Protests

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill has imposed a curfew and deployed state police outside Newark’s Delaney Hall immigration detention centre after nights of clashes between protesters and ICE agents.

Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark in New Jersey, has imposed a curfew on the area surrounding Delaney Hall, the immigration detention centre that has become a flashpoint in the debate over United States President Donald Trump’s mass deportation drive.

The Sunday morning announcement came amid a flare-up in tensions outside the detention centre, which is run by the private contractor GEO Group, as part of a 15-year deal with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

“Due to the escalating situation at Delaney Hall and the increasing need for police intervention, immediate action is required to protect public safety,” Baraka wrote in a statement.

“Multiple individuals have already been arrested and found in possession of weapons, underscoring the seriousness of the threat.”

As part of the curfew, movement will be restricted within half a mile (0.8km) of the detention centre between the hours of 9pm and 6am US Eastern time (1:00 to 10:00 GMT).

A nearby road, Doremus Avenue, will also be closed to pedestrians and vehicles that cannot verify their need to be in the area.

Since the reopening of Delaney Hall as an immigration detention facility last year, it has been the site of confrontations between law enforcement and protesters, including Mayor Baraka himself.

The month of May has seen more than a week of daily protests outside Delaney Hall, after lawyers for the detainees at Delaney Hall announced a hunger strike was unfolding inside.

Detainees have denounced the living conditions to human rights groups, reporting expired food, a lack of medical care and abuse at the hands of authorities.

The Trump administration has justified its mass deportation campaign as an effort to rid the US of “the worst of the worst”, framing undocumented immigrants as a criminal threat.

But critics point out that many of those detained have no criminal record, and some who do have only been cited for minor offences.

The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data-tracking service from Syracuse University, found that, as of April, roughly 71 percent of those in ICE detention had no criminal conviction.

To show solidarity with the hunger strike, protesters have been gathering outside Delaney Hall, locking arms to form human chains and creating barricades to prevent access.

But that has led to tense confrontations with law enforcement, who have used batons and pepper spray to try to clear roads to the facility.

Governor Mikie Sherrill called for the establishment of designated protest zones, to mitigate the likelihood of conflict between officers and demonstrators.

But clashes have continued. Overnight on Wednesday, six protesters were arrested.

Politicians themselves have encountered tense interactions at Delaney Hall.

A year ago, one protest resulted in trespassing charges against Mayor Baraka and assault charges against US Representative LaMonica McIver, after a disagreement over which officials could enter the facility for an inspection.

While the charges against Baraka were dropped, McIver continues to face legal proceedings. She has denied the charges and called the prosecution politically motivated.

“One year ago, the Trump administration threw baseless charges against me for conducting oversight to protect immigrants at Delaney Hall,” McIver wrote on social media on Saturday.

“Have they tried to silence me? Yes. Have the stakes risen? Yes. Am I backing down from speaking up for you? Never.”

This past week, Governor Sherrill was also denied access to the facility. She has since issued a statement calling for Delaney Hall to be shut down.

At a news conference on Saturday, she blamed “national extremist groups” for arriving from out of state and escalating tensions. She added that the current precautions were designed to protect the safety of peaceful protesters.

“I urge those protesting outside of Delaney Hall to bring the temperature down, so we can focus on the detainees and their families,” Sherrill said.

She suggested that the actions of state and local officials would help head off any expanded ICE operations in New Jersey.

“I will not give ICE a pretext to expand operations at Delaney Hall or across our state. I will not put lives at risk,” she said. “I’m grateful to the vast majority of protesters who have assembled peacefully and raised their voices about Delaney Hall’s conditions.”

May 31 (UPI) — Newark, N.J., Mayor Ras J. Baraka instituted a curfew early Sunday in the area around an immigration detention facility where protesters have gathered in reaction to a hunger and labor strike there.

Baraka’s announcement came amid growing conflict between those supporting the hunger strikers at Delaney Hall detention facility and those who support the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. The strike has been in effect since May 22 with detainees protesting what they describe as inhumane conditions at the facility.

Supporters of the strikers have gathered outside the facility since the start of the strike, and some have gotten into scuffles with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, prompting anti-immigration protesters to join the demonstrations.

“Due to the escalating situation at Delaney Hall and the increasing need for police intervention, immediate action is required to protect public safety,” Baraka said in a statement. “Multiple individuals have already been arrested and found in possession of weapons, underscoring the seriousness of the threat.”

Baraka said the curfew went into effect at midnight and applied to a half-mile surrounding the facility. He closed Doremus Avenue to all pedestrian traffic and limited vehicle traffic to those with official business in the area.

“This curfew will remain in effect nightly from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. until further notice,” the mayor said.

In his statement, he said those violating the curfew will be issued a warning, and non-compliance would “result in removal from the area and the issuance of appropriate summonses and/or further legal action.”

Environmental activists in Rome built a mock rocket with caricatures of Giorgia Meloni and Donald Trump, calling for ‘fascists’ to be launched to another planet. The protest condemned government inaction on climate change and the global rise of authoritarian politics.

Weekly protests in Dublin are growing as people demand justice and accountability for Yves Sakila, a Congolese man who died after being restrained by security guards outside a shopping centre.

Foreign workers in South Africa are yet again facing violence and protests by anti-immigrant groups. They accuse them of residing and working in the country illegally and are demanding that they leave by June 30.

South Africa has seen recurrent waves of anti-immigrant violence in the past decade – often directed at other African nationals.

Since the end of apartheid in 1994, the country has become a destination for thousands of workers from neighbouring countries. But many South Africans say the government is not upholding its immigration laws.

So, does South Africa still need foreign workers?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

William Gumede – Associate professor, School of Governance at the University of the Witwatersrand

Lindiwe Zulu – Member of the ANC Committee on International Relations and a former South African minister of social development

Ashraf Essop – Immigration lawyer

Bolivia’s president has warned protesters “time is running out” amid a weeks-long standoff over the country’s economic and political crisis. President Rodrigo Paz has secured powers to declare a State of Emergency, but protesters remain unmoved.

May 27 (UPI) — Federal prosecutors are suing the University of California, alleging civil rights violations were committed in connection with pro-Palestinian campus protests, the latest lawsuit by the Trump administration, which has targeted universities over issues from antisemitism to their hiring practices.

The Trump administration has taken dozens of actions against higher education institutions, including investigations, lawsuits and funding freezes, in what critics describe as an effort to crack down on left-leaning ideology in public and private spaces.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the Western District of California, focuses on the encampment erected on the University of California, Los Angeles, campus in April 2024 as pro-Palestinian protests erupted across U.S. universities against Israel’s war in Gaza as students sought to pressure their schools to divest from Israel.

Federal prosecutors allege the school failed to protect its Jewish and Israeli students through its inaction concerning the encampment, which was erected April 25, 2024, and torn down May 2, 2024, when the school permitted police to clear the campus of protesters.

“Universities have an obligation to maintain safe and inclusive campuses for all students,” First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli of the Central District of California said in a statement.

“Universities that violate our nation’s civil rights laws by repeatedly failing to shield Jewish students from antisemitism will be held accountable.”

The lawsuit is similar to the one federal prosecutors filed against UCLA in February, accusing the institution of creating a hostile work environment for Israeli and Jewish faculty and staff over its inaction with regard to the encampment.

UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk on Tuesday rejected the accusations.

“Let me be direct: The suggestion that UCLA has been passive in the face of antisemitism is simply wrong. Combating antisemitism is a moral imperative — one rooted, for me, in personal history that makes indifference unthinkable,” he said in a statement.

Frenk highlighted a series of actions the school has taken over the past year, from recruiting an associate vice chancellor for campus and community safety to reorganizing its civil rights office, as proof of the school’s commitment to stand against antisemitism.

The Justice Department is seeking a court declaration that UCLA unlawfully discriminated against Jewish and Israeli students, an order forcing it to institute a series of changes and a declaration that the federal government does not need to make additional grant payments to the university.

Earlier this month, the Justice Department announced the results of an investigation into UCLA’s medical school admissions process, saying it discriminated by race to favor Black and Hispanic applicants.

Critics have accused the Trump administration of using the Justice Department to crack down on disfavored speech and ideology.

In April 2025, more than 200 college and university leaders issued a joint statement condemning the actions of the Trump administration targeting higher education institutions as “unprecedented government overreach and political interference.”

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.”

Coffee chain has seen ‘very significant’ drop in sales after campaign that evoked deadly crackdown, local operator says.

Starbucks Korea has suffered a “very significant” drop in sales after a marketing campaign that evoked a brutal 1980 military crackdown on pro-democracy protesters triggered a public outcry, according to the coffee chain’s local operator.

Shinsegae Group, whose subsidiary E-Mart owns the coffee chain in South Korea, has faced mounting criticism over its so-called “Tank Day” campaign, launched on the anniversary of the May 18 Gwangju Uprising, when the military government deployed troops and tanks to suppress pro-democracy demonstrations.

In a news conference on Tuesday, Shinsegae Group chairman Chung Yong-jin made a public apology and asked people not to take out any anger on Starbucks Korea employees and front-line staff.

“I take it very seriously, the fact that many people felt deep pain and anger because of Starbucks Korea’s inappropriate marketing campaign,” Chung said.

“I will take all responsibility for the incident.”

Chung also asked people not to take out their frustration on staff at Starbucks shops, saying the responsibility lies with management. There were no immediate reports of major incidents at stores.

Chung issued his first apology on May 19, saying in a statement that the campaign caused “deep pain to the victims and bereaved families of the May 18 Democratization Movement as well as to the public”.

Shinsegae fired the head of Starbucks Korea last week after apologising over the campaign. Starbucks Global also apologised and said that an investigation had begun.

A Shinsegae official said sales had fallen sharply since the marketing controversy.

“While sales are not our main concern at the moment, we have seen a very significant drop,” said the official.

At Tuesday’s news conference, Jeon Sangjin, a senior Shinsegae Group executive, said the company had yet to find conclusive evidence that Starbucks Korea marketing employees intended to mock the pro-democracy movement, an accusation the employees have denied.

However, he said some employees refused management requests to hand over their smartphones during a weeklong internal review.

Jeon said the company would look at the results from the police inquiry, and any employee found to have intended to ridicule protesters would be fired.

The anger over the campaign has triggered public calls for boycotts, amplified by government officials, including Interior and Safety Minister Yoon Ho-jung, who said Starbucks products will no longer be used at government events and lamented the chain’s “anti-historical behaviour”.

The country’s president, Lee Jae Myung, said on X last week that the campaign displayed “inhumane and disgraceful behaviour by cheap profiteers who deny the values of the South Korean community, basic human rights and democracy”.

Hundreds of people are estimated to have died ⁠or gone missing when Chun Doo-hwan’s military government cracked down on the protests in Gwangju.

Many details remain unconfirmed, including who gave the order to open fire.

Clashes have broken out between protesters and riot police after an antigovernment rally in the Serbian capital, Belgrade.

Large crowds of demonstrators poured into central Belgrade on Saturday, many carrying banners and wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the “Students win” motto of the youth movement that organised the gathering.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic has sought to rein in mass demonstrations that have challenged his hardline rule in the Balkan country. The size of Saturday’s turnout suggested that dissent remains strong more than a year after protests first began with demonstrators demanding accountability for a train station tragedy in northern Serbia in November 2024 that killed 16 people.

Anticorruption protests forced then-Prime Minister Milos Vucevic to resign in January 2025 before the authorities moved to clamp down on the movement. Many in Serbia blamed the concrete canopy collapse at the station on alleged corruption-fuelled negligence during renovation work carried out with Chinese companies.

On Saturday, Serbia’s state railway company cancelled all trains to and from Belgrade in what appeared to be an effort to prevent at least some people from travelling to the capital from other parts of the country.

In a video posted on Instagram on Saturday, the president said protesters “have shown their violent nature and that they cannot stand political opponents”. Vucic, who was en route to China for a state visit, added: “The state is functioning and will continue to work in line with the law.”

Students on Saturday demanded early elections and the rule of law, accusing the government of crime and corruption. They said they now plan to challenge Vucic in this year’s elections, which they hope will unseat his right-wing populist government. Vucic said on Thursday that the parliamentary elections could be held between September and November.

Clashes were first reported near a park camp of Vucic loyalists outside the Serbian presidency building. The camp was set up before another large antigovernment rally last March as a human shield against protesters. Folk music blared from a fenced-off area surrounded by rows of riot police in full gear.

The Serbian president has come under international scrutiny for his hardline tactics against demonstrators over the past year, including arbitrary arrests and the use of excessive force. The Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, Michael O’Flaherty, criticised Serbia’s government in a report after he visited the country last week and said he “will monitor the situation closely”.

O’Flaherty also cited “reports of police protecting unidentified and often masked attackers of journalists and protesters”. He said the overall human rights situation has deteriorated since his previous visit in April 2025.

Serbia is seeking to join the European Union while cultivating close ties with Russia and China. Democratic backsliding under Vucic could cost the country about 1.5 billion euros ($1.8bn) in EU funding, the bloc’s top enlargement official warned last month.

The student-led movement, which began after the Novi Sad rail station disaster in November 2024, is pushing for early elections.

Tens of thousands of people, led by university students, have rallied in the Serbian capital to protest against the government and call for early elections.

The Novi Sad rail station disaster in November 2024, which killed 16 people, sparked anticorruption protests, calling for a transparent investigation, forcing then-Prime Minister Milos Vucevic to resign.

Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vucic later pushed back hard against the protesters.

With students leading the anticorruption movement, the demonstrations have snowballed into a campaign to push Vucic to call early elections.

Vucic said this week that the ballot could be held between September and November this year.

‘Students win’

Protesters streamed into a central square in the capital, Belgrade, from several directions, many carrying banners and wearing T-shirts inscribed with the “Students win” motto of the youth movement.

Columns of cars drove into Belgrade from other Serbian towns earlier in the day.

Protester Maja Milas Markovic said students “managed to gather us here with their youth and wonderful energy; I really believe that we have [the] right to live normally.”

Serbia’s state railway company cancelled all trains to and from Belgrade on Saturday, in a bid to stop at least some of the people from coming from other parts of the Balkan country.

Vucic’s loyalists, meanwhile, gathered in a park camp outside the Serbian presidency building that he set up before another big antigovernment rally last March as a human shield against protesters. Folk music blared from a fenced area surrounded by riot police in full gear.

Students have said their rally will be peaceful. But there are concerns of violent conflict with Vucic’s loyalists, who are often hooded and masked and who have attacked student protesters in the past.

The protests have “huge support from the public, and that’s because they’re an all-encompassing movement … against the government,” Tetyana Kekic, a journalist in Belgrade, told Al Jazeera.

She said the challenge for the protesters is that they do not have a “clear political platform or policies … and they do not have a leader or a personality which could really challenge the president”.

Serbia’s push to join the EU

The Serbian president has faced international scrutiny for his hardline approach towards the demonstrators.

The Council of Europe commissioner for human rights, Michael O’Flaherty, criticised Serbia’s government in a report this week and said he “will monitor the situation closely” on Saturday.

Serbia is formally seeking entry into the European Union, but it has maintained close ties with Russia and China.

The democratic backsliding under Vucic could cost the country about 1.5 billion euros ($1.8bn) in European Union funding, the EU’s top enlargement official warned last month.

The venue on Saturday is Belgrade’s Slavija Square, the scene of a huge antigovernment protest in March 2025. That rally ended in sudden disruption that experts later said – and the government denied – involved the use of a sonic weapon against peaceful demonstrators.

Students now say they plan to challenge Vucic in approaching elections later this year or next, which they hope will oust the right-wing populist government.

Vucic, government officials, and the pro-government media have branded critics as “terrorists” and foreign agents who wish to destroy the country – rhetoric that has ramped up political polarisation.

Bolivian President Rodrigo Paz has announced a cabinet reshuffle and other measures as protests demanding his resignation continue. Paz said the government wants to build a collaborative government with broader participation from social and economic groups.

Rodrigo Paz is under pressure from weeks of demonstrations and poor economic conditions.

Bolivia’s right-wing President Rodrigo Paz has said he will reorganise his cabinet as he faces calls to resign amid weeks of widespread protests.

During a news conference on Wednesday, Paz said he would reshuffle his ministers in a bid to ease tensions with antigovernment protesters.

“We need to reorganise a cabinet that must be able to listen,” Paz told reporters.

Since taking office in November, Paz and his government have faced backlash to economic restructuring measures, including controversial cuts to fuel subsidies. The country is in one of its worst economic crises in decades.

Protesters have taken to the streets to express frustration with Paz’s free-market reforms. His inauguration ushered in a period of right-wing leadership after nearly two decades of governance by the Movement for Socialism (MAS).

Thousands of farmers, labourers, miners and teachers have denounced Paz’s reforms. Riot police clashed with protesters again in the capital, La Paz, earlier this week.

While Paz acknowledged frustrations in his remarks on Wednesday, his government has depicted the protests as dangerous and anti-democratic.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Fernando Aramayo said earlier in the day that the mass protests and roadblocks were aimed at destabilising the country and “disrupting the democratic order”.

Former leftist President Evo Morales, who continues to exert influence over the country’s politics, has expressed support for the demonstrations.

The Paz government, meanwhile, has accused Morales of fomenting unrest. The former socialist president faces charges of statutory rape and has an arrest warrant out against him. His allies, however, say the charges are part of an effort to remove him from political life.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has expressed support for Paz, whose election is seen as part of a regional shift to the right.

“Let there be no mistake: the United States stands squarely in support of Bolivia’s legitimate constitutional government,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a social media post on Wednesday. “We will not allow criminals and drug traffickers to overthrow democratically elected leaders in our hemisphere.”

Paz also slammed Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who has frequently feuded with right-wing governments in the region, for recent comments describing the protests as a “popular insurrection”.

The Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on Wednesday that it would ask the Colombian ambassador to leave the country, citing interference in domestic political affairs.

“If they expel the ambassador simply for proposing dialogue and mediation, it means we’re sliding towards extremism that could lead to a very difficult situation for the Bolivian people,” Petro said in an interview with the local radio station Caracol.

A nationwide transport strike in Kenya over surging fuel prices, blamed on the United States-Israeli war on Iran, has been suspended for a week after four people were killed in mass protests against the increases.

Kenya, one of many African countries heavily reliant on fuel imports from the Gulf, has raised petrol prices by 20 percent and diesel by almost 40 percent since Iran in effect blocked traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key chokepoint that normally handles about a fifth of the world’s oil.

The strike was launched on Monday by transport operators, particularly the “matatu” bus operators who provide most of Kenya’s public transport, in response to the latest sharp fuel price hike.

“The strike that is going on is suspended for a period of one week to provide an avenue for consultations and negotiations between the government and stakeholders,” interior minister Kipchumba Murkomen told reporters on Tuesday.

Albert Karakacha, the president of Matatu Owners Association, confirmed the suspension.

Authorities said four people were killed and more than 30 were injured nationwide on Monday. Police said on Tuesday that more than 700 people had been arrested in connection with the protests over fuel price increases.

Rights groups condemned the use of lethal force by security forces, with Amnesty International calling for “maximum restraint”.

The unrest also disrupted Kenya’s main trade corridor, with local media reporting that truck drivers had refused to move cargo amid fears their vehicles could be attacked and set alight by demonstrators.

The national energy regulator said last week the government had spent $38.5m to cushion consumers from rising diesel and kerosene costs.

In a further emergency measure, Kenyan authorities last month temporarily suspended fuel quality standards in a bid to maintain supplies amid growing shortages.

Despite being one of East Africa’s most dynamic economies, Kenya still has deep structural inequalities: about a third of its roughly 50 million people live in poverty and unemployment remains high.

Workers represented by a local union say ICE presence would create a climate of fear during the FIFA World Cup 2026.

Workers at the SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles have decided to go on strike if federal immigration enforcement agents are deployed at the venue when it hosts FIFA World Cup matches in June and July.

The UNITE HERE Local 11 – a labour union representing some 2,000 hospitality employees – on Monday demanded federal guarantees that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would not be used during the matches scheduled at the stadium.

The venue, which will be known as the Los Angeles Stadium during the tournament, will host eight World Cup games, including the opening fixture for the United States on June 12.

Workers at the world’s most expensive sports arena say the ICE presence would create a climate of fear for themselves and for fans.

“ICE should have no role in these games,” said Isaac Martinez, a stadium cook, at a protest outside the venue.

“We do not want to live in fear coming to work, or fear being detained going home.”

“If we do not reach an agreement, my colleagues and I are ready to strike,” Martinez added, speaking on behalf of a workforce composed largely of food and beverage concession staff.

ICE has led the charge in President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Human rights groups have condemned the agency for its conduct during raids in several US cities, including Los Angeles last year.

In early 2026, ICE agents fatally shot two American protesters in Minneapolis.

Workers on Monday also raised alarms over FIFA’s accreditation process, which requires employees to submit personal data before the tournament, which runs from June 11 to July 19 across the US, Canada and Mexico.

“We ask FIFA not to share our information with ICE agencies, foreign countries, or intelligence services,” worker Yolanda Fierro said.

Protesters carrying plastic balls and signs reading “Kick ICE Out of the World Cup” drew support from Tom Steyer, a Democratic candidate in California’s gubernatorial race.

ICE’s mandate is border control, the financier-turned-politician said.

“Can anyone explain what that has to do with the World Cup? Nothing,” Steyer said.

“How is it possible that this is the agency that is going to be here when we know in fact they’re an absolute threat, a lawless threat, to workers in California?”

Police fired tear gas at protesters in La Paz as miners and unions marched on the presidential palace, demanding that President Rodrigo Paz step down over a worsening fuel shortage and economic crisis.

Spain, Netherlands, Ireland, Iceland and Slovenia all withdrew in protest against Israel’s participation in the midst of its war on Gaza.

As the Eurovision Song Contest took to the stage for the Saturday night final in Vienna, thousands protested outside against Israel’s inclusion, and five countries boycotted the event over the genocidal war on Gaza.

Protesters marched through the Austrian capital to highlight what critics described as a double standard. The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) organisers refused to exclude Israel, despite banning Russia following its invasion of Ukraine four years ago.

Eurovision, which attracted 166 million viewers last year, is seeing the largest boycott in its 70-year history.

Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Iceland and Slovenia all withdrew because of Israel’s inclusion, with some of their national broadcasters refusing to air the show.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, who has emerged as one of Israel’s strongest critics in Europe, said on Friday that the decision puts Spain on “the right side of history”.

Last month, more than 1,000 artists called on fans to boycott Eurovision in an open letter against Israel’s participation. Among the artists were outspoken critics of Israel, Macklemore and Paloma Faith. Macklemore has released songs protesting against Israel’s war in Gaza.

Double standards

On Monday, Amnesty International Secretary-General Agnes Callamard denounced the EBU for allowing Israel to participate.

“The failure of the European Broadcasting Union to suspend Israel from Eurovision, as it did with Russia, is an act of cowardice and an illustration of blatant double standards when it comes to Israel,” she said.

Reporting from Vienna, Al Jazeera’s Charlie Angela said 2,000 demonstrators gathered in the city earlier on Saturday to protest against Israel’s participation.

Angela reported that protesters accused the competition of normalising Israel’s actions in Gaza, adding that Eurovision was “bending over backwards” to justify including Israel while excluding Russia.

Russia has faced a widespread cultural boycott following the Ukraine invasion. It is banned from international football tournaments, and FIFA and UEFA have excluded Russian domestic teams from all competitions, including the Champions League.

The winner of Eurovision will be selected by both a professional jury and TV viewers voting for their favourite act.

Austria won the competition last year, with Israel second.

The Israeli government was later accused of unfairly influencing voting. New rules have since been introduced.

Hundreds of Tunisians have marched through the capital to denounce a worsening economic crisis and what they say is a widening crackdown on dissent. President Kais Saied is accused of undermining the country’s hard-won post-2011 revolution system.

Video shows German police violently hitting and pepper-spraying protesters as thousands gathered in Berlin to mark the 78th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba.

Military and law enforcement clashed with demonstrators outside La Paz, Bolivia, in an attempt to clear roadways that had been blocked as part of nationwide antigovernment protests.

As many as 3,500 soldiers and police were deployed as part of the operation that began in the early hours of Saturday. Around 57 people were arrested, according to the citizens’ rights ombudsman’s office.

Miners, schoolteachers, Indigenous groups and unions have helped to organise the protests, which aimed to convey outrage against the government of centre-right President Rodrigo Paz.

Bolivia is in the grips of an historic economic crisis, considered the worst the country has seen in decades.

The government’s foreign currency reserves have cratered, as exports from Bolivia have slowed down.

Key among those was natural gas. Vast reserves of the fuel were discovered in the late 20th century, and for nearly three decades, those natural gas deposits powered Bolivia’s economy, transforming the South American country into a major energy exporter.

But in 2022, the dynamic switched, amid mismanagement and dwindling supplies. Since then, Bolivia has had to import fuel from abroad, exacerbating its economic crisis.

Currently, many parts of the country have experienced long lines for fuel and shortages of basic supplies like food.

Paz, who was elected in October, had campaigned on alleviating the economic stress. But since taking office, he has spurred outrage by ending a two-decade-old fuel subsidy and pushing to privatise state-owned companies.

Earlier this month, the protests forced the repeal of a land reform measure, Law 1720, that critics claimed could be used to dispossess small, rural landowners, in favour of bigger holdings.

The Bolivian government has estimated that 22 roadblocks have been erected across the country in recent weeks.

Some of the protesters have demanded Paz’s resignation: His election in October marked the end of nearly two decades of rule by the Movement for Socialism (MAS).

But Paz’s office has blamed the demonstrations for cutting off key supplies to cities like La Paz, which holds the seat of government.

Food prices have increased since the blockades began, and the government claims three people have died after being unable to reach hospitals.

According to presidential spokesperson Jose Luis Galvez, Saturday’s crackdown on the protesters was designed to create a “humanitarian corridor” to ensure the free flow of supplies to hospitals in La Paz.

Earlier this week, Paz also thanked his Argentinian counterpart, Javier Milei, for delivering humanitarian assistance to Bolivia.

“This gesture of solidarity not only strengthens the historic bonds of brotherhood between our nations, but also represents vital relief for our communities in times of great need,” Paz wrote on social media on Friday.

Milei responded by denouncing the protesters as anti-democratic.

“Argentina stands with the Bolivian people and supports their democratically elected authorities against those who seek to destabilise the country and obstruct the path toward freedom and progress,” the Argentinian president said.

Military police in Bolivia arrested demonstrators, and used tear gas to try and disrupt road blockades after 11 days of protests. Rallies over fuel shortages, due to the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, blocked roads, even after a deal was signed on Friday between protesters and the government.