Nicolas Maduro was arrested and is being prosecuted internationally,” the statement said, adding that there was no “direct criminal accusation against” Lula.

Bolsonaro and Lula are currently in a neck-and-neck race for the presidency ahead of October’s general election.

A poll released this week from the research firm Quaest shows Lula slightly ahead in the first round of voting, with 37 percent of the vote compared with Bolsonaro’s 32 percent.

But if the race proceeds to a run-off, the frontrunner flips. Bolsonaro polls slightly ahead in a one-on-one contest against Lula, netting 42 percent support compared with the incumbent’s 40 percent.

The poll has a margin of error of about 2 percent, though, meaning the results are not conclusive. There is also nearly five and a half months until the first round of voting on October 4.

Both Bolsonaro and Lula are well-known quantities in Brazil’s political sphere.

For the 80-year-old Lula, this year’s race will see him run for a fourth term in office. Previously, he served as president from 2003 to 2011, and then he ran again in 2022, defeating Senator Bolsonaro’s father, Jair Bolsonaro, the incumbent president that year.

The elder Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence for attempting to subvert the results of that election.

The margins were tight in the 2022 run-off, and then-President Bolsonaro refused to concede defeat, instead suggesting that there were “malfunctions” in the electronic voting machines that favoured Lula.

His supporters took to the streets to protest his loss, blockading roads and attacking police headquarters in the capital, Brasilia.

The unrest culminated in an attack on January 8, 2023, against government buildings in the capital, which was seen as an attempt to trigger a military uprising against Lula’s leadership.

Former President Bolsonaro was later convicted in September 2024 of plotting to stay in power, with prosecutors presenting evidence that he and his allies explored options including calling a new election and assassinating Lula.

The former president has denied wrongdoing and accused his adversaries of a political witch-hunt.

In December, his eldest son, Flavio, 44, entered the 2026 presidential race with his father’s endorsement. He has suggested he would seek his father’s freedom as part of his campaign.

Earlier this year, Lula vetoed a bill that would have lowered Jair Bolsonaro’s prison sentence. He has denounced his predecessor’s actions as a coup attempt.

Washington, DC – United States President Donald Trump has been unambiguous about his desire for Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping voting law that supporters say will boost election security and that detractors say risks disenfranchising millions of voters.

The push has gained new urgency, with the US Senate continuing debate on the law following a two-week recess.

The president has said the bill, which at its core would create higher documentation standards for proving citizenship when registering to vote and casting a ballot, is his top priority ahead of the midterm elections in November, which will determine which party controls the Senate and the US House of Representatives.

The bill has near-total support from Republicans, with Democrats remaining largely unified in opposition. It passed in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives in February along party lines.

The measure has since remained stalled in Congress, where Republicans control 53 out of 100 seats, short of the 60 votes it will likely need to pass.

That is, unless party leaders move to change the chamber’s longstanding rules, a transformative approach considered a”nuclear” option that will reverberate for years to come.

Here’s what to know.

What would the SAVE America Act do?

The version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act passed by the House in February would require voters to provide proof of citizenship – a birth certificate or passport – when registering to vote. It would also implement stricter voter identification requirements for individuals casting ballots, whether by mail or in person.

Under the US Constitution, states administer elections, and currently have different processes for registering voters and confirming citizenship. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, and all people registering to vote attest they are US citizens under threat of perjury.

The bill does not provide any funding for the new verification processes, which would be effective immediately upon the bill being signed into law.

The legislation would also require all states to run their voter rolls through a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “Alien Verification Eligibility” system to identify potential noncitizens already enrolled.

It would include criminal penalties for election officials who register voters without the required documentation.

What has Trump said about the SAVE Act?

The US president has long maintained that elections in the country are marred by widespread fraud, including noncitizen voting, despite there being no evidence to support these claims.

Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has influenced many of Trump’s policies, has found only exceedingly rare instances of voter fraud over decades of US elections.

Trump’s focus on election administration dates back to his 2020 loss to former US President Joe Biden, which he continues to maintain was the result of the vote being “stolen”. Again, no evidence has emerged to back those claims.

The president has called the SAVE America Act “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself”.

In March, he vowed not to sign any other bills into law until the legislation was passed. He has further vowed not to endorse any Republicans who do not support the legislation.

Trump also told members of his party in March that passing the bill would “guarantee” their success not only in the midterm elections but in the years to come.

Several top Republicans have embraced Trump’s messaging, with US House Speaker Mike Johnson saying opponents of the legislation “want illegal aliens to vote in our elections”.

What have critics said about the SAVE Act?

Critics have said the bill would be tantamount to widespread voter disenfranchisement, creating onerous barriers to address what several studies show to be the fleetingly rare problem of noncitizens registering to vote.

Several studies have shown that about 11 percent of eligible voters do not have access to birth certificates, while 52 percent do not have valid passports. All told, a recent study by several election-monitoring groups found that about nine percent of eligible voters in the US do not have easy access to documents proving citizenship, accounting for about 21.3 million people.

Several groups, including the Bipartisan Policy Center, have argued the legislation risks doing more damage than good. Data from a USCIS voter verification system, which some states already use to identify noncitizens in their voter rolls, found that only 0.04 percent of reviewed cases were flagged as potential noncitizens.

But as noted by the Bipartisan Policy Center, evidence indicates that the rate may be considerably lower, pointing to a review by Travis County, Texas that found that a quarter of the voters flagged by USCIS had actually provided proof of citizenship.

In another example, a review of all registered voters in Utah from 2025 to 2026 found only a single instance of a noncitizen registered to vote out of more than two million voters. There were no confirmed instances of a noncitizen actually voting.

Top Democrats have echoed those criticisms, while charging that Trump is seeking to influence the outcome of the midterms as part of what they call a years-long effort to politicise voting administration.

“The only thing Republicans are trying to save with this legislation is their own skin in the next election,” Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, said earlier this week.

Could it affect women and name changes?

A main point of contention for opponents of the legislation is the additional barriers it could create for individuals, primarily women, who changed their last names after marriage or for other reasons.

An estimated 69 million women in the US lack easy access to documentation linking their current legal names to those at birth, according to the League of Women Voters, which has been a leading opponent of the bill.

The requirement for extra documentation for some married women creates inherent inequality in the system, the organisation has argued.

The law would further create extra barriers for individuals who move regularly, including members of the military, and those who have been afflicted by disruptive life changes, including natural disasters, opponents have argued.

How does this relate to the filibuster?

The so-called “filibuster” is a procedural rule in the Senate that can be used to require 60 votes to pass most bills, as opposed to a simple majority of 51 votes in the 100-seat chamber.

Parties in the minority have long used the rule to temper the party in the majority, with Republicans and Democrats rarely holding a filibuster-proof 60 seats.

Being a rule of the Senate’s own making, it could be easily scrapped by the party in power. However, doing so has long been seen as a “nuclear” option. While it would offer short-term benefits to the majority party, it would undermine the same party if it becomes the minority in future elections.

Nevertheless, Trump has heaped pressure on Republican leaders in the Senate to scrap the rule, writing on Truth Social in March, they need to “Kill the Filibuster”.

What happens next?

Debate remains ongoing in the Senate over the legislation, but major shifts in support are seen as extremely unlikely.

Republicans are unlikely to bring the legislation to a vote if they do not have the support for it to pass.

Currently, there is no plan to hold a vote to do away with the filibuster, which would require only a simple majority.

Lawmakers have also not yet pursued other, more incremental procedural manoeuvres to pass the bill without 60 votes.

The battlefield is narrowing and the timeline is tightening in a congressional redistricting contest among states seeking a partisan advantage ahead of the November midterm elections.

The end of Maryland’s legislative session this week marked the demise of Democratic efforts to reshape the state’s U.S. House districts. But Florida lawmakers are to begin a special session Monday for a Republican attempt at congressional redistricting. And Virginia voters are deciding Tuesday on a Democratic redistricting plan that could help the party win several additional House seats in this year’s election.

Voting districts typically are redrawn once a decade, after each census. But President Trump triggered an unusual round of mid-decade redistricting last year when he urged Texas Republicans to redraw House districts to give the GOP an edge in the midterm elections. California Democrats reciprocated, and redistricting efforts soon cascaded across states.

So far, Republicans believe they could win nine additional seats in states where they have redrawn congressional districts, while Democrats think they could gain six seats elsewhere because of redistricting. But that presumes past voting patterns hold in November. And that’s uncertain, especially since the party in power typically loses seats in the midterms and Trump faces negative approval ratings in polls.

Democrats need to gain just a few seats in November to wrest control of the House from Republicans, potentially allowing them to obstruct Trump’s agenda.

Where redistricting remains in play

Officials in more than a dozen states debated or floated redistricting proposals. The immediate focus is on two states — one led by Republicans, the other by Democrats.

Florida

Current map: eight Democrats, 20 Republicans

Proposed map: Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis has called a special legislative session to begin Monday on congressional redistricting. Republicans haven’t yet publicly released a specific plan.

Challenges: The state constitution says districts cannot be drawn with intent to favor or disfavor a political party or incumbent.

Virginia

Current map: six Democrats, five Republicans

Proposed map: A new U.S. House map passed by the Democratic-led General Assembly could help Democrats win up to four additional seats. For the map to take effect, voters would have to approve a constitutional amendment allowing mid-decade redistricting. That amendment is on Tuesday’s ballot.

Challenges: The state Supreme Court ruled the referendum can proceed, but it has yet to rule whether the effort is legal. The court is considering an appeal of a Tazewell County judge’s ruling that the amendment is invalid because lawmakers violated their own rules while passing it.

Where new House districts were approved

New U.S. House districts have been adopted in six states since last summer. Four took up redistricting voluntarily, one was required to by its state constitution and another did so under court order.

Texas

Current map: 13 Democrats, 25 Republicans

New map: Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a revised House map into law last August that could help Republicans win five additional seats.

Challenges: The U.S. Supreme Court in December cleared the way for the new districts to be used in this year’s elections. It put on hold a lower-court ruling that blocked the new map because it was “racially gerrymandered.”

California

Current map: 43 Democrats, nine Republicans

New map: Voters in November approved revised House districts drawn by the Democratic-led Legislature that could help Democrats win five additional seats.

Challenges: The U.S. Supreme Court in February allowed the new districts to be used in this year’s elections. It denied an appeal from Republicans and the Department of Justice, which claimed the districts impermissibly favor Hispanic voters.

Missouri

Current map: two Democrats, six Republicans

New map: Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signed a revised House map into law last September that could help Republicans win an additional seat.

Challenges: A Cole County judge ruled the new map is in effect as election officials work to determine whether a referendum petition seeking a statewide vote complies with constitutional criteria and contains enough valid petition signatures. The Missouri Supreme Court rejected a lawsuit claiming mid-decade redistricting is illegal. It’s scheduled to hear arguments in May on claims the new districts violate compactness requirements and should be placed on hold pending the potential referendum.

North Carolina

Current map: four Democrats, 10 Republicans

New map: The Republican-led General Assembly gave final approval in October to revised districts that could help Republicans win an additional seat.

Challenges: A federal court panel in November denied a request to block the revised districts from being used in the midterm elections.

Ohio

Current map: five Democrats, 10 Republicans

New map: A bipartisan panel composed primarily of Republicans voted in October to approve revised House districts that improve Republicans’ chances of winning two additional seats.

Challenges: None. The state constitution required new districts before the 2026 election, because Republicans had approved the prior map without sufficient Democratic support after the last census.

Utah

Current map: no Democrats, four Republicans

New map: A judge in November imposed revised House districts that could help Democrats win a seat. The court ruled that lawmakers had circumvented anti-gerrymandering standards passed by voters when adopting the prior map.

Challenges: A federal court panel and the state Supreme Court, in February, each rejected Republican challenges to the judicial map selection.

Where redistricting efforts were denied

Governors, lawmakers or partisan officials pushed for congressional redistricting in numerous states. In at least five states, those efforts gained some initial traction but ultimately fell short in either the legislature or court.

Maryland

Current map: seven Democrats, one Republican

Proposed map: The Democratic-led House in February passed a redistricting plan backed by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore that could help Democrats win an additional seat.

Challenges: The legislative session ended in April without the Democratic-led Senate voting on the redistricting plan. The state Senate president said there were concerns it could backfire on Democrats.

New York

Current map: 19 Democrats, seven Republicans

Proposed map: A judge in January ordered a state commission to draw new boundaries for the only congressional district in New York City represented by a Republican, ruling it unconstitutionally dilutes the votes of Black and Hispanic residents.

Challenges: The U.S. Supreme Court in March granted Republicans’ request to halt the judge’s order, leaving the existing district lines in place for the 2026 election.

Indiana

Current map: two Democrats, seven Republicans

Proposed map: The Republican-led House passed a redistricting plan in December that would have improved Republicans’ chances of winning two additional seats.

Challenges: Despite pressure from Trump to adopt the new map, the Republican-led Senate rejected it in a bipartisan vote on Dec. 11.

Kansas

Current map: one Democrat, three Republicans

Proposed map: Some Republican lawmakers mounted an attempt to take up congressional redistricting.

Challenges: Lawmakers dropped a petition drive for a special session on congressional redistricting in November, after failing to gain enough support.

Illinois

Current map: 14 Democrats, three Republicans

Proposed map: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in October proposed a new U.S. House map that would improve Democrats’ chances of winning an additional seat.

Challenges: The Democratic-led General Assembly declined to take up redistricting, citing concerns about the effect on representation for Black residents.

Lieb writes for the Associated Press.

As we pointed out in this other article, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice stated in a ruling, on January 3rd, that Delcy Rodríguez should assume and exercise, as “acting president,” all the powers, duties, and faculties inherent to the office of president. That decision classified Maduro’s absence as “forced.” It did not specify whether that absence was temporary or permanent. For the Constitutional Chamber, there is a forced absence of Maduro that must be filled by Delcy Rodríguez.

However, the concept of “forced absence” does not exist under the Constitution. The absence of the President of the Republic is either temporary or permanent, and for both options, the 1999 Constitution establishes clear rules that apply to each scenario.

Under these rules, it is already known that the acting president did not assume that an absolute vacancy had occurred on January 3rd. Let’s assume she assumed it was a temporary absence. Well, according to constitutional regulations on this matter, the 90 days corresponding to the “temporary absence” were completed on April 3rd. On that day, the National Assembly should have extended the temporary absence for another 90 days. Under the 1999 Constitution, a 30-day period begins from that day within which elections must be held.

These are the rules of the current Venezuelan Constitution.

As is becoming increasingly clear, the foreign and local investments that Venezuela needs will not materialize without first going through an electoral process that leads to the election of a new president. The current system is weak enough to discourage long-term investments in Venezuela.

Venezuela doesn’t need to be taught how to live in a democracy. Venezuela needs to be allowed to live in a democracy.

As we explained in this other article, one way we can pave the road for a presidential election is by calling for new primaries to choose our presidential candidate. It will be more difficult to postpone the discussion about the presidential election if the opposition transforms this potential landmark into the main focus of the national conversation.

Judging by what happened on July 28th and the political events before and after that day, it seems clear who the winning candidate in those primaries would be. But let the people express themselves again, and let them ratify the choice if that is their decision.

In 1958, after the Pérez Jiménez regime was toppled, Venezuelans held a universal and secret presidential election and elected a president. In 1968, we elected a president from the opposition party. For 40 years, we lived under a democratic system that was an example for the world. When Spain elected its president, Venezuela had been electing presidents for 20 years.

We Venezuelans want to bury the long period of authoritarianism we have endured since 1999. Democracy is not new to us. Venezuela was an example of democratic coexistence for many countries in the Americas and Europe.

Venezuela doesn’t need to be taught how to live in a democracy. Venezuela needs to be allowed to live in a democracy.

More than three months after January 3rd, Venezuelans should already be talking about presidential elections.

In a record turnout at the polls, Hungarians have voted out their long-serving, far-right Prime Minister Viktor Orban, handing victory to the Tisza party’s Peter Magyar who ran a pro-EU campaign.

Democratic Representative Eric Swalwell suspends campaign to succeed Gavin Newsom after media reports detailed alleged accounts of sexual assault.

US Congressman Eric Swalwell has dropped out of the California state gubernatorial race following sexual assault allegations.

“I am suspending my campaign for Governor,” he said in a social media statement on Sunday.

“To my family, staff, friends, and supporters, I am deeply sorry for mistakes in judgment I’ve made in my past. I will fight the serious, false allegations that have been made – but that’s my fight, not a campaign’s,” the Democrat added.

Swalwell’s statement came after several influential Democratic Party lawmakers called on him to exit the race and resign from the United States Congress following reports from CNN and the San Francisco Chronicle that detailed alleged accounts of sexual assault from a former staffer and misconduct allegations from several other women.

“What he did is sick and disgusting,” Congressman Ro Khanna told the news programme Fox News Sunday, calling for investigations into the allegations by law enforcement and the US House of Representatives.

A March poll from Emerson College suggested that Swalwell was ahead of Democratic and Republican challengers by several points in the race to replace Governor Gavin Newsom.

But the reports shook his campaign, with powerful figures and organisations revoking their endorsements and calling for him to drop out over the weekend. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office confirmed on Saturday that it was investigating the allegations.

Republican US Representative Anna Paulina Luna said she would submit a motion to begin the process of expelling Swalwell, a move some Democrats in Congress said they could support.

“This is not a partisan issue,” Representative Pramila Jayapal said on Sunday. “This cuts across party lines. And it is the depravity of the way that women have been treated.”

Democrats have also called for the expulsion of Representative Tony Gonzales, a Republican from Texas, who is also facing sexual misconduct allegations.

Khanna and Republican Representative Byron Donalds have said they could support a bid to eject both Gonzales and Swalwell from Congress.

“As far as I’m concerned, both gentlemen need to go home,” Donalds said.

Peter Magyar has won Hungary’s election, defeating longtime nationalist leader Viktor Orban. In a victory speech in Budapest, Magyar celebrated his party’s success in bringing down Orban and ‘taking back the homeland’.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban has conceded defeat to opposition leader Peter Magyar after 16 years as prime minister.

Source link

Voters to choose from 35 presidential candidates, including a comedian, a media baron and a political dynasty heiress.

Polls have opened in Peru’s presidential and legislative elections, with no clear frontrunner amid years of political instability.

Since 2018, Peru has seen eight presidents, with a high turnover rate marred by impeachments and corruption scandals, leading to voter disillusionment with weak governments.

Some 27 million Peruvians are eligible to vote on Sunday to pick the country’s ninth leader in a decade, with polling stations across the country opening at 7am (12:00 GMT) and closing at 5pm (22:00 GMT), with preliminary results expected shortly afterwards.

With 35 candidates on the presidential ballot, Peruvians will choose from a wide range of potential leaders, including a comedian, a media baron, a political dynasty heiress, and a hard‑line ex‑mayor who likens himself to a cartoon pig.

However, all major candidates continue to poll well below the 50 percent needed to win the election, making a June 7 run-off appear likely.

A fruit seller in Lima told the Reuters news agency that she was still undecided on who to vote for.

“Peru is a mess, and there’s no candidate worth voting for,” Gloria Padilla said.

Clothing merchant Maria Fernandez, 56, also shared the same sentiment.

“I wouldn’t vote for anyone. I’m so disappointed with everyone in power,” Fernandez told the AFP news agency.

“We’ve been governed by nothing but corrupt, thieving scoundrels,” she added.

The most well-known candidate is conservative Keiko Fujimori, who will make her fourth presidential bid after reaching the run-off in all three previous races.

While Fujimori has taken a position of guarantor of order and economic stability, her candidacy remains polarising due to her family legacy. Her father, former President Alberto Fujimori, was convicted of human rights abuses and corruption before he died in 2024.

On the eve of the election, Fujimori told the AFP news agency that she would “restore order” in her first 100 days if she were to win, sending the army into jails, deporting illegal migrants and strengthening security at the border.

At the other end of the political spectrum, Ricardo Belmont – a former mayor of the capital, Lima, running for the centre-left Civic Party Obras – was polling in second place.

Popular comedian Carlos Alvarez follows behind Belmont in pre-election polls and has campaigned on a platform of being tough on crime, as Peru’s homicide rate has more than doubled in the past decade.

Benin is facing harsh economic conditions and security challenges that its new leader will have to address.

Voting is under way in Benin’s presidential election with long-serving Finance Minister Romuald Wadagni expected to win in the absence of a major challenger.

Polls opened at 7am (06:00 GMT) on Sunday and will close at 4pm (15:00 GMT). More than 7.9 million people are registered to vote, including 62,000 in the diaspora.

Backed by the two main parties in the governing coalition and the outgoing president, Patrice Talon, Wadagni, a 49-year-old former Deloitte executive, is being challenged by Paul Hounkpe, an opposition figure and former culture minister whose campaign has been low-key.

The member of the Cowry Forces for ⁠an Emerging Benin party got on the ballot with help from lawmakers of the two main ruling coalition parties after they refused to endorse the candidacy of Rene Agbodjo, head of the opposition Democrats party.

Talon, 67, is barred from running again after two terms in office and is expected to step down with a legacy of mixed results: economic growth, which reached 7 percent last year, but also a clampdown on the opposition and his critics. In December, a group of military officers also tried and failed to overthrow Talon’s government.

The new president will have to address major challenges, including a huge gap between the poor and well-off. The poverty rate is estimated at more than 30 percent, and many Beninese complain that the benefits of the economic growth over the past decade have not trickled down to them.

Benin’s economic growth will also depend on improving security and stabilising the country. Benin has been the hardest hit among coastal West African states by armed fighters from the Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), an al-Qaeda affiliate that has made major gains in the central Sahel region.

Wadagni has promised to deliver on bread-and-butter issues like expanding access to potable water and guaranteeing emergency healthcare regardless of ability to pay.

“The next phase of the country’s development will be the eradication of extreme poverty. That is one of his priorities,” one of Wadagni’s close associates told the AFP news agency.

‘A climate of fear’

Hounkpe has noted that the situation for many of Benin’s nearly 14 million people has not improved under previous leaders and has promised to bring about change.

“If we make progress but none of us can afford three meals a day, we haven’t made any progress. Yes or no?” he asked at a rally this month.

He has also decried what he described as a climate of fear as the political space for the opposition shrinks and the ruling coalition holds every seat in the National Assembly after the Democrats failed to win 20 percent of the vote in the last legislative elections, the threshold needed to enter the National Assembly.

Provisional results are expected on Tuesday in an election in which many people said they will not vote.

“I won’t go and vote. This election is not inclusive. You cannot talk about genuine democratic competition when some key political players are barred,” Arnold Dessouassi, a 39-year-old teacher, told AFP.

Reporting from a polling station in the port city of Cotonou, Al Jazeera’s Ahmed Idris said voting has been slow and none of the ballot boxes is full.

“There is a low turnout of voters on election day,” he said.

He added that this low turnout is due to controversies surrounding the accreditation for candidates to run in the election.

Other voters have spoken of the presidential election as a formality and urged Wadagni to deliver on his platform.

“Once President Romuald Wadagni is at the head of this country, I would like him to promote and help young people to find work because we have many young graduates on the streets driving ‘zem’,” 34-year-old teacher Marcel Sovi told the Reuters news agency, using local slang for motorcycle taxis.

Christelle Tessi, a 40-year-old trader, added that Wadagni should focus on improving security in the north, where JNIM killed 54 ‌Benin soldiers in ⁠one attack a year ago and another 15 in an attack last month.

“What is happening in northern Benin is that our brothers are being killed, and if a soldier goes there on a mission, it is his body that comes back,” she said.

The parliamentary election could end Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s 16-year hold on power.

Polls have opened in Hungary’s parliamentary elections with incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Orban facing his biggest electoral challenge after 16 years in power.

Voting in the election for the 199-seat parliament started at 6am local time (0400 GMT) and is due to close at 7 pm (0500 GMT).

Opinion polls over the last two weeks have shown Orban’s Fidesz party trailing Peter Magyar’s upstart centre-right opposition Tisza party by 7-9 percentage points, with Tisza at around 38-41 percent.

Orban, a eurosceptic nationalist, has cast the election as a choice between “war and peace”. During campaigning, the government blanketed the country with signs warning that Tisza leader Magyar would drag Hungary into Russia’s war with Ukraine, something he strongly denies.

“I am looking forward to Sunday’s election with the best hope,” Orban told supporters in his birthplace Szekesfehervar.

“If we know ourselves well, if we know our country well and if we know our own people well, then I must say Hungarians will vote for safety on Sunday,” he added.

Many Hungarians have however grown increasingly weary of 62-year old Orban, after three years of economic stagnation and soaring living costs as well as reports of oligarchs close to the government amassing more wealth.

“I am very excited but also very scared,” Kriszta Tokes, a 24-year-old who sells postcards and trinkets in Budapest, told the Reuters news agency.

“I know that my future depends on this,” she said, adding that she plans to leave Hungary if Orban wins.