face

June 3 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s major commercial banks are facing growing pressure from a sharp rise in long-overdue loans, with the amount of loans unpaid for more than one year exceeding 1 trillion won, or about $716 million, in the first quarter.

Loans overdue for less than one year, which could later worsen into long-term delinquencies, also approached 6 trillion won, or about $3.84 billion. The increase suggests that borrower distress is deepening, especially among corporate borrowers, despite banks’ efforts to dispose of nonperforming loans.

The sequential expiration of COVID-19 loan maturity extensions also appears to be adding pressure on delinquent borrowers.

Banks, which have continued to post strong earnings, are concerned that rising long-term delinquencies could increase loan-loss provision burdens. The longer a loan remains overdue and the lower its chance of recovery becomes, the more banks must set aside in provisions.

If the Bank of Korea raises its base rate in the second half, borrowers’ repayment burdens could grow further, increasing the risk of additional long-term delinquencies. Analysts say asset quality management could become a key factor determining banks’ earnings performance.

According to financial industry data released Wednesday, the combined balance of loans overdue for at least one year at KB Kookmin Bank, Shinhan Bank, Hana Bank, Woori Bank and NH NongHyup Bank reached 1.0972 trillion won, or about $716 million, in the first quarter.

That was up 49.3% from 734.9 billion won, or about $480 million, a year earlier. Compared with 261 billion won, or about $170 million, in 2024, the figure has more than quadrupled. It was also more than double the 508 billion won, or about $332 million, recorded in 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The increase appeared across all five banks. By bank, NH NongHyup had the largest balance of long-term overdue loans at 474.8 billion won, or about $310 million, followed by KB Kookmin at 166.9 billion won, or about $109 million, Hana at 155.2 billion won, or about $101 million, Shinhan at 151.5 billion won, or about $99 million, and Woori at 148.8 billion won, or about $97 million.

Loans overdue for at least one month but less than one year totaled 5.8851 trillion won, or about $3.84 billion, approaching the 6 trillion won mark. The figure was slightly lower than 6.1002 trillion won, or about $3.98 billion, a year earlier, but remained high by historical standards.

By category, loans overdue for at least one month but less than three months rose from a year earlier to 2.8225 trillion won, or about $1.84 billion. Loans overdue for at least six months but less than one year, which are considered more likely to become long-term delinquencies, reached 1.1111 trillion won, or about $726 million. Both were record highs since the banks began disclosing the relevant data.

The surge in long-term delinquencies is widely attributed to a sharp increase in new overdue loans in 2024 and 2025. Higher interest rates and weak domestic demand weakened borrowers’ repayment capacity, with some distressed borrowers slipping into long-term delinquency.

The increase appears particularly concentrated among corporate borrowers, whose loans are relatively large and harder to recover. At the end of March, the banking sector’s corporate loan delinquency rate stood at 0.68%, up 0.06 percentage point from 0.62% a year earlier.

“Distress pressure has continued for a long period in sectors such as construction and real estate leasing because of the weak housing market,” an official at a commercial bank said.

A renewed period of rate increases could add to the problem. The Bank of Korea left open the possibility of at least one base rate increase in the second half during last month’s monetary policy meeting, raising concerns that banks could face greater asset quality pressure.

Higher base rates can push up market rates, including bank bond yields, increasing borrowers’ interest burdens. That could deepen distress among loans already in arrears and increase new delinquencies, potentially expanding the volume of long-term overdue loans later.

That would likely translate into higher loan-loss provisions for banks. Banks classify loans into five asset-quality categories: normal, precautionary, substandard, doubtful and estimated loss.

When a loan is classified as substandard, banks must set aside provisions equal to 20% of the loan amount. As the overdue period grows longer and repayment capacity worsens, the required provision ratio rises. Doubtful loans, which are overdue for more than three months and have low recovery prospects, require 50% provisioning. Loans classified as estimated losses after more than one year overdue require 100% provisioning.

That means if a doubtful loan deteriorates into an estimated loss, the provisioning burden doubles.

A rise in provision expenses would directly weigh on bank earnings. In 2022, the five major banks set aside 3.5422 trillion won, or about $2.31 billion, in annual loan-loss provisions, while their combined net profit rose 18.6% from a year earlier to 13.7472 trillion won, or about $8.98 billion.

But in 2023, when banks set aside more than 6 trillion won, or about $3.92 billion, in provisions because of real estate project financing distress and other factors, their net profit growth slowed to 2.6%.

Provision expenses fell sharply the following year, but as delinquencies continue to rise, the possibility of renewed growth in provisions has increased. Analysts say careful risk management has become more important.

“As the delinquency period lengthens, the sale price of nonperforming loans tends to fall, so if long-term delinquencies increase, banks disposing of bad loans will also face greater loss burdens,” a financial industry official said.

“The key will be whether banks can prevent new distress from expanding while effectively clearing existing bad loans,” the official said.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260604010001073

Snowboarding made its Winter Olympics debut in Nagano 1998 with halfpipe and giant slalom.

Riders competed against the clock before the head-to-head parallel giant slalom version on identical, side-by-side courses was introduced four years later in Salt Lake City.

Three-time Winter Olympian Alex Payer said: “PGS is one of the only formats where everything is truly equal – same course, same conditions, same start, same chance. That fairness is rare in sport.

“If you take it out of the Olympic programme, you take away one of the purest expressions of competition we have.”

Among the sports bidding to replace them in the programme for the Games, which are scheduled for 1-17 February 2030, are freeriding and ice climbing.

Freeriding allows skiers and snowboarders to choose their own off-piste course from top to bottom and also perform tricks as they descend.

They are judged on elements of their descent including the difficulty of the course, jumps and performance.

In ice climbing, competitors climb up a frozen waterfall or glaciers with a speed version favourite for inclusion.

There had been speculation that cyclo-cross would be also be aiming for inclusion but last month IOC president Kirsty Coventry said that “no summer sports and no seasonal crossover events” would be part of the programme.

Rebecca Bennett has won a high-stakes Democratic Party primary in the US state of New Jersey, setting up a contest against Republican Tom Kean Jr, backed by President Donald Trump, for one of the most competitive seats in the upcoming midterm elections.

Bennett, a former US Navy helicopter pilot, defeated three Democratic rivals in New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, securing about 47.2 percent of the vote, according to projected results on Tuesday.

Her nearest competitor, Tina Shah, received 20.2 percent.

Kean and Bennett will now square off in November for a seat that has changed party hands twice within the past eight years and ranks as a key target for Democrats hoping to capture the House of Representatives.

Independent analysts rate the contest as a toss-up.

The race has attracted heightened attention because of Kean’s prolonged absence from Congress.

The Republican incumbent has missed more than 100 House votes since early March due to an undisclosed illness.

Despite his absence, Kean ran unopposed in the Republican primary with Trump’s backing.

Kean said on Tuesday that he remained focused on his recovery and expected to return to in-person work within weeks.

Hours before polls closed, Kean released a statement promising greater transparency about his health while suggesting his return to in-person work could take longer than previously anticipated.

On May 21, he said he expected to be back within “a couple of weeks”.

“Right now, I am focused on my recovery and, under the advice of healthcare professionals, I will transition from virtual to in-person work within a matter of weeks,” Kean had said.

Bennett targets cost of living, Kean’s absence

At an election night gathering in Somerville, New Jersey, Bennett sharply criticised Kean’s record and absence from Washington.

“You are failing us, and you do not deserve to represent us in Washington,” she told supporters, calling the congressman a “coward”.

Bennett built her campaign around her military service and economic issues, arguing that higher grocery and gasoline prices during the US-Israel war on Iran, combined with Trump’s tariffs, were squeezing working families.

Democrats have increasingly focused on the conflict’s economic impact, with higher energy costs contributing to inflation and broader cost-of-living pressures across the country.

The 7th Congressional District, which includes suburban communities, farm towns and Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, has emerged as one of New Jersey’s key battlegrounds.

The seat has changed hands repeatedly in recent election cycles, with Democrat Tom Malinowski defeating Republican Leonard Lance in 2018 before Kean unseated Malinowski in 2022.

Bennett’s victory over Tina Shah, Brian Varela and Michael Roth now sets up a high-stakes general election contest in a district both parties consider crucial to their House ambitions.

Kean, 57, is the scion of a storied New Jersey political family.

His father, Thomas Kean, served two terms as governor and later chaired the 9/11 Commission, a panel set up in 2002 to investigate the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001, attacks in the US. He is also a descendant of William Livingston, New Jersey’s first governor.

The Republican congressman will also enter the race with the backing of Trump, who reiterated his support on the eve of the primary, despite Kean’s prolonged absence from Washington.

“Tom Kean has my Complete and Total Endorsement for Re-Election,” Trump wrote on social media, adding: “HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!”

Voters in the district have ousted incumbents in recent midterm elections, making the race one of the most competitive House contests in New Jersey.

Elsewhere in New Jersey, Analilia Mejia won the Democratic nomination in the 11th Congressional District, while LaMonica McIver secured the Democratic nomination in the 10th Congressional District.

MISBEHAVING Brits could be slapped with a permanent flight ban under new Labour rules.

Labour Ministers are currently looking at establishing a blacklist to stop abusive behaviour towards cabin crew and disruption to travel.

This includes considering how information about drunk and abusive passengers could be shared between airlines.

Currently, if you misbehave on a flight you can be banned by the airline you are travelling with – but other airlines would not know this.

If the new rules were to go ahead, it would mean that public officials could keep information about passengers, including a history of any bad behaviour during flights.

In an airport setting, public officials would likely include police, border force officers and immigration officers.

Read more on travel inspo

TRAVEL TIP

The £2.99 SIM hack that can save Brits HUNDREDS abroad

CHEAP BREAKS

UK’s best 100 cheap stays – our pick of the top hotels, holiday parks and pubs

The official would then warn an airline if the passenger was trying to check in with them.

Then, the airline could decide whether or not they want the passenger travelling with them.

The new system would be compliant with data protection rules, so no new legislation would need to be created for the rules to be introduced.

Having said this, data protection rules don’t allow airlines to share information about travellers, hence the need for a public official.

It comes as the number of drunken and violent incidents on planes has risen in recent years.

Earlier this month, a drunk woman believed to be British lunged at another passenger, causing chaos on an easyJet flight.

A government source said: “Everyone should be able to enjoy a pint at the airport, but anti-social behaviour on flights is totally unacceptable.

“It threatens the safety of passengers and crew, and disrupts hard-earned holidays.

“There are already tough laws in place to deal with offences committed on flights, but we are exploring with industry how we can better address this issue, ensuring we crack down on people who persistently cause chaos.

“Everyone should be able to fly without fuss.”

Tim Alderslade, Chief Executive of industry body Airlines UK, said: “UK airlines have a zero-tolerance approach to disruptive behaviour.

“Additional measures for the most serious cases of disruption, including the creation of a national ban list, are an important next step in ensuring a tiny minority of passengers cannot disrupt air travel for the majority.

“We welcome the government’s support for further action and will work closely with ministers on delivering the right solutions.”

According to LBC, Phil Ward, Chief Operations Officer of Jet2, also said the airline would support new rules of sharing passenger information between airlines.

He said: “The creation of a national database will mean that, as well as being banned from flying with us, disruptive passengers can also be banned from flying with other UK airlines.”

In a recent YouGov survey of 5,000 adults, 37 per cent said they supported the proposal for new rules, with 38 per cent saying they somewhat supported it.

Only 11 per cent opposed.

Being drunk on a flight is a criminal offence and can lead to a fine of up to £5,000 and two years in prison.

A meeting will be held later this month where industry leaders will discuss the plans.

The Sun’s Head of Travel shares her thoughts

LISA Minot, The Sun’s Head of Travel, shares her thoughts:

Plans to blacklist drunk and abusive passengers on a nationwide database can’t come soon enough.

Onboard incidents have skyrocketed in recent years and a full ban on those found guilty across all airlines would be the kind of punishment that would have real consequences.

At the moment, while one airline can ban a passenger for life, data protection means other airlines are not alerted.

Having seen the chaos a drunken passenger can wreak myself on a flight from Cape Verde back to the UK anything that will show disruptive passengers there are real consequences is a good move.

Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary has repeatedly called for a ban on passengers drinking in departure lounges but why should the vast, innocent majority pay for the sins of a tiny minority?

This proposal is a much more sensible way of ensuring planes are not turned into battlegrounds without punishing the law-abiding passengers.

Officials are considering measures that would allow UK airlines to block disruptive passengers with a history of serious misconduct from travelling, amid a sharp rise in onboard incidents since the pandemic

Ministers are exploring proposals that could result in persistent troublemakers being banned from future flights amid growing alarm over disruptive behaviour on aircraft.

Officials are weighing up a system that would enable airlines to identify passengers with a track record of serious misconduct and potentially deny them the ability to travel. Under the plans, which are still at an early stage of consideration, details of blacklisted passengers could be shared throughout the aviation industry.

Should someone attempt to book a flight after being added to the list, the airline or tour operator could receive notification and be given the choice to block the reservation, effectively grounding that individual indefinitely.

Civil liberties campaigners have, however, raised alarm about the proposals, cautioning they could set a “dangerous precedent” through the sharing of personal data and limitations on access to transport, reports the Express.

Currently, airlines have the power to ban passengers who have displayed violent or abusive conduct while travelling with them. Yet existing restrictions only extend to the specific carrier involved in the incident, meaning offenders can frequently sidestep penalties by simply booking with a different airline.

The primary hurdle facing any new system is current data protection law, which prohibits carriers from exchanging passenger details with one another, even where criminal offences have taken place.

Who is calling for some passengers to be banned from all flights for life?

Calls for stricter measures have grown louder following a string of high-profile mid-air incidents that have gone viral online, reports the Daily Mail. These have included episodes where cabin crew faced death threats and violent clashes erupted between passengers in aircraft aisles.

Such incidents are among hundreds logged annually and have often led to expensive flight diversions that wreck holidays and travel arrangements.

There appears to be widespread public backing for harsher punishments, with recent polling indicating most Britons support restrictions on passengers who commit serious misconduct while airborne.

Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary has previously urged limits on airport alcohol sales, including curbs on early morning pints, in an effort to cut the number of disruptive passengers getting on planes.

Ministers aren’t attempting to stop travellers from having a drink before their flight. Rather, they’re hoping any future system would promote better conduct while helping to safeguard cabin crew, families and fellow passengers.

It’s understood the proposals are being worked on by the Home Office and Department for Transport but remain in the early stages and require additional consultation with the aviation sector. Any system would need to tackle existing privacy regulations, which currently stop airlines from sharing passenger data.

Ministers are expected to sit down with industry bosses later this month to thrash out the details of the plans. A government source said: “Everyone should be able to enjoy a pint at the airport, but anti-social behaviour on flights is totally unacceptable.

“It threatens the safety of passengers and crew and disrupts hard-earned holidays.

“There are already tough laws in place to deal with offences committed on flights, but we are exploring with industry how we can better address this issue, ensuring we crack down on people who persistently cause chaos. Everyone should be able to fly without fuss.”

May 30 (UPI) — Dueling groups of protesters gathered at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in New Jersey on Saturday morning over the agency’s treatment of people detained under the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

A group of detainees at the Delaney Hall facility have been on a hunger and labor strike since May 22 over inhumane conditions there.

Protests in support of the striking detainees have continued since last Friday, but after protestors and ICE officials got into scuffles in recent days protesters in support of the administration’s deportation efforts gathered at the facility as well, The Guardian and NBC News reported.

The protests were met with state police with riot shields blocking the entrance, as well as barricades that were set up to separate and protect protesters, who yelled at each other from the two protest zones.

New Jersey Gov. Mikkie Sherill moved to replace federal officers managing the situation with state law enforcement on Friday in order to establish the “protected speech zone.”

“This was absolutely necessary to protect public safety, and avoid escalation from ICE,” Sherill said Saturday.

“As Americans, we have a right to protest — and we will continue to ensure New Jersey residents can peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights,” she said.

The decision followed days of tension between federal officers and protesters who have decried the treatment of detainees, which since the hunger and labor strikes started has resulted in what the GEO group called “control measures to safely resolve the situation, including the limited use of chemical agents.

Mullin thanked Sherill for working with DHS to “restore law and order” in a statement on X.

“We support every Americans constitutional right to peacefully protest,” Mullin said. “No one has the right to RIOT and ASSAULT law enforcement. We hope to build on this partnership and work together to remove the worst of the worst from New Jersey communities.”

Proposed $250 bill would mark the first time a living person has appeared on US currency in more than a century.

US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent says preparations are under way to print a new $250 banknote featuring President Donald Trump’s face, with lawmakers to decide whether the bills will be put into circulation.

US law bars any living person from appearing on US currency, but legislation was introduced last year to create an exception to allow current and former presidents to be featured.

Speaking at the White House on Thursday, Bessent said a design had been prepared in anticipation of a change in the law.

“Right now, there is proposed legislation – front of the House, in front of the Senate – to change the first requirement so that a living person, Donald J Trump, could be on a $250 bill,” Bessent said.

Bessent made his comments after The Washington Post reported that Treasurer Brandon Beach, a Trump appointee, has been pushing the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to expedite the process for a new currency note to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

“I don’t think that there’s anything untoward about having the president of the United States, the person who’s president of the United States, on the 250th anniversary bill,” Bessent told reporters.

A design mock-up obtained by The Washington Post showed the words “America 250 anniversary”, a nod to the US declaring its independence on July 4, 1776.

The Treasury Department did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Behaviour of dictators, monarchs

A banknote featuring Trump’s face would be the latest example of the US president expanding his personal brand in his official capacity since returning to the White House in 2025.

Banners featuring Trump’s portrait have been hung on the Department of Justice and other federal buildings.

And his slate of appointees to the Kennedy Center governing board added his name to the national performing arts facility, which Congress originally designated as a memorial to assassinated President John F Kennedy.

Trump’s signature is also set to appear on US currency as part of plans to mark the 250th anniversary, a first for a sitting president.

US banknotes have until now featured the signatures of the Treasury secretary and the treasurer.

In March, the US Commission of Fine Arts, led by Trump appointee Rodney Mims Cook Jr, approved the minting of a commemorative gold coin bearing the Republican president’s image.

The announcement, which relied on a legal loophole for commemorative coins, prompted a backlash from critics, who likened the move to the behaviour of dictators and monarchs.

Opinions are divided on whether dog owners should allow their beloved pets to lick their faces or not – but Springwatch’s Chris Packham has some strong scientific backing for his take

It’s one of those questions that can divide even the closest friends: would you let a dog lick your face? Medical opinions vary.

Professor Graham Roberts, honorary consultant paediatrician in paediatric allergy and respiratory medicine, is quoted in medical journal The Hippocratic Post as saying that that babies brought up in homes with pets are far less likely to suffer from allergies than babies who grow up in pet-free homes. He states: “If you are born into a household where there is a pet, you are less likely to be allergic.”

But others, such as Professor John Oxford, emeritus professor of virology and bacteriology at Queen Mary University of London, is strongly opposed to excessively close contact with dogs.

He points out: “It is not just what is carried in saliva. Dogs spend half of their life with their noses in nasty corners or hovering over dog droppings so their muzzles are full of bacteria, viruses and germs of all sorts.”

But for BBC Springwatch’s Chris Packham, there’s no debate. Speaking on the Oh My Dog podcast, the naturalist told host Jack Dee: “When we cut our finger, what’s the first thing we do? We lick it. And you lick it because there are bacterial fauna in your saliva which have antiseptic and healing properties.”

Similarly, he says, there’s a health benefit to be gained from dogs’ saliva: “In days of old, when they were having medieval battles and doing unspeakable things to one another with swords, there were a lot of wounded people and they would allow the camp dogs to come and lick their wounds. They discovered that if the dog was licking the wound… it would be less less likely to get infected.”

All domestic dogs are ultimately descended from wolves, and Chris says that while a small amount of a dog’s saliva can be good for us, wolves’ saliva has even more healing power: “I’ve been licked by wolves, been kissed by wolves,” he says, “and they have even cleaner, or bacteriologically richer, saliva than than dogs.” They’ve never been treated with antibiotics or other medicines that might compromise their natural state, he says.

Chris adds that when wolves lick each other, it’s part of ensuring the survival of the pack: “When wolves go back to their their den, in order to carry the food which they may have caught many kilometres away, they eat it and swallow it, and partially digest it.

“So when they get back to the den, the pups lick their lips and that stimulates the adult wolves to regurgitate the food.”

“Now obviously,” Chris adds, “dogs have lost that habit – they don’t regurgitate for their young. But that licking is retained into adulthood in dogs because it’s a greeting.”

Similarly, he adds, when dogs eat each other’s poo, there is a valid reason for it. While it might seem disgusting to us – providing support for the opponents of face-licking – this also dates back to wolf behaviour.

“Research has been done recently in California,” Chris explains, “which shows that they will only eat faeces that are between one and two or three days old.”

Chris adds: “It was a relic to wolf behaviour. Because adult wolves will come back and eat all of the faeces in the den area when they’ve got cubs… because it’s a way of reducing parasite load because the eggs of those parasites are in the faeces, and they don’t want their young to get them.

“So that apparently appalling behaviour, because everyone’s nauseated by the fact that their dog eats other dogs’ faeces, that comes from the wolf and it’s about reducing parasites.”

Green Bay Packers running back Josh Jacobs has been released from a Wisconsin jail a day after being arrested in relation to an alleged incident over the weekend. He still faces the possibility of being charged with several crimes, including some related to domestic abuse, pending further investigation.

“After reviewing the available evidence in this case, the Brown County District Attorney’s Office is not yet prepared to make a formal charging decision,” Dist. Atty. David Lasee said Wednesday in a news release. “Our office has requested additional investigation, as there is reason to believe that additional evidence may exist that would impact whether criminal charges are appropriate, and what charges would be issued.

“Mr. Jacobs will be released from custody at this time, and a final charging decision will be made by our office at a later date.”

Jail records show that Jacobs, 28, was released at 12:20 p.m.

Jacobs’ lawyers — David Chesnoff, Richard Schonfeld, and Clarence Duchac — said in a joint statement Wednesday that they remain confident their client ultimately will not be charged in the matter.

“We are extremely pleased that Josh has been released from custody and that no criminal charges have been filed against him,” they said. “As we previously stated, we encourage everyone to keep an open mind while the matter is fully reviewed. We remain confident that, once all of the evidence is gathered and evaluated, it will confirm that no charges should be brought against Josh in the future.”

According to the Hobart/Lawrence Police Department, officers were dispatched to a complaint involving Jacobs on Saturday at 8:37 a.m. He was arrested Tuesday on allegations that included strangulation and suffocation, battery-domestic abuse, criminal damage to property-domestic abuse, disorderly conduct-domestic abuse and intimidation of a victim.

Jacobs’ lawyers said in a statement Tuesday that he “vehemently denies the allegations.”

A three-time Pro Bowl selection, Jacobs spent the first five years of his NFL career with the Raiders, leading the league with 1,653 rushing yards in 2022, and the previous two seasons with the Packers.

“We are aware of the matter involving Josh Jacobs,” a Packers spokesman said Tuesday. “As it is an ongoing legal situation, we will withhold further comment.”

Speaking to reporters Wednesday at the team’s voluntary workouts, Coach Matt LaFleur said, “I know there’s going to be a lot of questions about Josh. I’m going to stick with the statement that we put out as an organization and just let the process play out.”

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said Tuesday that the league is “aware of the report and have been in contact with the club.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A new report warns that Britain is undergoing a “deeply troubling transformation” in how it treats political protest as climate activists and pro-Palestine campaigners increasingly face lengthy prison sentences, sweeping legal restrictions and months in jail before trial.

The report, Britain’s Political Prisoners, copublished by researchers at the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice at Queen Mary University of London and the campaign group Defend Our Juries, said the UK has “witnessed an increase in anti-protest powers granted to the police and the courts through legislation” that has “created a significantly more repressive legal terrain for activists engaging in civil disobedience and direct action”.

It traces the shift from crackdowns on protests by Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Insulate Britain and Just Stop Oil to more recent prosecutions linked to Palestine solidarity actions, including campaigns targeting British factories operated by Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer.

The report, released on Tuesday, found that a combination of new laws, broader police powers and increasingly punitive court tactics has reshaped Britain’s protest landscape since 2019.

The United Kingdom has witnessed numerous mass protests and direct actions by activists to pressure the government to stop selling arms to Israel during its genocidal war on Gaza, in which more than 72,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 40,000 women, children and elderly.

So what does Britain’s shifting stance on protests mean for civil rights, and what’s behind the legal clampdown on climate and pro-Palestine protests?

How Britain’s legal system has changed since 2019

The report painted a stark picture of how Britain’s legal system has changed in response to climate and pro-Palestine direct action campaigns through a mix of new laws, expanded police powers and what campaigners describe as increasingly punitive court tactics. What this means for protesters is longer jail sentences, stricter bail conditions and harsher treatment in the courts than was once typical for acts of civil disobedience, according to the report.

At the centre of that shift are two major laws introduced after waves of demonstrations by groups such as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil, two environmental groups that employ nonviolent civil disobedience tactics to pressure governments to address the climate crisis.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 transformed the old common law offence of “public nuisance” into a formal criminal offence carrying a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. This means actions that seriously disrupt the public – such as blocking roads, stopping traffic or shutting down infrastructure – can now lead to far more severe criminal penalties than before because the offence was never previously codified into legislation. Campaigners said the law has given prosecutors a powerful new tool to pursue long prison sentences against protesters.

The Public Order Act 2023 introduced a series of protest-specific offences in May of that year, largely in response to climate protests by groups including Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion, whose actions included blocking motorways, occupying oil terminals and targeting infrastructure projects in an attempt to pressure the government to halt new oil and gas extraction.

Such offences under the act included “locking on”, in which protesters attach themselves to roads, buildings, vehicles or each other using chains, glue or other devices to make removal difficult. The law also criminalised tunnelling, a tactic used by some activists to delay infrastructure projects, and introduced offences for disrupting major transport networks, oil terminals and other nationally important infrastructure. 

The legislation also significantly widened police powers whereby officers may now place restrictions on even one-person protests if they are deemed disruptive. Police were also granted powers to carry out stop-and-search operations in designated protest zones without needing reasonable suspicion that someone has committed an offence – a significant expansion of police authority criticised by civil liberties groups.

But the report argued the crackdown extends beyond parliament and into the courts.

One of its central findings is the growing use of civil injunctions and contempt of court proceedings against activists.

Oil companies, arms manufacturers, councils and universities have increasingly obtained court orders banning protests near their sites, the report said.

The report identified contempt of court as the most common route to imprisonment among the 249 protest-related cases it analysed. Contempt of court usually refers to someone disobeying a judge’s order or behaving in a way the court says interferes with justice. In protest cases, it has increasingly been used against activists who ignore injunctions or refuse to follow restrictions imposed during trials.

Because contempt proceedings are handled directly by judges rather than juries, campaigners argued they allow courts to imprison protesters more quickly and with fewer legal safeguards.

Researchers also highlighted what campaigners described as the “gagging” of defendants. Judges have increasingly stopped protesters from mentioning climate concerns, Gaza, international law or their political motivations in front of juries.

Courts have often argued that juries should focus only on whether a defendant broke the law, not on the political or moral reasons behind their actions. Critics said those restrictions prevent activists from fully explaining why they protested in the first place.

Campaigners also said the legal shift reflects a broader political change, driven in part by corporate lobbying under successive Conservative governments and continuing under Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government. They argued that peaceful protest is increasingly being criminalised to protect corporate interests, regardless of wider ethical concerns about the supply of arms to Israel during its war on Gaza or opposing fossil fuel projects linked to the climate crisis.

Perhaps most controversially, the report pointed to the growing use of lengthy pretrial detention. That means protesters being held in prison before they have been convicted of any crime.

According to the findings, many activists spend months on remand awaiting trial while some Palestine Action defendants have been held for more than a year before their cases are heard in court.

In 60 percent of the cases studied, the final sentence handed down was shorter than the time defendants had already spent in custody awaiting trial.

Are lobbyists influencing the crackdown?

Tim Crosland, director of Defend Our Juries, said the findings challenge Britain’s claims of ensuring democratic protections.

“This report strips away the illusion that Britain remains committed to democratic principles,” Crosland said.

“It reveals that peaceful protesters are being jailed in ever-increasing numbers under pressure from the oil and arms industries, the Israeli government and their lobbyists.”

The report pointed to what it described as growing political and corporate pressure behind Britain’s crackdown on protest movements.

Researchers cited reports that parts of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act may have originated in proposals from the right-wing think tank Policy Exchange. According to the investigative news site Open Democracy, Policy Exchange has previously received funding from ExxonMobil. The think tank had earlier published a report titled Extremism Rebellion, which called for new laws targeting Extinction Rebellion activists.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the links between the think tank and the legislation.

The report further alleged that British officials came under pressure from both Elbit Systems and the Israeli government to take a tougher approach towards Palestine Action protests targeting Elbit’s UK factories.

According to correspondence quoted by the researchers, the British government said in 2022 that it had “expressed our support in recognising the attacks and boycott on Elbit UK”. The report said the issue was later raised directly with then-Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab during a visit to Israel, where he reportedly “declared that the British government is committed to stopping the attacks”.

Zoe Blackler, founding director of the London events space Kairos, said: “In the face of this clampdown on the right to peaceful protest, we need to come together in solidarity and defiance.”

Which are the cases at the centre of Britain’s protest crackdown?

The report traced Britain’s hardening response to the protests through a series of landmark cases involving climate activists and Palestine solidarity campaigners, many of whom received lengthy prison sentences or spent months behind bars before trial.

Among the most high-profile is the case of the Whole Truth Five, a group of Just Stop Oil activists jailed in July 2024 over a Zoom call discussing plans to disrupt the M25 motorway. The five were convicted of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance and initially sentenced to between four and five years in prison.

The report described the case as one of the clearest examples of the tougher approach now being taken towards protest movements. Campaigners argued the sentences were extraordinary because the activists were punished largely for planning disruptive action rather than carrying it out. Prosecutors relied on conspiracy laws, which allow people to be charged for agreeing to commit an offence even if the planned action never ultimately happens.

Four Palestine Action activists were also sentenced to between 23 and 27 months for conspiring to damage an Israeli-linked arms factory in Wales. Meanwhile, four Just Stop Oil activists received prison terms of up to 30 months over plans to disrupt Manchester Airport despite never reaching the site. A fifth defendant, Noah Crane, spent almost a year in jail on remand before later being acquitted.

Another major case involved the Filton 24, Palestine Action activists prosecuted after a protest at an Elbit Systems factory in Bristol. Some defendants were held on remand for up to 18 months before trial.

After several activists were acquitted of aggravated burglary charges, most were eventually granted bail.

The report said the case raises “serious concerns” that prosecutors used unusually serious charges to justify holding defendants in prison for long periods before trial.

The report also highlighted the Brize Norton Five, activists accused of spray-painting air force planes in protest against Britain’s military links to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. According to the report, the group has remained on remand since August and is not expected to stand trial until 2027, meaning some could spend close to two years in jail before a verdict is reached.

Other cases revealed the growing use of judicial “gagging orders”.

During the retrial of the Filton 6, a separate trial from the Filton 24, the judge barred defendants from mentioning Gaza, Elbit’s role in supplying weapons to Israel and their political motivations for protesting. Critics argued such restrictions make it harder for juries to hear the broader context behind direct action campaigns.

In another case, three Insulate Britain activists were imprisoned for contempt of court after defying a judge’s order not to mention the “climate crisis” or “fuel poverty” before a jury.

Despite the legal restrictions, several juries continued to acquit activists. The report pointed to acquittals involving Just Stop Oil protesters, Extinction Rebellion activists and a hung jury in the first Filton 6 trial as evidence that some jurors remained unconvinced by the increasingly aggressive prosecution of protest movements.

Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty International UK CEO, told Al Jazeera that “the right to protest is being eroded before our eyes.”

“We’re seeing a worrying shift where the state is using remand, sweeping injunctions and contempt proceedings to lock people up or silence them before they’ve even stood trial.

“The broader legal implications here are concerning. It’s not just about one group of activists; it’s about a systemic attempt to shut down dissent, something we’ve been ringing the alarm on for a long time.

“By replacing the presumption of liberty with preemptive legal intimidation, it creates a chilling effect, undermines the rule of law and flies in the face of basic human rights.”

The waits are so long that the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has been forced to issue an official warning with the UK half term now in full swing

Brits heading to a popular EU destination have been warned about long delays.

Long queues at arrivals have been plaguing Copenhagen Airport in Denmark in recent days. The waits are so long that the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has been forced to issue an official warning.

“Travellers flying into and out of Copenhagen Airport from non-Schengen destinations (including the UK) are experiencing long delays at passport control. Embassy staff are in discussion with the relevant authorities on managing this pressure. Passengers with accessibility requirements, who need assistance (e.g. with very young children) or who have tight flight connections should make themselves known to airport staff in yellow vests who are monitoring the queue. For travellers departing from Copenhagen to the UK and non-Schengen destinations, we recommend giving yourself extra time to allow for queues at passport control,” the comment released on Sunday reads.

READ MORE: Japan unveils ‘fastest ever’ passenger jet 2.5x speedier than ConcordeREAD MORE: Ten airlines cancelling and grounding flights this summer because of the fuel crisis

The long wait times come in the weeks after the EES border check system was fully implemented at Copenhagen Airport, after a partial rollout in October last year. The new system means that non-EU travellers arriving in the country from outside the Schengen Area, such as those with UK passports, will be fingerprinted at border control.

The scheme has been more than 12 years in development and has been delayed time and time again. Copenhagen Airport completed its rollout of the EU’s new Entry and Exit System (EES) last month.

The implementation of the EES system has caused issues across the whole of Europe, including in the UK. Long queues formed at Dover last week, before the new border checks were suspended amid concerns for drivers stuck in the sweltering bank holiday heat.

Holidaymakers faced hours-long waits on Friday at the Port of Dover and travellers on Saturday came up against similar disruption. In a bid to ease congestion, the French authorities suspended extra EU border checks under its EES, the port announced.

It also said anyone who has missed their ferry crossing because of queues can travel on the next available slot free of charge.

EES involves people from third-party countries such as the UK having their fingerprints registered and photograph taken to enter the Schengen Area, which consists of 29 European countries, mainly in the EU.

There have been delays at other European ports. Passengers in airports in countries such as France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Greece were waiting several hours at border checks, the Airports Council International (ACI) body said last month.

Olivier Jankovec, the director of the ACI European division, told the Financial Times: “This situation, in the coming weeks and certainly over the peak summer months, is going to be simply unmanageable. We are seeing those queueing times now, at peak times, when traffic is just starting to build up.”

Last week, the boss of budget carrier easyJet urged European member states to be more flexible and avoid long airport queues caused by EES.

He said: “We are in correspondence with all the European member states, encouraging them to use the flexibility they have already been given by the EC, because it is unacceptable if customers are made to wait in border queues because, frankly, they have had since 2017 to prepare.

“It is really inexcusable. They have got the means to avoid allowing the queues to overrun by opening up the passport desks. It is completely in the gift of the European member states to smooth this through.”

PASSENGERS are facing travel chaos this bank holiday following a signalling issue impacting routes to Heathrow Airport.

There are major delays on the Elizabeth Line and Heathrow Express trains wreaking havoc for those trying to reach the airport today.

Earlier this evening, customers travelling to Heathrow Airport have been hit with severe delays to their journey.

A signalling failure in the London Paddington area has meant there’s a reduced service on the Elizabeth Line and Heathrow Express trains.

Trains running between London Paddington and Heathrow Airport or Reading may be cancelled, delayed by up to 45 minutes or revised.

These delays are expected to last until the end of the day.

WHAT A BELTER

My trip to US city famous for beating the Brits…and the best boxing film ever

MED OF DREAMS

I visited the Spanish hotel chain with late breakfasts – perfect for lie ins

According to Heathrow Express’ website, there are delays in both directions with only two trains departing every hour.

Meanwhile, the Elizabeth Line has reported severe delays between Paddington and Heathrow Terminals while a signal fault in the Southall area is fixed.

The service is also severely reduced, with some stations currently not being served.

On the National Rail site, they advise those travelling from the east to change at Whitechapel for service to Heathrow Terminal 4.

At the moment, services for Heathrow Terminal 5 will terminate before reaching Heathrow, so passengers are advised to arrive at Heathrow and use the free terminal transfers available at the airport.

Transport for London have said that tickets are being accepted on London Underground.

But for those travelling to Heathrow, the Underground doesn’t offer much of a solution.

This bank holiday the Piccadilly Line is undergoing planned engineering works, with no service from Hyde Park Corner to Uxbridge or Northfields.

However, tickets are being accepted by Great Western Rail and local bus services in order to get passengers to Heathrow Airport.

A spokesperson for Great Western Rail said: “Network Rail are currently investigating a signalling issue affecting the relief lines just outside of Paddington.

“To help keep trains running, some services are being reduced – and we’re advising customers travelling to or from Paddington to check before they travel.”

TfL said: “The Elizabeth line services are currently impacted by signalling issues in the Hayes & Harlington area.

“There is a severely reduced service, with some stations not being served, though we are currently looking to increase services.

“There is alternative ticket acceptance with GWR and local bus services.”

A former MAFS UK bride has alleged she was left traumatised after her on-screen husband performed a lewd act and controlled her behaviour as she criticises welfare team

A former Married At First Sight UK bride says she was traumatised for years after appearing on the show and alleges her co-star restricted her movements, leaving her isolated.

Speaking to the Mirror following Panorama: The Dark Side of Married At First Sight, which aired on BBC One on Monday night, the bride alleged: “He performed a lewd act and then touched my face without consent. He banned me from drinking or speaking to production staff without him.”

She claims to have reported it to welfare staff and that production staff were aware of incidents but she was encouraged to continue with the show. She alleged: “They [production] would say, ‘It’s going to be OK’. Staff bought me a drink to help smooth things over after I complained.”

READ MORE: Two more Married At First Sight UK brides and a groom make fresh abuse claims

Describing the welfare team, she alleged: “They present as your best friend. I thought they were somebody you could talk to about anything. But if I look back on it now, I would say it’s more like grooming.”

The bride alleged she felt pressured into intimacy by her partner and does not believe enough safeguarding existed once couples returned to their apartments off camera.

She said: “I had sex with my partner and whilst I wasn’t forced, I felt pressured.” She added: “The couch ceremonies are supposed to be a safe space where you can speak honestly. But you go back to your apartment afterwards and there are no cameras there and nobody to protect you.”

She told how much of the alleged behaviour took place away from cameras and claimed she repeatedly raised concerns with welfare and production teams throughout filming.

She had months of psychological assessments, interviews and background checks, which she believed were designed to protect participants.

But she said: “I told them everything about myself – that I’d been in controlling relationships before, that I struggled speaking up for myself and that I fall in love very quickly. But now I feel like I gave them the blueprint on how to expose me and use me.

“They knew I had a history of abusive, controlling relationships and paired me with someone who controlled my every move.”

She believes the intense filming conditions heightened emotions. She said: “I’ve never cried more in my life. “You aren’t sleeping enough, you’re filming 14, 15, sometimes 20-hour days and when you’re not filming, you’re isolated in an apartment.

“At the dinner parties you’d be picked up at 8am in full hair and make-up then left sitting in a shipping container for six or seven hours before filming. The worse your situation was with your partner, the longer they seemed to leave you in the room.”

She questioned how much information relationship experts Paul C. Brunson, Charlene Douglas and the late Mel Schilling had received. The contestant said: “The experts had zero idea what was going on. They gave good advice based on the information they had.”

After watching the Panorama episode, the bride believes the worst is yet to come. She added: “They need to properly safeguard people instead of just creating drama. This Panorama story is only the beginning of hearing the nightmares people have had.”

The bombshell claims come as Channel 4 removed all ten series from its platforms and scrapped the series due to air in September following a BBC Panorama investigation that revealed two women claim they were raped by their on-screen “husbands” during filming, while another made allegations of sexual assault against her partner.

The Metropolitan Police has now urged potential victims to come forward, stating they will be “making approaches to the relevant production teams” to ensure anyone affected knows how to report criminal allegations.

The scandal has blown open the production practices used in dating reality shows which have been growing in popularity over recent years.

Monday’s documentary sparked a political row, with Channel 4 CEO Priya Dogra telling MPs the broadcaster was “not an adjudicator” on the serious allegations. But it is feared this is just the tip of the iceberg for dating reality shows and these new claims put pressure on producers and broadcasters to clean up their act.

Channel 4 has commissioned an external review while insisting their welfare protocols are “some of the most comprehensive and robust in the industry”. Industry sources say the show is unlikely to ever air in the UK again.

The Mirror put these allegations to CPL and to Channel 4 who directed us to their statement in full. Part of this includes: “MAFS UK is produced under some of the most comprehensive and robust welfare protocols in the industry. These include the most thorough background checks available, a Code of Conduct which clearly sets out behavioural standards, daily contributor check-ins with a specialist welfare team and access to additional support before, during and after filming. The physical and psychological wellbeing of all contributors is of paramount importance throughout the process. All duty of care processes are regularly reviewed and, where appropriate, strengthened.”

Another section of the statement reads: “Channel 4 believes that when concerns related to contributor welfare were raised through existing welfare and production protocols, prompt and appropriate action was taken, based on the information available at the time. Channel 4 strongly refutes any claim to the contrary.”

READ MORE: ‘Serious concerns’ raised with Channel 4 and Ofcom over Married At First Sight rape claims

Current events are causing all sorts of problems, according to a currency exchange expert

Brits heading abroad this summer are being given a new warning.

Towards the close of last week, Sterling dropped to a three-week low against the Euro and a five-week low against the US Dollar, spelling trouble for Britons travelling overseas. The decline, according to a foreign exchange expert, stems from two key factors.

Tony Redondo, founder of Newquay-based Cosmos Currency Exchange, explained: “Firstly, markets are worried that Britain is heading towards a period of political instability. Secondly, they are worried about how the UK economy will cope with an expected rise in inflation.

“Though inflation fell to 2.8% today, it is expected to rise, potentially sharply, in the months ahead as the impact of rising oil prices due to the conflict in the Middle East hits the UK economy in full. If markets believe higher inflation makes UK gilts a not–so-safe bet, that will apply further downward pressure on Sterling.”

Tony noted the weakened Pound was hammering holidaymakers venturing abroad, as their money was now “plummeting” in value against currencies like the Euro and Dollar – a situation that “could get worse in the weeks and months ahead”.

However, he highlighted that a struggling domestic economy and Sterling’s persistent fragility was prompting an increasing number of businesses to fundamentally reconsider how and where they sell their services.

Tony added: “If they’re anything, the UK’s businesses are resilient and proving they can adapt. During 2026 to date, we’ve seen a sharp rise in UK businesses moving away from difficult domestic conditions and looking for customers overseas.

“Rather than having all their eggs in one UK economic basket, a growing percentage of UK firms are now marketing and selling their products and services online to customers in Europe, America, Canada, Australia and even Singapore and Hong Kong.

“If there’s one silver lining to the weak UK economy, it’s that many traditionally domestic UK small businesses have become international ones, as they cast their nets ever wider in search of customers and profit.

“The ability to ply your trade internationally has never been easier and it can massively boost a company’s bottom line.”

May 19 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s fast-growing defense industry is confronting a major new obstacle in the U.S. market as the Pentagon fully implements strict cybersecurity certification requirements across its global supply chain.

The U.S. Department of Defense has begun enforcing the final version of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification, or CMMC, program, requiring all companies participating in U.S. defense contracts to meet specific cybersecurity standards.

Industry officials warn that Korean defense firms unable to obtain certification could be excluded not only from exports to the United States but also from ship maintenance, repair and overhaul projects and future joint weapons development programs.

The certification system applies not only to primary contractors but also to subcontractors supplying parts and components.

Even companies with advanced technology and competitive pricing can be blocked from bidding if they fail to meet required cybersecurity levels.

For many South Korean defense firms, the most critical threshold is CMMC Level 2, which is required for handling Controlled Unclassified Information, or CUI, tied to U.S. military programs.

The requirement is considered especially important for South Korea’s ambitions to participate in U.S. Navy ship maintenance and repair projects, as well as broader bilateral defense cooperation initiatives.

Defense analysts say the new rules are becoming a de facto trade barrier across Western defense markets.

“Losing access to the U.S. market effectively means being pushed out of the global defense supply chain,” one industry expert said.

Defense Acquisition Program Administration has launched information sessions and consulting support programs in response to growing industry concerns.

The agency is working with regional defense innovation clusters, the Korea Defense Industry Association and the Defense Agency for Technology and Quality to help companies prepare for certification.

But smaller suppliers say the burden remains overwhelming.

Industry estimates suggest that achieving Level 2 certification can cost companies from hundreds of thousands to several million dollars due to infrastructure upgrades, consulting fees and final audits. Preparation alone can take more than a year.

Large defense contractors have already formed dedicated task forces, but many second- and third-tier suppliers lack both funding and cybersecurity specialists.

Because the CMMC system requires certification across the entire supply chain, failure by even a single subcontractor could jeopardize broader export opportunities involving larger Korean defense firms.

Additional complications stem from differences between U.S. and South Korean encryption standards.

One key CMMC requirement involves use of cryptographic modules certified under U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology guidelines known as FIPS standards.

Many South Korean defense companies, however, rely on domestic encryption systems validated under the country’s K-CMVP framework overseen by intelligence and defense authorities.

Industry experts are calling for government-level negotiations between Seoul and Washington to seek mutual recognition or equivalency between Korean and U.S. encryption standards.

Some officials argue such talks could be linked to ongoing negotiations over a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement between the two allies.

Concerns are also growing over South Korea’s lack of domestically accredited third-party CMMC assessment organizations, forcing companies to rely on U.S.-based auditors and raising concerns about defense technology exposure.

Analysts say South Korea’s defense industry must now treat cybersecurity as strategically important as weapons performance itself if it hopes to become a top-tier global arms exporter.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260519010005245

SCORES of drivers face a new charge at a major Scottish airport as a price increase begins today.

New drop-off charges have been rolled out at Edinburgh Airport, Scotland‘s busiest air hub which was used by 17 million passengers last year.

It will now cost £8.50 for a ten-minute slot to either drop-off or pick someone up near the main terminal.

The fees have been hiked by £2.50 and were rolled out today.

Bosses have also scrapped a 50 per cent discount for people driving electric vehicles to the airport.

Instead, more spaces have been added to the free drop-off area – where motorists can park for free for 30 minutes.

The price hike has been blamed on a surge in business rates.

Airport chiefs claim they have been hit by a hit by a 142 per cent rise – an £8million increase – which was branded “simply unacceptable”.

Edinburgh Airport’s chief executive Gordon Dewar said: “This decision to impose an unplanned and wholly disproportionate £8million rates increase has an immediate and negative impact on our business.

“We made this clear in correspondence with the Lothians Assessor, who set the increase, and in discussions with the Scottish Government, which has endorsed it.

“A 142% increase reduces our ability to invest, grow and compete. In practical terms, it equates to funding around 200 jobs, two aircraft stands, or five new security lanes. It is not a cost that can be absorbed; it must be covered, and trade-offs like this are unfortunately unavoidable.

“Like many across the hospitality and tourism sectors who have seen business rates soar, we have no choice but to pass part of this cost on to passengers.

“We had not planned to raise fees this year, but the absence of a transitional relief scheme – equivalent to that available in England and Wales – leaves us with no alternative.

“We have always accepted that, given our size, we should pay more, but the scale of this increase is simply unacceptable.”

Bosses previously wrote to the Convenor of the Lothian Valuation Joint Board, which sets non-domestic rates, as well as the First Minister and the Public Finance Minister, to outline their concerns.

Mr Dewar added: “We have made clear to both the Assessor and the Scottish Government that a system which produces such markedly different outcomes for comparable assets operating within the same national economy cannot credibly be described as fair, proportionate or fit for a modern Scotland. This systemic inconsistency lies at the heart of our concern.”

It comes just months after Glasgow and Aberdeen airports – both owned by AGS – increased their drop off fees.

It costs £7 for people to park for up to 15 minutes at both of the sites.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “The valuation of all non-domestic property is a matter for the Scottish Assessors who are independent of central and local government.
 
“The Scottish Government estimates Edinburgh Airport will, with Transitional Relief,  have a net non-domestic rates bill of around £8.1 million for 2026-27, compared to £5.4 million before revaluation.
 
“The Scottish Government’s Revaluation Transitional Relief protects those most affected at revaluation – including airports – and will cap increases in gross liabilities up to the next revaluation in 2029.”

Ronnie O’Sullivan reeled off three frames in a row to beat Kyren Wilson 6-3 and book a place in the Snooker 900 Global Championship final.

Seven-time world champion O’Sullivan, who won the World Seniors Snooker Championship last week, knocked in a break of 121 in the opening frame as he went 2-0 in front in Reading.

Wilson, the 2024 world champion, levelled and took a 4-3 lead before O’Sullivan surged to victory.

Luca Brecel will face O’Sullivan in the final after the Belgian beat Joe Perry 6-3 in the other semi-final.

Snooker 900 events involve playing frames to a 15-minute (900 seconds) time limit, a 20-second shot clock and a ball in hand rule when a foul is conceded.

Airports in Japan, China, India, the UAE, Singapore and Thailand have all been impacted, with major airlines cancelling 366 flights and delaying a further 2,949 services.

Hundreds of flights have been axed this weekend as severe weather, airspace chaos and growing operational strain cause widespread disruption.

Airports across Japan, China, India, the UAE, Singapore and Thailand have all been hit, with airlines scrapping 366 flights and delaying a further 2,949 services, according to aviation tracking data reported by Travel and Tour World.

Major carriers affected include China Eastern Airlines, IndiGo, AirAsia and Etihad Airways, with the disruption centred on major transit hubs such as Tokyo Haneda Airport, Shenzhen Bao’an International Airport, Kempegowda International Airport, Singapore Changi Airport and Zayed International Airport.

Industry experts say the chaos is being fuelled by a mix of heavy storms battering parts of Asia, congestion at key airports and the ongoing impact of Middle East airspace restrictions, which have forced airlines to reroute planes and shoulder significantly higher fuel bills.

The broader aviation sector is also grappling with the fallout from geopolitical tensions linked to the conflict involving Iran, which has resulted in airspace closures and extended flight times on major Europe-Asia routes.

It has been reported this week that a number of carriers have already started cutting back international schedules due to spiralling operating costs. Air India has confirmed temporary reductions to several long-haul services between June and August, attributing the move to fuel pressures and operational challenges stemming from diversions around restricted airspace.

Despite the turbulence affecting much of the region, Singapore Airlines has revealed plans to boost capacity on certain routes as passengers increasingly opt for direct Asia-Europe flights that bypass Middle Eastern stopovers.

Australian government travel guidance has also cautioned travellers to anticipate continued disruption related to the conflict, including cancellations, delays and fuel supply problems impacting global aviation networks.

Passengers flying through major Asian hubs this week have been advised to verify flight status updates before departing for the airport, with airlines cautioning that additional schedule alterations remain likely should weather patterns and geopolitical disruption persist.

Ronda Rousey returns to the ring on Saturday to face Gina Carano at the Intuit Dome in a card that its promoters hope will prove that mixed martial arts (MMA) can generate the same excitement as boxing without the UFC.

The five-round, 145-pound bout airing on Netflix (6 p.m. PDT) will be the first MMA event promoted by Most Valuable Promotions (MVP), the company co-founded by Jake Paul and Nakisa Bridarian. According to Bridarian, the card is the most expensive in MVP history, with each fighter receiving at least $40,000 — a sum greater than what UFC rookies receive.

“I would say this is the most expensive MMA card ever put together,” Bridarian said Wednesday. “We can only do this because we have a partner [Netflix] that allows us to pull it off, and they deserve it.”

Rousey (12-2), a Riverside native, is returning to competition after a nine-year hiatus, during which she starred in movies, wrestled in the WWE and became a mother of two. Her informal retirement came after consecutive losses to Holly Holm in 2015 and Amanda Nunes in 2016. For the Californian, this fight is the career finale she never had.

Gina Carano participates in an open workout Wednesday at Venice Beach ahead of her Netflix MMA bout with Ronda Rousey at Intuit Dome.

(Sarah Stier / Getty Images for Netflix)

“It’s incredible, because I feel like, no matter what happens, I’m completely at peace with it,” Rousey said. “Before, winning was the most important thing in the world. Now, what matters most to me are my kids and my family.”

Rousey hopes the event will draw more than nine million viewers, a threshold that would help convince Netflix and MVP to invest in MMA on a sustained basis. The MMA ratings record belongs to the fight between Junior dos Santos and Cain Velasquez at UFC on Fox 1 on Nov. 12, 2011, which peaked at 8.8 million viewers and averaged 5.7 million during its broadcast.

Netflix has already demonstrated an appetite for combat sports, posting impressive numbers: it drew a global audience of 33 million for Paul versus Anthony Joshua, 41.4 million for the Canelo Álvarez-Terence Crawford bout and 108 million for the Paul-Mike Tyson fight. However, promoters are aware that MMA operates in a different league and that on Saturday they will have the top ambassador of women’s MMA in action.

Ronda Rousey lunges forward and punches during an open workout at Venice Beach on Wednesday ahead of Netflix MMA bout against Gina Carano at Intuit Dome.

(Sarah Stier / Getty Images for Netflix)

“I just want to convince MVP and Netflix that there’s something here worth investing in and that they should keep backing MMA,” Rousey said.

Carano (7-1), 44, also has a historic track record, having been part of the first women’s MMA fight on live television in 2007 and headlining the first Showtime card featuring two women as main event fighters, facing Cris Cyborg in 2009. Although Carano is unlikely to pose a competitive challenge for Rousey, both women are approaching the event more as pioneers than as rivals.

On Wednesday, Rousey trained at Venice Beach in front of dozens of fans, the same beach where she began her career. She was accompanied by Pauline Macías, a Brazilian judoka, MMA fighter and close friend since the age of 11.

“It’s the ending she deserves,” Rousey said of her special training session ahead of what could potentially be her final fight as a fighter.

Beyond her fight, Rousey has her sights set on becoming a promoter to improve conditions for fighters outside the UFC.

“It’s about giving the power back to the fighters and reminding people that we are the essence of this sport, not a brand or a belt,” said the 39-year-old fighter.

The match has been criticized for taking place more than 10 years late, well past the fighters’ prime. Carano disagreed.

“I think this fight is coming at just the right time,” Carano said. “Two years ago, you would have seen a different version of me. Right now, I’m in such a strong place that, well, I’ve had to go through all of this to get here.”

This article first appeared in Spanish via L.A. Times en Español.

DAKAR, Senegal — It’s an existence that Congo’s president has described as “living the Congolese dream.” For the 15 Latin Americans deported to the African nation under the Trump administration’s widely criticized crackdown on migrants, it feels more like a nightmare.

The Associated Press spoke with one, a 29-year old Colombian woman who confirmed what people deported to other African nations have described: A shackled deportation despite a U.S. immigration judge’s protection order. Confinement in a hotel with supervised outings.

And an impossible choice: Return to a home country with the risk of persecution or stay in Congo, a country the Colombian woman had never heard of before she arrived.

“They treat us like we’re children,” she said as their three-month Congolese visas near an end, with no plan in sight.

“What would one do in a completely unknown place, without a place to live and without knowing what to do?” she added, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

It was not immediately clear what a new U.S. court ruling, saying the U.S. likely broke the law by deporting a fellow Colombian to Congo, will mean for her.

A United Nations-affiliated group plays a central role

In her interview from the hotel in Congo’s capital, Kinshasa, where she and other deportees are held, the woman gave new details about the central role that a United Nations-affiliated body, the International Organization for Migration, is playing.

She said deportees are allowed to leave the hotel about once a week and only accompanied by IOM staff. When they shop at a supermarket or withdraw money they are quickly ushered back to their vehicle, with IOM staff never out of sight.

“They choose where we go and what we buy,” she said.

At the hotel, she said, IOM staff have organized activities like painting, music and volleyball but many deportees have stopped participating, bored with the routine. She goes for meals and remains in her room otherwise, making late-night calls to her 10-year-old daughter in Colombia and worrying when she will see her again.

Most striking is the role IOM staff are playing in presenting deportees with their possible fates.

They have offered the woman two paths: Return to Colombia, where a U.S. judge has ruled she cannot safely be sent back, while receiving IOM “protection and assistance,” or remain in Congo with no support.

“They are given impossible choices,” said Alma David, the woman’s U.S.-based attorney. “By deporting them to a third country with no opportunity to contest being sent there, the U.S. not only violated their due process rights but our own immigration laws and our obligations under international treaties.”

Congo is one of at least eight African countries that have made deals with the Trump administration to facilitate deportations of third-country nationals, which legal experts say are effectively a legal loophole for the U.S. Most deportees had received legal orders of protection from U.S. judges shielding them against being returned to their home countries, lawyers said.

The AP has interviewed others sent to African nations who were forced to make risky decisions, such as a gay Moroccan asylum-seeker deported to Cameroon, a country where homosexuality is illegal.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to questions about the Colombian woman’s case, but it has asserted that third-country deportation agreements “ensure due process under the U.S. Constitution.” The Trump administration says the agreements are needed to “remove criminal illegal aliens” whose country of origin will not take them back.

Details of Congo’s deal with U.S. are unclear

The details of Congo’s deal with the Trump administration are not clear. Other countries have received millions of dollars to participate.

Earlier this month, Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi called the agreement an “act of goodwill between partners,” with no financial compensation. It comes as Washington has ramped up pressure on neighboring Rwanda over its support for the M23 rebel group that has seized cities in eastern Congo — a dynamic some analysts say may explain Kinshasa’s willingness to take deportees.

“We agreed to do so as a friendly gesture, simply because it was what the Americans wanted,” Tshisekedi said, adding that the migrants are free to leave Congo at any time.

“We understand that psychologically they must be unsettled because, at first, they dreamed of living the American dream, and now they are living the Congolese dream — in a country they probably did not know and may never even have noticed on a map of the world,” Tshisekedi said.

Congolese human rights groups have called it a violation of international refugee law. The Congo-based Institute for Human Rights Research described the situation as “arbitrary detention by proxy for the United States.”

The current U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy says if a government has made blanket diplomatic assurances that it won’t persecute people who are deported, no further process is required for deportation, not even giving deportees notice where they are being sent, said David, the attorney.

“When they told me they were going to deport me, I almost fainted,” the Colombian woman said. She was told about Congo the day before the flight.

She was detained at a routine check-in with ICE

She said she left Colombia in 2024, following threats from armed groups and abuse by a former partner who worked for the government.

She went to Mexico, where she waited for a border appointment booked with the U.S. government. When she presented herself at an Arizona port of entry in September 2024, immigration officials determined she had a credible fear of persecution, clearing her to apply for asylum, but kept her in ICE detention.

“You spend a year and a half locked up, living the same day over and over again. You see fights, punishments where people are locked in cells for many hours. You lose your privacy even to use the bathroom,” she said.

Some officers made racist remarks. “They made derogatory comments toward us as migrants, shouted at us all the time and sometimes denied basic things like showers as punishment,” she said.

In May 2025, a federal judge granted her protection under the U.N. Convention Against Torture, ruling she could not be safely returned to Colombia, according to court documents seen by the AP.

She filed a habeas corpus petition and won her release in February. She moved to Texas and was required to wear a GPS monitoring device, but at her first check-in appointment with ICE, she was detained again.

“All they told me was that I was under detention, as they had found a third country for me,” she said.

Less than three weeks later, she was put on a plane to Congo. She and the other deportees arrived on April 17 after a nearly 24-hour charter flight during which their hands and feet were restrained.

She doesn’t feel safe in Congo

Now they stay at a hotel near Kinshasa’s airport, in tidy white bungalows. Congo’s government covers the cost, the IOM said. It was not clear whether that would last after the deportees’ visas run out.

The hotel gates are locked according to one of the deportees lawyers. The Colombian woman also said security personnel do not let them leave on their own.

They were told they could apply for asylum, an option no one has chosen. “I don’t feel safe in Congo,” the woman said.

An IOM spokesperson said the organization has provided her with humanitarian assistance based on an assessment of her vulnerability. It includes “protection interventions, referrals, rights safeguarding and promotion of migrants’ overall well-being,” with no details.

The IOM also may offer “assisted voluntary return” — covering documents, flights, transit and temporary housing on arrival — with migrants’ consent.

The IOM said it plays no role in determining who is deported and reserves the right to withdraw its assistance for deportees if “minimum protection standards” aren’t met.

The Colombian woman remains in limbo, anxious. She said the food “has made us very sick,” with stomach ailments ongoing.

Local languages, like French and Lingala, are as foreign as her surroundings.

“The worst part is having to go through all of that without having committed any crime, simply for going to another country to ask for safety and protection.”

Banchereau writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON, May 14 (UPI) — Every day at 4 a.m., Cesar wakes up to sell burritos on the streets of Los Angeles. He spends a few hours preparing food in his apartment kitchen and later sets up a small canopy tent with a grill, several coolers and a large sign, made by his sister, advertising “burritos for sale.”

He has done this for the last three weeks, after finding out just over a month ago that he was terminated from his human relations job. He lost the job because of renewal delays to his status under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill, said Tuesday that 32,000 people have lost their DACA status largely as a result of delays. The Department of Homeland Security has not released data on the number of people waiting for renewals.

More than 500,000 people rely on DACA, according to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. The program requires recipients to renew their status every two years.

“At first, when I was let go, I was feeling devastated, defeated,” said Cesar, who came to the United States when he was 4 and who did not want his last name used for fear of government retribution. “But, after going through those feelings, I knew I couldn’t just sit there.”

Cesar is one of many DACA recipients who have lost their jobs in recent months due to renewal delays, largely caused by increased vetting procedures. The program requires recipients to renew their status every two years.

The Obama-era immigration program provides work authorization to those who qualify, as well as protection from deportation. When their status expires, DACA recipients lose both protections. Many, like Cesar, now have been terminated from their jobs as a result and fear deportation.

Cesar applied for his renewal in early December, nearly six months ago. Like many others, he has received no communication since from USCIS. Previously, renewal applications took one to two months on average, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Last year, the median processing time was 15 days, according to DHS data.

“In its 14 years, we have certainly seen the DACA program face a whole host of attacks,” said Anabel Mendoza, a spokesperson from United We Dream, a youth-led immigrant network. “But what we’re seeing now is truly the most dangerous moment in DACA’s history.

More than 700 people attended a Zoom event hosted by United We Dream last week to help DACA recipients navigate the instability created by these delays. There was a distinct sense of anxiety among the attendees.

Participants flooded the chat feature of the call with anecdotes of losing solid jobs and questions on whether DACA recipients qualified for paid leave or unemployment.

One attendee wrote that, although he would prefer not to use unemployment, he had been waiting five months to receive his renewal. Like many others, he was worried about his ability to pay off significant bills and loans after losing his job.

One person even questioned whether they could sue the current administration.

Another asked whether they could now be deported, with many worrying whether they may even be detained at their immigration appointments.

The two central benefits of DACA, historically, have been legal protection from deportation and work authorization. However, a recent ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals, an arm of the Department of Justice, said that judges can no longer stop deportation proceedings simply based on the plaintiff having DACA status. This marked a significant shift in immigration policy.

Organizers at the event stressed that DACA still protects recipients from deportation, but judges now have to consider DACA cases more closely. They later acknowledged that many DACA recipients were detained and deported by ICE last year, even before the ruling.

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons confirmed in April that 343 people with DACA status were detained between January and November 2025, while 176 were deported.

Former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement in February that most of these people had “criminal histories.” However she did not specify their crimes or whether they had been arrested, charged or convicted.

“It is part of a broader pattern of really trying to undermine DACA and erode the very protections that the program was meant to uphold,” Mendoza said.

This was a sentiment echoed by Maria Fernanda Madrigal, a mother of three who recently lost her job as an immigration attorney after losing her work permit because of the delays.

In an interview, she questioned whether the delays were an intentional strategy by the Trump administration. She explained that the renewal process had previously been very straightforward for many of her clients — sometimes taking just a week.

“I’m still trying to figure out what the goal is,” Madrigal said. “Because it’s hard, do they want us to leave?”

She highlighted Trump’s attempted termination of the DACA program in 2017 during his first term. The Supreme Court blocked him and preserved the program in 2020.

Now, she wonders whether it may be easier for her and her family to leave the United States. She explained that, unlike their parents, “a lot of us [DACA recipients] have degrees and careers, so we know that we’ll be able to build lives somewhere else.”

Madrigal now keeps the doors of her house locked at all times out of fear of being detained while she awaits her renewal. She said she and her husband have had discussions about whether their small children should share a bed with them.

“If I’m ever detained, these are the moments that I’m going to want, right? I’m going to look back and say I wish I would have cuddled with them a little longer,” Madrigal said.

As Cesar’s new business continues to grow, he faces similar fears, worrying whether he might be “taken away at any moment.”

“I know a lot of people say we’re resilient and we’ll figure it out. And that’s very true,” Madrigal said. “But, I think the main thing that our people understand is, even though we might be able to stick together and get over this, we shouldn’t have to.”