Reform

July 31 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s acting prosecutor general submitted his resignation Friday after the National Assembly passed legislation eliminating prosecutors’ authority to conduct supplementary investigations.

Koo Ja-hyun said he felt responsible for the overhaul of the country’s criminal justice system and had submitted his resignation.

“The revision to the Criminal Procedure Act, centered on abolishing prosecutors’ supplementary investigative authority, passed the National Assembly today,” Koo said at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in southern Seoul.

“I also feel a strong sense of responsibility that the law was revised while concerns raised by legal experts, other professionals and the public remain unresolved,” he said.

The National Assembly passed the bill Friday under the leadership of the governing Democratic Party.

The legislation bars prosecutors from conducting additional investigative work after receiving cases from police. Prosecutors will instead be required to ask police to perform supplementary investigations.

The Democratic Party says the change completes the separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers and prevents prosecutors from exercising excessive authority.

Opposition lawmakers, prosecutors and some legal experts have warned that the system could delay cases and weaken protection for crime victims.

Koo warns of investigative gaps

Koo said prosecutors needed to reflect deeply on their failure to earn public trust.

He said, however, that institutional reform should not undermine the prosecution’s responsibility to uncover the truth and protect victims and other people involved in criminal cases.

“Even when institutional reform is carried out for those reasons, the essential purpose of the prosecution system – discovering the substantive truth and protecting victims and other parties – must not be damaged,” Koo said.

Koo said he had repeatedly considered how the system could be changed while protecting citizens’ rights and safeguarding society from crime.

He said prosecutors had warned lawmakers that the revision could force them to make indictment decisions based only on written investigative records.

Under that structure, prosecutors could have difficulty independently checking disputed facts, identifying gaps in police investigations or responding directly to victims’ concerns, he said.

Koo also warned that repeatedly returning cases to police could create a more costly and inefficient process.

“Those concerns were not accepted and the amendment passed without change,” he said. “It is difficult to conceal my disappointment and sense of helplessness.”

Koo urged the government to conduct another review of possible gaps in the system after the legislation is formally transferred from the National Assembly.

“I sincerely hope our criminal justice system will develop in a direction that ensures every citizen is protected fairly under the law,” he said.

Prosecution faces another leadership vacancy

South Korea’s prosecution service has already been operating without a formally appointed prosecutor general.

Koo has led the organization in an acting capacity while serving as deputy prosecutor general.

His departure would leave the service under what South Korean media described as an “acting acting chief.”

If Koo’s resignation is accepted, Park Kyu-hyung, head of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s planning and coordination department, is expected to assume the duties of acting prosecutor general.

The leadership vacancy comes as the government prepares to replace the existing prosecution service with a new Public Prosecution Office and establish a separate Serious Crimes Investigation Agency.

The Public Prosecution Office will focus on indictments and courtroom prosecutions, while the new investigative agency will handle major crimes previously investigated directly by prosecutors.

The two agencies are scheduled to launch Oct. 2.

The transition will require the government to determine how pending cases, personnel, records and investigative responsibilities will be transferred.

— 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=20260731010011845

Reform UK say they are reporting Green Party leader Zack Polanski to the police after he shared a post to his Instagram which included a photo of a man wearing a top featuring the name “Nigel” alongside an image of a guillotine.

Polanski accepted a request to collaborate with another account and shared a series of pictures of a Green Party event on Sunday with his 713,000 followers.

One of the images showed a man wearing a T-shirt which said: “We’re only making plans for Nigel”.

A Green Party spokesperson said: “Once this image was brought to [Zack’s] attention he immediately unshared the post. He unequivocally does not support this type of dangerous message.”

The Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, criticised Polanski on X.

Sharing a screenshot of what Polanski had reposted, he said: “If I was to post anything as inciteful then I would expect to be arrested, and so should Polanski.”

It is understood Reform UK are reporting Polanski to the police. The party’s home affairs spokesperson, Zia Yusuf, said “this is incitement to murder”.

Andy Burnham has told the BBC “the NHS will collapse” if social care is not reformed but said he could not put a timeline on changes.

In his first major interview since becoming prime minister, Burnham said he would not want to leave office without bringing in “substantial change” to the social care system.

The prime minister also suggested making it harder to claim benefits, saying the country had to get serious about getting the welfare bill down.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has meanwhile written to the prime minister, saying he should rule out tax rises or increased borrowing to fund social care reform.

Burnham told the BBC that if the government did not reform social care, the NHS would “collapse under the weight of trying to care for people who’ve really not needed to end up in the NHS system”.

But pressed on whether he would create a new system before the next election, he said he “couldn’t put a timeline on it right here, right now”, though he would put “whatever political capital I have into fixing broken social care”.

Burnham first proposed a universal system of social care in England in 2009 when he was health secretary under Gordon Brown and pursued the idea of a compulsory levy to fund it.

That Labour government also floated the idea of allowing people to defer the payment until after they died, which led to the Tories branding it a “death tax”.

Burnham is due to make a speech on adult social care on Wednesday.

The BBC understands the PM will stop short of unveiling plans for a new system in this speech, instead announcing he is speeding up the Casey Commission, an independent review that has been considering possible solutions for social care.

Baroness Louise Casey is not expected to give her final recommendations until 2028, but Burnham wants to bring her schedule forward.

Adult social care provides state support to help people live more independently, including assistance at home.

Unlike the NHS, social care is not free at the point of use. In England and Northern Ireland, people with savings worth more than £23,250 are not entitled to help with care costs from their council.

In Wales and Scotland, different rules apply in terms of eligibility.

Sarah Woolnough, chief executive of healthcare think tank the King’s Fund, said the current “punitive system” meant that “quite a lot of people go without care that they need”, with one in seven paying in excess of £100,000 for social care.

While Burnham has not yet outlined any plans, Woolnough told the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that reforms could range from making social care free at the point of need to placing a cap on the amount people spend.

“The PM has for a long time mooted the idea of a social care system similar to NHS,” she said.

“It would be expensive but on the scale of what we spend on other public services – around £200bn on the NHS – we are talking for some of these options low billions per year.”

Adult social care has proved a complex issue to tackle for successive governments.

Two years ago Sir Keir Starmer was criticised when Labour scrapped plans for an £86,000 cap on the amount people in England would spend on social care in their lifetime.

Badenoch wrote in her letter to Burnham that “any solution to the issues around social care must also be fair to those who have made provisions and saved up over the course of their lives”.

Layla Moran, the Liberal Democrat MP who chairs the Health and Social Committee, told the Today programme: “We do need to discuss where the money is going to come from but also we need to all be putting our political capital into this.”

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said he was ready to do “whatever I can to find a real and lasting consensus on social care”.

“Family carers must be at the heart of any new system, everyone must get the care they need and no one should lose their home as a result,” he said.

Reform Treasury spokesman Robert Jenrick said social care needed fixing but warned the party would fight any proposal for a “universal death tax”.

He said: “It’s not fair to raid people’s life savings and drags hundreds of thousands more families into paying tax when their loved ones pass away.”

SANTIAGO, Chile, July 22 (UPI) — Chile’s Congress approved most of the economic and tax reforms promoted by President José Antonio Kast — one of the flagship initiatives of his government agenda.

The reforms include a gradual reduction in the corporate tax rate from to 23% from 27% to encourage investment and revive economic growth.

The Chamber of Deputies on Tuesday passed the National Reconstruction and Economic and Social Development bill, which also establishes tax incentives for the repatriation of capital, creates compensation mechanisms for companies when courts overturn projects that have already received Environmental Qualification Resolution approval and eliminates the tax on a first home for older adults.

Finance Minister Jorge Quiroz said the initiative seeks to “restore tax competitiveness” and provide greater certainty for investment.

“We have approved measures to restore certainty for investment in Chile, remove permitting barriers that have kept investment projects and economic activity stalled, and provide security for those who decide to invest,” he said.

The approval represents one of Kast’s main legislative victories since taking office in March, and allows him to advance one of the pillars of his economic agenda — reducing the tax burden to stimulate private investment and accelerate growth.

Jorge Berríos, academic director of the Graduate Diploma in Finance at the Faculty of Economics and Business of the University of Chile, told UPI that the reform is intended to restore investor confidence and create conditions for the country to return to growth above 3%.

“A reduction of several percentage points in the corporate tax rate has positive effects on companies and the economy, although those results are generally seen over the long term,” he said.

Berrios said some effects could be felt sooner in the labor market because of the subsidies included in the initiative, as well as through an improved perception of Chile among domestic and foreign investors.

“The Chilean market is returning to a structure similar to that of the 1990s, with market-oriented reforms that allowed the country to achieve strong growth and stand out in Latin America,” he said.

Berríos said the Chilean economy experienced several years of uncertainty marked by increased regulation and higher taxes — factors that he believes damaged the country’s standing among investors.

The Confederation of Production and Commerce, the country’s leading business organization, welcomed approval of the bill. Its president, Susana Jiménez, said the initiative represents “an important step toward restoring the economy’s dynamism and returning to growth.”

The only provision still awaiting approval is the compensation mechanism for municipalities, which will lose part of the revenue generated by the tax on residential properties.

BUENOS AIRES, July 21 (UPI) — President Javier Milei’s government is backing a bill that would eliminate most of Argentina’s restrictions that have limited foreign ownership of rural land since 2011 in an effort to attract investment and strengthen legal certainty.

The plan also has reignited debate over sovereignty and control of a resource considered strategic.

The proposal is part of the Private Property Inviolability Act, and it would substantially amend the framework established a law enacted during the administration of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner that set limits on the amount of rural land that foreign individuals and companies could own.

Presidential spokesman Adrián Ravier said the initiative seeks to strengthen property rights protected under Argentina’s Constitution. Speaking at a news conference, he said the country had endured decades of legal uncertainty that discouraged investment and hindered opportunities for economic growth and job creation.

“What we are seeking is to remove the general restrictions on the acquisition of rural land by foreigners,” Ravier said.

He also argued that Argentina historically grew thanks to immigrants who invested and became landowners, and that maintaining broad restrictions on foreign investors no longer makes sense. He added that the bill instead strengthens oversight of foreign governments and their state-owned companies.

The initiative also removes one of the central principles of the current law, which states that purchasing rural land by foreigners does not constitute an investment because the land is a nonrenewable natural resource that belongs to the country.

Former Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries Minister Julián Domínguez, who promoted the law during Fernández de Kirchner’s administration, had rejected proposed reform.

He told UPI that when Congress approved the legislation, it established that “the acquisition of rural land shall not be considered an investment because it is a nonrenewable natural resource contributed by the recipient country.”

Domínguez contended the proposal contradicts the objective of protecting a strategic resource.

“It is paradoxical. The grandly titled ‘Private Property Inviolability Act’ ends up being, precisely, a violation of Argentines’ rights over their land,” he said.

The former minister also rejected the government’s argument that the current law discouraged foreign investment.

“Our producers are recognized around the world for their ability to adapt and innovate. So does the government believe a foreigner will do a better job than an Argentine producer? The debate is about something else,” he said.

The issue goes beyond economics. Domínguez said.

“In Congress, what is at stake is our identity as Argentines and our relationship with our territory. Every country is very careful about who can buy its land,” he said.

Attorney Enrique Viale, president of the Argentine Association of Environmental Lawyers, also criticized the bill, saying it should instead be called the “foreignization of land law.”

He told UPI that the proposal repeals the provisions that establish acreage limits, ownership caps and protected areas for foreign purchases of rural land.

“It repeals the provisions establishing acreage limits, ownership percentages and protected areas. It fully liberalizes land purchases, including in border areas and without ownership caps,” he said.

Viale said foreigners already own large portions of Argentine land, adding that without restrictions, the trend could accelerate.

He said reform would benefit large international investors who seek to develop artificial intelligence-related data centers, as well as foreign landowners who already hold extensive properties in Patagonia and Argentina’s Littoral region.

“I see no benefit in this bill. What it does is consolidate permanent control of land by foreign capital and increase the risk of losing sovereignty,” he said.

From the real estate sector, José Rozados, director of consultancy Reporte Inmobiliario, said easing restrictions could encourage large-scale investment.

“Anything that removes restrictions on the inflow of capital, especially for investments that require large amounts of money and long payback periods, is important,” he said.

Rozados said greater openness would facilitate productive projects that require large tracts of land and significant investment to develop economic activities.

“Whatever legislation is enacted regarding the permissibility and protection of those investments could allow foreign investors, or even local investors partnered with foreign capital, to be willing to invest in large areas of land,” he said.

The law, known as the National Protection Regime for the Ownership, Possession and Tenure of Rural Land, mandates that foreign individuals and companies may not own more than 15% of the country’s rural land — a limit that also applies within each province and municipality.

It also provides that citizens of the same nationality may not account for more than 30% of that quota, equivalent to 4.5% of the total rural land within a given territory.

The legislation also limits to 2,471 acres the amount of land that may be acquired by a single foreign owner in the country’s core agricultural zone, or its equivalent in other regions, and prohibits the sale of land located in border security zones or containing significant permanent bodies of water, such as rivers, lakes and glaciers.

The government’s bill amends several of those provisions to relax the current framework while maintaining restrictions on foreign governments and their state-owned companies.

The ruling coalition failed to secure enough support to move the initiative forward, and the bill will return to the Senate for debate in August.

Imagine if Sunday’s World Cup final were played under rules that blatantly favored one side over the other. Let’s say Argentina was spotted four goals against Spain.

Spain could, conceivably, overcome that 4-0 deficit. But it would be awfully hard and something of a miracle if the Spanish team prevailed.

Fans the world over would be rightly outraged. Why bother holding the tournament? What’s the point if one team is saddled with near-insurmountable odds?

Increasingly, that’s what elections for the House of Representatives look like.

As recently as the late 1990s, around 4 in 10 congressional districts were considered competitive, meaning Democratic and Republican candidates each had a plausible shot at winning. Today, per the nonpartisan handicappers at the Cook Political Report, only 18 of 435 House districts are considered toss-ups.

Another 20 districts are rated as either leaning Democratic or Republican, meaning candidates from one party or the other enjoy a noteworthy advantage, but aren’t necessarily a lock to win in November.

In sum, that means fewer than a tenth of all House seats are even somewhat competitive.

That’s hardly an accident, as lawmakers have increasingly manipulated the election process to suit themselves, rejiggering congressional districts to sideline voters and boost their political parties.

It’s undemocratic, and it stinks.

Stifling competition, rewarding extremes

“Every voter has a stake in making sure that these elections are fair and that the process is transparent,” said Rep. Jeff Hurd, a Republican who represents a large, mostly rural swath of western and southern Colorado. “Gerrymandering undermines representative democracy … by preventing voters and communities from having cohesive representation.

“It unfortunately rewards political extremes,” he went on. “It reduces competition and contributes to the polarization and dysfunction that prevents Congress from effectively addressing the issues that our constituents care about.”

Hurd is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, a bipartisan group of 44 House members dedicated to working through their ideological and political differences to — lordy! — try to get stuff done.

Recently, to mark Independence Day, the caucus announced a framework for legislation aimed at bringing competition back to many congressional races, in part by limiting the redrawing of political maps to once every 10 years, following the census. Among other reforms, the bipartisan group also called for establishing a uniform, national standard requiring that congressional districts be drawn “using clear, objective criteria while rejecting partisan advantage and incumbent protection as legitimate goals.”

The effort is, of course, too late for this election. The hope is Congress will enact the changes in time for the next scheduled round of redistricting, which is due to take place after the 2030 census. The rules would be in place starting in 2032.

The chances of passage are not strong. As Hurd noted: “Any reform that asks politicians to give up political leverage is going to be challenging.” But if ever there was a time for a badly needed systemic fix, it’s now.

A race to the bottom

Gerrymandering has been around for more than 200 years. The term derives from the efforts of Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry to skew state Senate races in the election of 1812. The portmanteau, which appeared in the Boston Gazette, described one politically engineered, misshapen district that resembled a salamander.

The practice reached new heights of creativity (or deviousness, depending on your perspective) in the modern age, when ever-more sophisticated computers allowed for ever-finer slicing and dicing of the electorate.

In 2019, the Supreme Court effectively greenlighted the practice in a 5-4 decision by the conservative majority, decreeing that partisan gerrymandering was beyond the purview of federal courts. In other words, have at it! And lawmakers did.

But this last year, in particular, has broken new, insidious ground.

Pressured by President Trump — who fears losing the GOP’s whisper-thin House majority — lawmakers in Texas tore up their political map mid-decade and redrew the state’s congressional districts in hopes of nabbing five additional seats this November. California responded in kind, with passage of Proposition 50, a measure that shelved the work of a nonpartisan redistricting commission in favor of a map aimed at handing Democrats five additional seats.

More than half a dozen other states — most of them Republican-run — have jumped into the fight, gerrymandering their congressional districts to gain a partisan edge. Lawmakers in several Democratic-run states are now looking at the prospect of retaliatory gerrymandering ahead of the 2028 election.

There’s not much upside to all this self-dealing — if, that is, you care about political competition and allowing the electorate a genuine say. But all that manipulation and maneuvering has, at least, made voters much more aware of the once-obscure practice of congressional line drawing. And that offers reformers a flicker of hope.

One ally, improbable though it may seem, is Paul Mitchell. He’s the Sacramento political guru who drew the gerrymandered map that California voters approved with passage of Proposition 50. (California, he said, was left no choice but to respond after Texas made its move.)

Mitchell said he has long favored a national redistricting standard that would apply to all 50 states and put the much-abused process on an even footing. “I really believe that redistricting should … serve the public, not serve the politicians,” Mitchell said.

Still looking on that bright side, he suggested perhaps the current redistricting war will prove so odious and have “done so much harm” that combatants will reach a point where they “put down [their] arms and embrace a kind of nonpartisan, non-politicized, public-oriented redistricting.”

It seems far-fetched. But miracles do happen.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Californians rallied to save the coast 50 years ago. Trump is spoiling the celebration
The deep dive: On birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court originalists split on history and Trump
The L.A. Times Special: Inside the states’ case to block the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger: ‘Each side is taking risks’

Until next time,
mzb
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Democrat Xavier Becerra holds a commanding lead in the California governor’s race in a new poll, which also shows broad voter support for a ballot proposition to reform the state’s landmark environmental law to speed up housing and infrastructure.

The survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, released Wednesday night, focused primarily on questions related to climate change and environmental policies.

The results show Californians have a strong distaste for building data centers for artificial intelligence technology, and largely favor the state’s efforts to protect the environment and cut emissions — with some exceptions.

The survey showed Becerra with a big lead over Republican Steve Hilton in the race to replace term-limited Gov. Gavin Newsom. Becerra, a longtime Democratic officeholder, received support from 61% of likely voters, compared with 36% for Hilton, a populist conservative who once advised a British prime minister.

Gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton speaks at the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials conference in L.A. on Wednesday.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

The results are not surprising in a state where Democratic voters significantly outnumber Republicans. The GOP has not won a statewide election since 2008.

Just 2% of likely voters said they were unsure which candidate to support in the November election. The poll results skewed heavily partisan, with more than 9 in 10 Democratic and Republican voters picking their party’s respective candidate. Most independent voters leaned toward Becerra, 60%, over Hilton, 34%.

The results are similar to data from a poll conducted just before the June 2 primary election that asked voters to pick between the two candidates. In that survey, 52% said they supported Becerra and 31% were for Hilton.

In a statement Wednesday, Hilton characterized the race as “wide open,” contending that Becerra’s support was weaker than the poll’s headline figures would indicate.

“Instead of a 36-year career politician, we need a positive, energetic problem-solver with business experience and plans to make our state ‘Califordable’ — that’s me,” Hilton said.

Becerra spokesman Jonathan Underland said in a statement that “Californians got to know Xavier Becerra during the primary, and they’re ready to make him their next governor. We’re keeping our eyes on the prize — hitting the trail every day ’til November to turn that support into votes.”

Support for CEQA reform

A ballot measure aimed at reforming the California Environmental Quality Act to speed up construction notched a strong showing in the poll.

Nearly three-quarters of likely voters, including majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents, said that they would vote for Proposition 45. The measure would shorten windows for environmental review, public comment and legal challenges for certain housing, transportation, water infrastructure and other projects.

“At this early stage in the campaign, California voters are feeling more aligned with Democratic candidates on the environment, and it shows in the polling,” said PPIC survey director Mark Baldassare. “But strong support for Proposition 45 reveals their desire to balance environmental priorities with housing and infrastructure needs.”

Strong data center opposition

The poll found large majorities of Californians do not want new data centers to support the AI boom built in their area; 44% of adults say they “strongly oppose” such projects, and 29% “somewhat oppose” them.

The majority opposition holds across political parties, geographic regions, gender, race and income. It’s especially pronounced in the Inland Empire, where plans for a 950,000-square-foot data center came to a halt after fierce resident pushback. Three-quarters of people surveyed in that region said they oppose building new data centers.

“Every day, we are hearing about how local communities across the nation are responding to plans for data centers,” Baldassare said. “Californians have weighed in and they share this growing concern.”

Support for environmental policies — except if they cost more

The poll also shows strong, if somewhat qualified, support for California’s efforts to reduce climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.

Three-quarters of adults said policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have been a good thing overall, and 65% said they support California leaders’ efforts to make their own environmental policies separate from the federal government.

While most respondents — 62% — said they favor a law requiring 100% of the state’s electricity to come from renewable energy sources within the next two decades, just 38% said they were willing to pay more for electricity sourced from renewables.

“With energy prices spiking and affordability a growing concern, Californians are just not willing to pay more for renewable energy,” Baldassare said. A near-unanimous majority, 96%, said the cost of energy — including gasoline, natural gas and electricity — is a problem.

Newsom’s move to ban the sale of new gas-powered vehicles in the state by 2035 also appears to have fallen out of favor. Two-thirds of Californians oppose the policy, a significant slip in approval from 2021, when a PPIC survey showed 49% supported the move.

Still, majorities of likely voters — 53% and 51%, respectively — said they approve of Newsom’s and the state Legislature’s handling of environmental issues.

At 28%, President Trump’s approval rating on the environment was much lower. In his second term, Trump has moved to slash environmental regulations, including easing pollution regulations on coal-fired power plants and pushing for oil drilling off California’s coast.

“Given this ratings gap, it’s not surprising that Californians want to see the state take the lead on climate change policy,” Baldassare said.

The survey polled 1,578 California adults, 1,003 of whom were likely voters, in English and Spanish from June 29 to July 6 and had a margin of error of 3.8 percentage points in either direction.

Mérida, July 14, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan National Assembly preliminarily approved two laws granting expanded benefits to landlords and the private real estate sector as part of authorities’ post-earthquake reconstruction plans.

The Tuesday session was held at Simón Bolívar Park in La Carlota, Caracas, after the legislative palace suffered damage from the June 24 double tremor.

The Venezuelan legislature voted in favor of a Law for the Special Regime of Housing Property Leasing and a partial reform of the Law Against Real Estate Fraud. Both projects will now be subject to consultations and revisions before being put to a second and final vote.

“Our main task with this reform is to stimulate the housing rental market,” National Assembly Vice President Pedro Infante stated. “We have to strengthen the legal certainty for property owners and also protect tenants. It’s a legal balance.”

Infante added that officials estimate that there are around 200,000 homes that could enter the rental market but that parliament has to “untie the knots that are holding this market back.”

The existing legislation governing housing rentals was enacted by former President Hugo Chávez in 2011 and it is highly protective of tenants. Grassroots movements participated directly in several housing laws.

In a recent press conference, National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez called the current law “regressive” and argued that parliament needed to make property owners feel “more secure in renting their properties.” Real estate chambers have long lobbied for reforms to housing laws.

The preliminarily approved bill expands conditions for landlords to evict their tenants, including two months of unpaid rent, deterioration of the property, or unauthorized subletting. It additionally establishes that disputes are to be resolved via mediation or municipal courts. Tenant movements have recently denounced a growing trend of landlords bringing “invasion” charges against tenants as a way to evict them, with the complicity of public prosecutors.

The partial reform of the law against real estate fraud, likewise approved during Tuesday’s session, loosens conditions for the sale of housing properties yet to be built or under construction while also reducing collateral requirements for developers.

“The reform seeks to guarantee better conditions, legal security, and financing capacity so that the private sector initiates an aggressive, accelerated process of housing construction,” Infante explained, adding that it “removes rigid price schemes,” allowing real estate developers to factor “variations in the costs of materials in supplies” into house prices.

Under the updated law, house sale and pre-sale contracts no longer need to be individually approved by government housing authorities. Instead, the governing body will publish a set of general rules. According to the reform text, banks that finance real estate projects will no longer be liable for their non-completion, with legislators arguing that the measure will boost credit options.

Deputy Alejandra Rodríguez, from opposition party Un Nuevo Tiempo, endorsed the preliminary housing reforms for seeking a “balance between the right to housing, the protection of private property, legal security, and the promotion of responsible investment.”

Venezuelan authorities have prioritized finding housing solutions with over 20,000 people forced into temporary shelters after losing their homes in the June 24 double earthquake, most of them in coastal La Guaira State. The latest official figures placed the death toll at 4,734, with nearly 17,000 injured.

Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has launched the “Venezuela Renace” program to conduct inspections and repair works in affected buildings, as well as revitalize the construction sector to generate new housing complexes in a short time frame. She likewise called on public and private banks to expand mortgage programs, vowing that the government would subsidize them up to 80 percent.

On Monday, Rodríguez met with representatives from business chambers, including construction and real estate, and reiterated calls for the private sector to participate in the post-earthquake reconstruction. 

“Every person who lost their home should have hope of being under a new roof in the short term,” she stated.

Rodríguez announced that the government is working on construction plans in La Guaira alongside the Venezuelan Construction Chamber and the Venezuelan Real Estate Chamber. Authorities are conducting soil studies and identifying potential land plots. She recalled that the export of construction materials is presently banned.

The acting president assured those present that Venezuela remains on a path of economic growth and that household consumption had risen by 33 percent in June.

Rodríguez reiterated calls for the removal of economic sanctions against the country and ongoing efforts to secure the release of frozen Venezuelan assets, including gold reserves held by the Bank of England.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

July 13 (Asia Today) — South Korean Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back is facing mounting pressure from an allegation that he deserted his military post four decades ago and growing opposition to his plan to consolidate the country’s three service academies.

The two controversies have converged, raising questions about whether the Lee Jae Myung administration can maintain momentum behind its broader military reform agenda.

Complaint filed over parliamentary testimony

Kim Young-soo, head of the Korea Institute for Military Rights and a former Navy major, filed a police complaint against Ahn on June 27. The complaint alleges Ahn violated a law governing testimony and evidence before the National Assembly.

At a news conference at the National Assembly on Monday, Kim claimed Ahn left his post without authorization for about seven months while serving as a supplementary-duty soldier with an Army unit in Gochang County in 1984.

Kim also alleged that military police arrested Ahn and detained him for 30 days.

The complaint argues that Ahn gave false testimony during his confirmation hearing in July 2025 when he denied that such incidents had occurred.

The case is being investigated by Yongsan Police Station in Seoul. Police are scheduled to question Kim as the complainant Thursday.

The allegations have not been substantiated and remain under investigation.

Ministry calls allegation “clearly false”

The Defense Ministry rejected the desertion allegation Friday, calling it “clearly false.”

According to Ahn and the ministry, he completed his required service and was discharged from supplementary duty in January 1985. He returned to Sungkyunkwan University in March but was told in June that he was required to perform additional service.

The ministry said the issue arose after Ahn’s mother served lunch to active-duty soldiers at the request of his company commander. The period during which the incident was internally reviewed was mistakenly omitted from the administrative process when Ahn was initially released from duty, leading to his recall in August.

The ministry said Ahn was never detained or subjected to disciplinary action.

It has declined to publicly release his military service record, however, arguing that disclosing an incorrect 40-year-old document could create further misunderstanding regardless of the underlying facts.

Ahn has said he will seek to have the record corrected after leaving office.

SBS reported Sunday that a small number of ruling-party officials had examined the military records and said they contained no entries related to desertion or detention.

Military academy announcement abruptly postponed

Amid the dispute, the ministry abruptly postponed the scheduled release of its basic plan for establishing a unified armed forces academy. The announcement was canceled about 100 minutes before a briefing Monday.

The proposal calls for jointly selecting cadets for the Army, Navy and Air Force academies. Cadets would receive common instruction during their first two years and service-specific education during their third and fourth years.

The government has also reportedly considered relocating the Korea Military Academy from its current campus in northeastern Seoul to South Jeolla Province.

The ministry attributed the postponement to Ahn’s attendance at a presidential meeting and his schedule accompanying President Lee to a NATO summit.

The decision was widely interpreted, however, as a response to strong opposition from retired military organizations and alumni associations.

Academy alumni stage first joint protest

The alumni associations of the Army, Navy and Air Force academies held a rally outside the National Assembly on Wednesday opposing the consolidation plan and the proposed relocation of the Army academy.

It was the first time the three associations had jointly mobilized over the issue.

People Power Party Reps. Han Ki-ho and Lim Jong-deuk, both graduates of the Korea Military Academy, attended the demonstration. They described the proposal as a deterioration of national defense rather than genuine reform and called for it to be reconsidered from the beginning.

Twelve former commanders of the Army Training and Doctrine Command also issued a statement calling for a review of the plan.

The opposition People Power Party has linked the military service allegation with the academy consolidation proposal and called for Ahn’s resignation.

Independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon has also demanded that Ahn release his military service record.

A public petition seeking Ahn’s impeachment had received more than 310,000 signatures as of Sunday.

Thursday’s police questioning of the complainant is expected to become the first major turning point in the dispute over Ahn’s service history.

The policy battle, however, is unlikely to disappear regardless of the investigation’s outcome.

Opposition to consolidating the academies and dismantling the Defense Counterintelligence Command has already developed independently of the allegation against Ahn. The unprecedented joint protest by the three academy alumni associations demonstrates the extent of that resistance.

The ministry’s continued refusal to release Ahn’s service record is also prolonging the controversy. Its decision to postpone correction procedures until after Ahn leaves office risks allowing the dispute to remain a source of political conflict.

At the same time, treating the military service allegation and the academy reform proposal as a single political issue could undermine a substantive national security debate.

Defense experts familiar with the controversy say the allegation should be investigated according to the law, while the merits of military reform should be debated separately according to the national interest.

— 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=20260713010004389

Farage served as Reform’s honorary president between March 2021 and June 2024. On 3 June 2024, he confirmed he was returning as party leader and standing in the general election. He became Clacton MP in July 2024.

Under parliamentary rules, new MPs must declare financial interests and “registrable benefits” received in the 12 months before their election.

The guidelines say purely personal gifts or benefits do not need to be registered.

When he became an MP, Farage registered a £9,253 trip to Belgium in April 2024 donated by Cottrell, and later added a £15,276 donation from Cottrell for a US domestic flight he provided in December 2024.

No other support from Cottrell is listed in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests., external

A spokesman for Farage said: “It comes as no surprise that the Sunday Times has chosen to publish this baseless and contrived story, covering a period of time when Nigel Farage was not even an active politician let alone an elected one, given that the newspaper backed the Labour Party at the last general election.

“Contrary to the story’s tone, no parliamentary rules have been broken.”

A source said Reform paid for Farage’s security and staff after his return to politics.

The source also denied Farage received accommodation from Cottrell – saying the MP did not stay at the London property.

The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, is currently investigating whether Farage broke the rules over the £5m gift from British cryptocurrency investor Christopher Harborne in early 2024.

Farage has said Harborne gave him the money to pay for his personal security, adding the gift was “purely private” and “wasn’t political in any sense at all”.

Lib Dem MP Josh Babarinde has asked Greenberg to “get to the bottom” of the latest allegations linked to Farage’s support from Cottrell.

Babarinde has also asked Greenberg to confirm whether he will investigate the claims as part of the existing inquiry or as a separate matter.

A Labour Party spokesperson said: “Nigel Farage and Reform are engulfed in a huge and growing scandal.

“These new allegations of secret payments from a wealthy convicted criminal are on top of the ongoing scandal of his secret £5m gift from a crypto billionaire.

“How much money has he been given, what did his donors get in return, and why has he tried to cover them up and avoid legitimate questions?”

Responding to Jenrick’s interview, Labour said Reform “can’t shrug this scandal off and hope it goes away”.

June 11 (Asia Today) — South Korea needs to reform its electricity market to respond to surging power demand from artificial intelligence and the expansion of renewable energy, the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry said Wednesday.

The chamber said the current power market structure is not enough to support private investment or the growth of new energy businesses, including energy storage systems and virtual power plants.

The business group raised the issue during a seminar in Seoul co-hosted with the Korean Resource Economics Association. Participants discussed ways to reform the electricity market and promote new energy businesses as AI adoption and renewable power generation expand.

“As the power industry shifts from a centralized structure to a distributed and digital-based system, various new businesses are emerging,” said Cho Hong-jong, president of the Korean Resource Economics Association and a professor at Dankook University. “To make the energy transition a reality, it is necessary to build a competitive system based on market principles.”

Joo Sung-kwan, a professor at Korea University, said South Korea’s current electricity market has structural limits because wholesale prices are set a day before electricity is supplied, based mainly on fuel costs.

“This creates significant rigidity because real-time supply and demand conditions cannot be flexibly reflected in prices,” Joo said.

Joo said the market needs pricing signals that respond to supply and demand. Prices should rise when electricity supply is tight to encourage lower consumption and fall when supply is sufficient to promote use, he said.

For new energy businesses to secure profitability and increase investment, Joo said South Korea should move from the current day-ahead market to a real-time market. He also called for a price-bidding system in which power generators and electricity retailers submit bid prices.

Panelists also said South Korea needs a market environment and regulatory system that can attract private investment.

Lee Seo-jin, a professor at Hongik University, said tailored compensation systems for new energy businesses and a predictable policy environment are more important than simple market opening.

Huh Yoon-ji, a professor at Dankook University, said wholesale price normalization and retail electricity rate reform must proceed together to secure economic viability. She also called for independent governance to supervise the electricity market.

Industry officials said the pace of reform should accelerate.

Lee Hyo-seop, vice president of Encored, said his company is preparing a virtual power plant business using AI-based forecasting technology, but uncertainty over the schedule for electricity market reform is making business development difficult.

Yeom Sung-oh, Seoul representative of Gurin Energy, said power supply flexibility and sustainability will be crucial in the AI era. He called for preemptive institutional support covering power grids, energy storage systems and data centers.

The Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry said private-sector energy businesses are essential to address rising electricity demand from AI and the growing variability of renewable energy.

“Companies need a more predictable electricity market so they can invest in high-cost new technologies,” said Kim Min-seok, head of the chamber’s Green Energy Center. “Institutional foundations, including regulatory innovation and a supportive market environment, must be established.”

“To secure competitiveness in power infrastructure in the AI era, discussion on electricity market reform can no longer be delayed,” Kim 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=20260611010003798

Caracas, June 4, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan National Assembly preliminarily approved on Tuesday a reform to the country’s Organic Law of the National Electricity System and Service, proposing a structural overhaul of the National Electricity System (SEN).

One of the most significant changes is the incorporation of the private sector in electricity generation, transmission, distribution, and commercialization activities, breaking with two decades of state monopoly through the National Electric Corporation (Corpoelec).

According to the draft text seen by Venezuelanalysis, private corporations and joint ventures will be able to operate in the electric grid in what is termed a “diversification of actors in the service chain.” The mixed ventures, where the state can hold majority or minority stakes, will be approved directly by the government and not by the National Assembly.

“In recent decades, the electric system has showcased structural and financial limitations […] as a result of the productive reality and the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures,” the proposed law reads. “Faced with this reality, the Venezuelan state must assume an institutional and judicial reengineering.”

The bill establishes concessions with a maximum duration of 25 years, renewable for a further 15 years under specific conditions. Once a concession expires, all infrastructure, assets, substations, and data will automatically revert to the state in good condition and without compensation.

The proposed legislation announces the creation of a new tariff scheme “based on real costs and a reasonable return for investors.” Electricity, like most public services, has been heavily subsidized in recent decades in the Caribbean nation. The bill additionally introduces obligations for electricity distributors to compensate users for damages caused by blackouts or other failures.

The reform likewise establishes the possibility for the executive branch to grant tax exemptions to projects linked to renewable energy, rural electrification, or strategic investments in the electricity sector.

The 42-article legislation will now be subject to discussions and amendments before a second and decisive vote. 

If approved, it would repeal the Organic Law for the Reorganization of the Electricity Sector, enacted by former President Hugo Chávez on July 31, 2007, which merged the country’s seven existing electricity companies through the creation of the National Electric Corporation. The legislation also defined all stages of electricity generation and distribution as “strategic for the nation.”

During Tuesday’s parliamentary session, United Socialist Party (PSUV) lawmaker Orlando Miranda argued that the electricity reform represented a “mixed and private capital strategy under a rigorous regime of concessions and public supervision.” 

He noted that government plans to reinforce the grid with thermoelectric plants in the past 15 years were hampered by US economic sanctions. Miranda went on to add that increased tariffs are being studied to reflect the “real costs” of the system.

For his part, opposition legislator Ezio Angelini (Un Nuevo Tiempo) demanded that the reform address corruption, which he identified as a key factor behind Venezuela’s recurring power outages.

Angelini stated that in 2019 Venezuela generated around 20,000 megawatts (MW) while consuming approximately 12,000. Today, he claimed, the country produces close to 12,000 MW, roughly 40 percent of installed capacity, while demand has risen to 14,000. On May 11, Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello stated that electricity demand had surpassed 15,500 MW due to increased oil production.

Zulia state, considered the cradle of Venezuela’s oil industry, and other western regions have experienced daily blackouts lasting between eight and twelve hours in recent weeks. Supply instability also affects other services such as water pumping and cooking gas distribution.

Frequent power outages have also gripped oil fields in the Orinoco Belt, as crude extraction relies on electric motors that are vulnerable to tension fluctuations. According to Bloomberg, the Venezuelan government is urging international energy companies to generate their own electricity for oil and natural gas projects in an effort to shield the grid from the additional load.

Delegations from Siemens and General Electric visited the country in April and held talks with the Venezuelan government headed by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez. However, the two corporate giants are reportedly “hesitant” to take part in major projects due to doubts over Caracas’ financial capabilities.

Additionally, in mid-May, US Chargé d’Affaires in Venezuela John Barrett held a meeting with Electricity Minister Rolando Alcalá to discuss plans to “restore a reliable energy supply through US investment and collaboration.”

Electricity generation in Venezuela depends heavily on the 10 MW-capacity Guri hydroelectric complex in Bolívar state, making the system particularly vulnerable to climatic factors such as the high temperatures affecting the country. Venezuela suffered nationwide blackouts in 2019, with authorities blaming US-led cyberattacks.

The electricity reform follows legislative overhauls to the hydrocarbon and mining sectors that likewise curtailed the state’s role and responsibilities while granting private corporations expanded control over operations and sales, slashed royalties and taxes, and the ability to bring disputes to international arbitration bodies.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

May 29 (UPI) — Mexico’s Congress approved a constitutional reform that adds foreign intervention or interference in electoral processes as a new ground for annulling elections.

The measure, promoted by the ruling party, the National Regeneration Movement, or Morena, has sparked debate over national sovereignty, electoral security and the limits of legal interpretation in future elections.

The reform amends Article 41 of the Constitution to establish that an election may be annulled when acts of foreign intervention or interference that influence electoral results are proven.

The initiative was initially approved by the Chamber of Deputies and later received Senate approval. It must now be ratified by at least 17 state legislatures before it can take effect.

The proposal was introduced by Ricardo Monreal, Morena’s coordinator in the Chamber of Deputies, who argued that Mexican law had until now lacked a specific sanction for cases of foreign interference in elections.

“Currently there is no sanction for anyone who seeks to invade our country or interfere in electoral processes,” Monreal said during the legislative debate, according to El Universal.

The lawmaker said the annulment could only be applied when there is “full and conclusive evidence” that foreign governments or external agents intervened in an election.

The Chamber of Deputies approved the reform with 307 votes in favor, 128 against and one abstention.

The ruling coalition argues that the measure seeks to strengthen national sovereignty against possible attempts at external influence, including irregular financing, disinformation campaigns, digital operations or political pressure originating abroad.

President Claudia Sheinbaum publicly backed the initiative and said there is a “real risk” of foreign intervention in future Mexican electoral processes.

Several local media outlets reported that the government has linked the reform to an international environment marked by growing geopolitical disputes, digital influence campaigns and external pressure on Latin American governments.

However, opposition parties questioned both the substance of the reform and the speed with which it advanced through Congress.

Rubén Moreira, parliamentary leader of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, warned that the initiative was introduced only days before it was debated and argued that there was not enough time to thoroughly analyze the legal implications of concepts such as “interference” or “foreign intervention,” according to reports by El País.

Lawmakers from the National Action Party and the Citizens’ Movement party also warned of the risk that the new provision could be used discretionarily to challenge election results under broad interpretations of what constitutes foreign influence.

During the legislative debate, Morena rejected those accusations and said the reform is not intended to censor news media, social media platforms or individual expressions.

Monreal said that a news article, an interview or a social media post would not, by themselves, be sufficient grounds to justify the annulment of an election.

He also said secondary legislation will be needed to precisely define the legal circumstances under which foreign intervention occurred and which authorities will be empowered to determine it.

The debate comes amid growing political tensions between Mexico and United States over issues related to drug trafficking, border security and regional cooperation.

It also coincides with a broader debate across Latin America over the influence of foreign governments, transnational digital campaigns and mechanisms to protect electoral sovereignty.

In a few days, Los Angeles voters will be casting ballots for city attorney — and in a few months, they could be voting to sharply diminish the city attorney’s authority.

The city’s Charter Reform Commission has proposed splitting the city attorney’s office into two parts — an elected city prosecutor, charged with handling criminal misdemeanors, and a mayor-appointed and City Council-confirmed city attorney who would represent the city in civil cases and advise the mayor, city council and city departments.

The City Council is reviewing the recommendation as part of sweeping changes to city government, including expanding the council from 15 to 25 seats, which could go before voters in the Nov. 3 general election.

The proposed changes to the city attorney’ office, however, come in the midst of a heated primary campaign, where incumbent Hydee Feldstein Soto is up against three challengers, including a state deputy attorney general and a deputy district attorney.

Both of those challengers say plans to bifurcate the city attorney’s office are rooted in longstanding conflicts between Feldstein Soto and the City Council.

Council members have expressed frustration over her handling of rising costs from an outside law firm, where the payout amount has grown to nearly $7.5 million — with some attorneys billing the city roughly $1,300 an hour.

And last year, City Council took a 12-0 vote to direct Feldstein Soto to withdraw an effort to halt a federal judge’s order prohibiting LAPD officers from targeting journalists with crowd control weapons.

“When I first heard about this idea, I thought it was probably the greatest indictment of the current city attorney that I’ve heard yet,” said John McKinney, a Los Angeles County deputy district attorney who is running for city attorney in Tuesday’s primary.

McKinney opposes the bifurcation, saying it will cause overlap and confusion. “If she was doing a good job … we wouldn’t even be having this discussion,” he said.

Marissa Roy, another candidate in the race, hasn’t taken a position on bifurcation but said Feldstein Soto’s actions triggered the proposed change.

“The only reason that bifurcation, or splitting the city attorney’s office, is even going to be going before voters is because we’ve had an incumbent city attorney who has gone so rogue to politicize the role,” said Roy, a deputy state attorney general.

Roy said accused Feldstein Soto of inappropriately blocking an affordable housing project in Venice. And in her office’s role of drafting ordinance language, Roy said, Feldstein Soto has returned to city council ordinance language that isn’t “faithful to the intent of the drafter.”

Feldstein Soto said the proposal to bifurcate the office has nothing to do with her performance.

“This issue comes up every single time charter reform comes up,” Feldstein Soto said. “To me this is all political opportunism.”

Feldstein Soto has opposed the split, and former city attorneys have also come out against it, saying an appointed position threatens the independence of the city attorney’s office, takes away from voters the right to elect a city attorney and could cost taxpayers money in order to split the office.

In a March letter to the Charter Reform Commission, Feldstein Soto said an attorney “serving at the pleasure” of the mayor and city council would face an “innate, human pressure to harmonize legal advice with the political goals of the appointing officials.”

“I have been able to provide honest, accurate legal advice to the Mayor, City Council, Controller and departments — even when that advice is unwelcome — precisely because I am an independently elected officeholder with an ultimate duty to the public,” she wrote. “An appointed City Attorney, serving at the pleasure of the Mayor and City Council, faces enormous political pressure on all of these issues, behind closed doors, cloaked in privilege without an independent voice.”

Burt Pines, a former city attorney who served from 1973 to 1981, deeply opposes the bifurcation proposal, citing the threat to independence as the largest issue at stake. As city attorney, he said, he was empowered to tell city officials when a proposed action was unlawful and refuse to support it.

“You want to be able to call the shots as you see them, true to the law,” Pines said in an interview.

Advocates say other cities have bifurcated offices, and splitting it could reduce conflict and provide a clear delineation of roles.

After consulting with experts and good governance groups, the commission agreed the benefits of bifurcation outweighed the negatives, and it passed unanimously by the commission.

“It was easy to get consensus on this,” said Raymond Meza, chair of the commission. The commission’s proposal calls for the city attorney to be nominated by the mayor, and confirmed by the City Council.

In its report, the commission said that “the current structure creates conflicts when the same office advises the city and prosecutes cases. Separation provides clearer roles, reduces conflicts, and allows each function to be performed effectively.”

Other cities have different models for the city attorney’s office: Long Beach has a similar model with bifurcated duties, while New York City has legal representation split up several ways. The San Francisco City Attorney provides legal representation for the city and county of San Francisco, and the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office handles criminal cases in the city and county.

Mike Bonin, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute, said he has seen the question of splitting the office come up with at least three different city attorneys to varying degrees.

“Given that the city attorney is an elected position, there’s always going to be somebody who doesn’t like them,” Bonin, a former city council member, said. “You need to divorce the question from the occupant and focus on the role — the charter is not about a particular person, the charter is about the function of the office.”

Reform has stood by Robert Kenyon, a plumber and the candidate for the party in the upcoming Makerfield by-election, after comments he made about TV star Carol Vorderman resurfaced

Carol Vorderman has lashed out at a creepy sexual message by a Reform by-election candidate with a brutal three-word takedown.

Reform UK candidate Robert Kenyon, who is standing to be the next MP for Makerfield in the upcoming by-election, backed up a degrading comment about the TV star along with other comments directed at women. Hitting back, Carol branded Nigel Farage’s candidate a “disgusting online abuser”.

The campaign group HopeNotHate found Kenyon had two X accounts. One has been deleted and the other was suspended by X, HopeNotHate said.

Reform has stood by Kenyon, a plumber, and has said his lack of “polish” could make him an effective MP.

“Fundamentally, Rob Kenyon is a misogynist,” Carol told The Mirror. “I wouldn’t let him in my house if he was a local plumber in my area, not with what he’s been posting online. There is always a pattern.”

In 2021, an X user who wrote a degrading sexual message about Carol, which drew criticism from another person. To this, Kenyon responded by saying “he’s only saying what we’re all thinking”.

And another of the posts from the accounts referenced being blocked by the Sky Sports Rugby League account on X for comments about women’s rugby.

Carol added: “He’s been talking about how female rugby players ‘handle their knockers’, saying if it’s not ‘t**s, and a**e’, and he’d been blocked by the Sky Sports Rugby League Twitter page for his online behaviour.

“It’s a torrent of abusive and vile language. Nobody knows why his X account was suspended. X has a very low bar for suspension, and the public should know and Reform should tell us why his account was suspended. What were his actions for this to have happened?

“Last year the Victim’s Commissioner said ‘misogyny normalises violence against women and girls, normalises illegal harms such as harassment, abuse and stalking. And these harms manifest in both online and offline spaces’.”

Carol emphasised the comments are not just Kenyon “being a lad”, adding he is “being a disgusting online abuser who became a Reform councillor three weeks ago”.

In response to HopeNotHate’s investigation, a Reform UK spokesman said: “We fully back Cllr Kenyon. He is an excellent, local candidate who we are confident will be a superb MP for Makerfield.

“These comments were made before he was in politics. Rob isn’t a polished, professional politician and doesn’t speak like one. That’s precisely why he’ll be a straight-talking, effective voice for normal working people in Makerfield.”

After being read Reform’s response, Carol said: “So basically, it doesn’t matter how misogynistic or otherwise he has been as far as Reform are concerned. And they didn’t care that their MP James McMurdock had been put in jail for kicking his girlfriend outside a nightclub and that it hadn’t been declared. They simply don’t care at all.”

A Labour Party spokesman said: “Robert Kenyon’s comments online are disgusting and show that he’s not fit to represent Makerfield.

“From creepy remarks about women, to peddling baseless conspiracy theories, this is appalling stuff from a parliamentary candidate – on top of being Facebook friends with a fascist campaigner. Nigel Farage needs to explain why Reform UK selected him in the first place.”

The first weekend of campaigning in Makerfield, meanwhile, got underway.

Andy Burnham, who is viewed as a challenger to Sir Keir Starmer in a potential Labour leadership race, launched his by-election campaign on Friday and promised he was not offering “more of the same”.

Allies of Mr Burnham have suggested he may not launch a bid for the party leadership immediately if he is successful in his attempt to return to Parliament in the June 18 contest.

But Wes Streeting, who resigned from the Cabinet earlier this month, has openly talked about launching a campaign to oust Prime Minister Sir Keir.

The MP and former health secretary told reporters on Friday that he held off triggering a leadership race to give Mr Burnham time to tread a path back into the Commons.

In a pitch to voters, Greater Manchester Mayor Mr Burnham said: “I know my own party needs to change. We need to be better than we have been.

“A vote for me in this by-election is a vote to change Labour.”

Mr Burnham, who is also a former health secretary, later told reporters Labour has “space to be more radical” while honouring the party’s 2024 general election manifesto.

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto unveiled ambitious economic growth and fiscal deficit targets for 2027 while promising reforms aimed at restoring investor confidence and strengthening state institutions. The announcement comes after months of market concerns over government spending plans, policy uncertainty, and weakening confidence in Southeast Asia’s largest economy.

Government Sets Ambitious Economic Targets

Prabowo outlined a growth target of 5.8 percent to 6.5 percent for next year while aiming to lower the fiscal deficit to between 1.8 percent and 2.4 percent of gross domestic product. The government also expects inflation to remain under control and pledged to improve food security and attract greater investment.

Investor Confidence Faces Pressure

Indonesia has faced growing scrutiny from investors and rating agencies this year. Credit rating outlooks were downgraded due to concerns about policymaking credibility, fiscal discipline, and transparency. Market fears intensified after discussions around possible changes to the country’s long standing fiscal deficit ceiling and rising state spending commitments.

Commodity Control Plan Sparks Market Concerns

Prabowo confirmed plans to establish a new state agency to oversee exports of major commodities including coal, palm oil, and nickel. The government says the move is intended to reduce revenue losses and strengthen national control over natural resources, but investors worry it could disrupt pricing systems and reduce private sector profitability.

Private Sector Role Remains Important

Despite increasing state involvement in strategic sectors, Prabowo stressed that Indonesia still welcomes private companies and small businesses as partners in economic development. He called for cooperation between the government and the private sector to achieve long term prosperity.

Analysis

Indonesia’s latest economic strategy reflects a balancing act between ambitious state led development goals and the need to maintain investor confidence. While the government aims to accelerate growth and strengthen control over key resources, markets remain cautious about rising fiscal risks and unpredictable policy changes.

The proposed commodity export agency could significantly reshape Indonesia’s role in global resource markets because the country is one of the world’s largest exporters of coal and palm oil. However, stronger government intervention may create uncertainty for foreign investors and commodity traders.

At the same time, maintaining fiscal discipline will be critical as Prabowo moves forward with large welfare programmes and economic reforms. The success of his agenda will likely depend on whether the government can reassure markets while delivering growth, stability, and stronger institutional credibility.

With information from Reuters.

Amid an oil blockade against the island, the US blames Cuba’s communist leadership for ‘standing in the way’ of aid.

The United States has offered $100m in humanitarian assistance to Cuba on the condition that the island’s communist government agrees to “meaningful reforms”.

The sum was made public in a statement from the US State Department on Wednesday, though the administration of President Donald Trump underscored it had made the offer privately in the past.

But the $100m comes with strings: namely, that Cuba’s government commits to Trump-approved changes.

“Today, the Department of State is publicly restating the United States’ generous offer to provide an additional $100 million in direct humanitarian assistance to the Cuban people,” the statement said.

“The decision rests with the Cuban regime to accept our offer of assistance or deny critical living-saving aid and ultimately be accountable to the Cuban people for standing in the way of critical assistance.”

The statement marks the latest chapter in an ongoing pressure campaign designed to destabilise Cuba’s communist leadership.

Since Cold War tensions in the 1960s, the US has placed a comprehensive trade embargo on the Caribbean island, in part as a reaction to the Cuban Revolution.

It has become the longest-running trade embargo in modern history, and the US has justified its continuation by pointing to systematic repression under Cuba’s communist government.

But critics have denounced the trade embargo as worsening humanitarian conditions on the island.

The crisis reached a tipping point in January, after Trump abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a close ally of Cuba.

In the following weeks, Trump cut off Venezuelan funds and oil supplies to Cuba. He then threatened economic penalties against any country that supplied Cuba with fuel, implementing a de facto oil blockade on the island.

Since then, only one Russian oil tanker has reached Cuba in late March. That month alone, the island suffered two island-wide blackouts.

Cuba relies heavily on foreign imports of oil to power its ageing energy grid. Only 40 percent of its oil supply is produced domestically, according to the International Energy Agency.

The United Nations warned earlier this year that Cuba faces the possibility of humanitarian “collapse”, with public transportation grinding to a halt, food prices soaring and public services like hospitals struggling to keep the lights on.

Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly threatened to shift his focus to Cuba after the US-Israeli war on Iran ends, saying the island is “next” on his list of countries where he would like to see regime change.

“As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we’re also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba,” Trump told Latin American leaders at a summit in March.

“Cuba’s in its last moments of life as it was. It’ll have a great new life, but it’s in its last moments of life the way it is.”

Earlier this month, the US president issued a fresh wave of sanctions against the Cuban government, accusing the island of posing “an unusual and extraordinary threat to US national security and foreign policy”.

Media reports have also indicated that the Trump administration has stepped up its surveillance flights around Cuba, possibly in preparation for a surge of military assets to the Caribbean.

In Wednesday’s statement, the State Department blamed the communist system for having “only served to enrich the elites and condemn the Cuban people to poverty”.

It did not mention the US role in the humanitarian crisis on the island but instead described Cuba’s government as a hurdle to delivering much-needed aid.

“The regime refuses to allow the United States to provide this assistance to the Cuban people, who are in desperate need of assistance due to the failures of Cuba’s corrupt regime,” the State Department wrote.

It added that, should Cuba accept its terms, the $100m would be distributed through the Catholic Church and “other reliable independent humanitarian organizations”, rather than through the island’s government.

Adelmo Becerra is a Venezuelan trade union representative from the National Institute for Training and Socialist Education (INCES) and also a member of David Hernández Oduber Revolutionary Current (CREDAHO). In the past, he worked as an instructor at INCES and as a worker in the steel industry in Ciudad Guayana. In this interview, Becerra discusses the Venezuelan government’s recent labor policies under US sanctions, the growing labor reform prospects, and the present struggles and challenges facing the working class.

On May 1, the Venezuelan government raised non-wage bonuses while maintaining the minimum wage frozen. What was your reaction to these announcements? How do you place them in the context of recent labor policies in Venezuela?

The announcements represent a continuity of the labor policies of recent years. There had been expectations for restoration of the minimum wage in the short term. According to Article 91 of the Constitution, it must be adjusted once a year. Naturally, it would be a partial and limited restoration. But it is important to place the announcements in the context of various processes currently unfolding in the labor sphere.

In Venezuela, the Social Dialogue Forum, a body coordinated by the International Labour Organization (ILO), has been in place since 2021. Several trade union federations participate in this forum, including the Independent Trade Union Alliance of Venezuela (ASI), to which the INCES union belongs, the Venezuelan Workers’ Confederation (CTV), the Bolivarian Socialist Workers’ Federation (CBST), as well as government representatives. The Social Dialogue Forum is not binding, but Venezuela has ratified conventions, including Convention 26, which establishes consultations with trade union organizations for setting the minimum wage. However, a mechanism for establishing it has not yet been agreed upon.

At the same time, the government led by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has established the National Dialogue for Labor Consensus, which includes the CTV, ASI, and CBST labor federations, along with representatives from business associations FEDECÁMARAS and FEDEINDUSTRIA, and government officials.

Then there is the struggle on the streets that has unfolded in the country in recent years. I would single out the August 2018 Program for Growth, Recovery, and Economic Prosperity as a starting point. This program produced two instruments that have denied wage and labor rights established in collective bargaining agreements, even disregarding the Constitution and labor legislation. I am referring to Memorandum 2792, from October 2018, which sets out the broad guidelines regarding the suspension of collective bargaining rights. And then there is the 2021 ONAPRE Directive, which addresses its specific application. Both instruments remain in force, and their repeal has been a constant demand in the workers’ struggles.

So, back to May 1, there was no restoration of the minimum wage. However, the announcements stem from agreements reached at the National Dialogue for Labor Consensus. And the signed minutes refer to a “wage consultation process” that will begin in May. This indicates that the issue of the minimum wage is far from settled. Similarly, the agreements “urge” the private sector to establish this same US $240 income floor, specifying that it may be through “non-wage bonuses,” although in reality there are no mechanisms to enforce it.

But the minimum wage is not an isolated issue. We have heard spokespersons from both the government and the private sector speak of labor reform. Just in recent days, in a meeting of the Social Dialogue Forum, one of the agreements was to “coordinate consultations of labor-related laws with the National Assembly.”

Let us take a closer look at the issue of bonuses versus wages. What are the consequences of this “bonus-ization” policy?

The main impact is on workers’ entitlements, specifically in the form of social benefits. These benefits accumulate over the course of the employment relationship, and their primary function is to recognize seniority so that it can be taken into account when paying out benefits.

But there is also another concept: retroactivity. This means that benefits are paid based on the final salary. Thus, when an employment relationship ends at a private company, the benefits paid as compensation are calculated based on the final wage and the duration of the employment. The same applies to those retiring from the public sector, or from a private company that offers a retirement plan –which is very rare in Venezuela.

This issue is very important because it has been at the center of the historical Venezuelan working-class struggles following the oil-led industrialization and the 1936 Labor Law. Social benefits allowed Venezuelan families to have assets, purchase homes or other property, and also served as a safety net in contexts of unemployment or economic crisis. This safety net no longer exists today because the minimum wage has been effectively eliminated.

Then there are other important factors, such as social security contributions, which fund the Venezuelan Social Security Institute (IVSS). This is a universal solidarity-based system in which both employers and employees contribute, and it serves as the economic foundation for old-age pensions and other IVSS social support initiatives, such as in healthcare. So, this system is also in crisis because contributions are computed based on wages.

The result is that for the private sector, both social security contributions and severance pay are practically free right now, and that in turn affects job stability.

Speaking specifically about INCES, which is a state-run training institute, what is the current employment situation like? Do the staff work full-time?

According to data recently provided to us by the authorities, there are approximately 11,500 people on the payroll, 6,800 of them active workers, and the rest are retirees. The vast majority receive only the “economic war” and bonuses, now set at $200 and $40 a month, respectively. Through our collective bargaining agreement, retirees also receive the food bonus, which is not the case in general in the public sector.

In recent years, as a union, we have held discussions with INCES authorities and the Ministry of Labor –which oversees the institute –to ease the requirement that people come to work every day while we try to secure better conditions. Simply put, if their income isn’t enough, they should have the option of trying to find a second or third job. With the recent increases in bonuses, the authorities are putting more pressure on workers to return to full-time work, but it’s complicated.

We are still in that struggle to improve conditions, even though we have not even been able to make progress on a memorandum of understanding to improve the socioeconomic clauses of the current collective bargaining agreement. But that’s the priority.

Turning now to the private sector, you have participated in the Observatory for Labor Dignity, which has investigated current working conditions in Venezuela. In general terms, why the focus on the private sector? And what is the reality of that world?

The first reason is that unionization rates in the private sector have historically always been very low in our country. At its peak, in the 1970s, it reached 30%, and today it is likely below 15% –and that is being optimistic. We must take into account the massive migration of recent years. It is a very low unionization rate, and in sectors such as retail or services, there are practically no unions.

Consequently, the level of job insecurity and vulnerability is much higher, especially given the government’s policy of restraining official workplace inspections based on tacit agreements with the private sector under the pretext of “promoting employment.”

One issue that came up repeatedly was the lack of maternity protection which was one of the advances of the 2012 Labor Law. Right now, in the companies we investigated, such as [department store chain] Traki or [textile distributor] El Castillo, no woman wants to get pregnant because that would mean immediately losing their job. Not only that, but it would also make it impossible to get a reference letter or a recommendation for another job.

It is important to stress that the approach to undermine or marginalize collective bargaining agreements was not limited to the public sector. The private sector also adopted it. Under the guise of “protecting jobs”–claiming that companies would go bankrupt otherwise –many employers sent workers home on minimum wage, with some being called back to work at the employer’s discretion.

Given the context of crisis and precariousness, under US economic sanctions, that has persisted for several years now, is the impact on workers’ awareness noticeable?

Indeed, there is a very acute lack of awareness regarding labor rights. The new generation of workers is entering the workforce with virtually no knowledge of the rights they hold by law, in part because they have never had access to them.

So, issues like employment contracts, pay stubs, or even working hours themselves are a problem. It is very common to have 10, 12, or even 14-hour workdays, or for the two days off per week not to be upheld. At Traki, this is usually respected, although the two days are not necessarily consecutive. In El Castillo, the average is one and a half days. In El Castillo, there is also a practice of having workers sign their contract and a resignation letter at the same time, which is obviously illegal.

Another characteristic is high turnover. Fixed-term contracts have become the norm. Although after several contracts the law grants the right to continued employment, this is practically nonexistent. The vast majority of people move around a great deal between jobs. This is, of course, made possible by the fact that benefits are nearly non-existent and it is extremely cheap to dismiss a worker, which in turn keeps people in a much more precarious situation.

But there is an important factor to consider: the shift in subjectivity –and this, of course, is not a phenomenon unique to Venezuela. A few days ago, I watched an interview with a North American researcher who found that for young people in the US a job at Starbucks seems like a good opportunity –better than average. Here, in some of the testimonies we collected, young people expressed satisfaction with working at the Traki department stores. They earn some $250 a month, work 9- or 10-hour shifts –while conditions elsewhere are worse –have two days off a week, and would like to stay there. Therefore, the notion of work with rights has also eroded. Issues like overtime pay, not to mention social security, become irrelevant due to the precariousness of the present. The employment relationship, which includes rights and mechanisms to protect them, is beginning to be viewed simply as a commercial transaction.

Labor reform talks are underway. Government spokespeople talk about “updating” the law following the impact of US sanctions, while private sector spokespeople are also voicing their demands. What is currently at stake?

I think there are several aspects to consider. We are clearly witnessing an aggressive campaign being waged by the media, along with well-known economists and influencers, to impose a narrative that any wage increase will cause inflation. As such, the only way to raise wages is to reduce employers’ responsibilities and eliminate the retroactive nature of labor benefits.

The 2012 Labor Law reinstated the calculation of benefits based on the last salary. This had been modified, amid much controversy, during the Caldera administration in the 1990s. Still, unlike proposals we see now, retroactivity was not completely eliminated. There is a proposal to let workers choose between receiving benefits immediately or accumulating them, which completely distorts the concept and takes advantage of current economic difficulties. If wages are insufficient, workers obviously prefer to collect as much as they can right away. Even if the current $240 minimum income was turned into salaries, this would represent less than 50% of the food basket for a family, according to different estimates.

I believe it is essential to reject the narrative promoted by groups like Fedecámaras, to reject the premise that we must give up our rights and historic achievements because there are no conditions to sustain them. For starters, there is a lack of transparency and information. We do not even have reliable information on the size of the economically active population. The last census was in 2011, and following the massive migration over the past decade, we do not know what the current picture looks like.

According to 2021 data from the National Institute of Statistics (INE), there were roughly 4 million workers in the formal private sector, just over 3 million in the public sector, and around 5 million pensioners. Therefore, with that precise data, and with transparent information on revenues, it would be possible to quantify whether or not there are resources. Because GDP was heavily hit by the US blockade but has been growing—according to the Central Bank, for 20 consecutive quarters –but the last adjustment to the minimum wage, to $30 per month, was in March 2022.

Another piece of data we lack is the distribution of surpluses among the workforce, private capital, and the state. According to research by former Minister Víctor Álvarez, the labor share reached 40% by 2010. Currently, according to estimates by researcher Carlos Dürich, that figure may be around 20%, which is what is typically observed in African countries with high levels of poverty and inequality.

We need all that data if we want to discuss what is possible or not, and how the wealth that is generated will be distributed. This is especially true in this context, where, outrageously, the US controls Venezuela’s oil sales. Now the Central Bank will be subject to external auditing, but the public still lacks information. So there is a second layer of opacity there.

In summary, under the present conditions, with an unfavorable correlation of forces and foreign control over the Venezuelan economy, it is not possible to restore the minimum wage and have it cover living costs, as established in Article 91 of the Constitution. Nevertheless, economists and trade union federations have argued that there are conditions for a partial restoration.

In this complex context, both domestically and internationally, what is the path forward for the workers’ struggle in the country?

For me, there is one fundamental factor –one that has been evident in recent years –and that is social pressure. Workers are the only force that has exerted pressure on the government, and to some extent on the private sector as well, particularly since 2022. In 2023, the government placated the protests by introducing the “economic war” bonus. The minimum wage had been devalued to $5 at the beginning of the year, and 15 days later the government set the bonus at $25, and then in May at $70. Even if it happens through non-wage bonuses, it is a struggle with the bourgeoisie over the country’s income.

The May 1 increase, again via bonuses, is also a response to pressure from the streets. We will now see what happens with the wage consultations and labor reform plans. The challenge is to sustain the actions and protests over time. But that sustainability depends on unity.

And what are the challenges to building unity around the labor agenda? A few weeks ago, we witnessed an absurd demonstration by certain union factions asking for support at the US Embassy.

Precisely. On May 1, there was a unified demonstration that likely drew 3,000 to 4,000 people in Caracas, along with smaller marches in other parts of the country. Various labor federations were present, ranging from the more left-wing ones like the CUTV to those social-democratic or Christian-democratic like the CTV or ASI.

On March 12, we also had a united mobilization, but since then the forces have split. And that weakens us because it reduces our impact; the business leaders rub their hands together.

This division has partly to do with issues of leadership and protagonism, and with the fact that not all federations understand that we must play on two chessboards at this moment: on one hand, the negotiating tables, and on the other, applying pressure in the streets.

But the division is also due to a particular factor: a group called the Coalición Sindical, whose main focus is not so much labor or wages, but politics. It serves as the vehicle within the labor movement for María Corina Machado’s political faction, which is obviously trying to capitalize on labor issues for its own agenda. This group has no interest in joint actions to secure better conditions –even if only partial –for the working class; rather, its priority is to stoke conflict.

That is why we see actions such as demonstrations in front of the US Embassy, calling on Trump to intervene. But right now, the priority for the US is stability, so it can advance its energy and mining interests. It views social pressure as something the Venezuelan government must handle on its own.

In short, it is essential at this moment to have a united force with a specific agenda: to fight for the restoration of wages, for the reopening of collective bargaining negotiations, for the release of unjustly imprisoned workers and trade unionists, and to defend labor rights against regressive reform efforts.

“We’ve been so used to thinking about politics in terms of left and right, yet what Reform are able to do is to win in areas that have always been Conservative, but equally, we’re proving in a big way that we could win in areas that Labour has dominated since the end of World War I.”

SANTIAGO, Chile, May 8 (UPI) — An economic reform plan Chilean President José Antonio Kast announced to revive the country’s economy is drawing criticism over its potential short- and medium-term fiscal impact, as the International Monetary Fund lowered its growth projections for Chile.

The IMF’s World Economic Outlook report had estimated in mid-April that Chile’s gross domestic product would grow 2.4% in 2026 and 2.6% in 2027. However, the organization said this week it revised those projections to 2.2% this year and 2.5% in 2027 if external conditions and the country’s fiscal situation improve.

“Economic activity, driven by investment and exports in 2025, faces a period of heightened uncertainty,” the IMF said.

The report said higher copper production and prices support growth expectations, but warned of risks that include the crisis in the Middle East, rising oil prices and loss of domestic competitiveness tied to the sharp public spending cuts promoted by Kast.

The Chilean president’s plan includes proposals to reduce corporate taxes and cut bureaucracy in an effort to stimulate private investment. Congress is discussing tha proposal.

“Amid persistently high inequality, social discontent also remains a risk,” the IMF report said.

The IMF is not the only institution warning about the risks associated with the government’s National Reconstruction Plan.

Chile’s Autonomous Fiscal Council, an independent public agency tasked with monitoring the sustainability of fiscal policy, warned about the proposal’s possible impact on the country’s fiscal balance and public debt.

“The project commits fiscal spending with a high degree of certainty in the short term and reduces permanent revenue, while the positive effects depend on more uncertain future income associated with growth, which could lead to a deterioration in the fiscal balance if growth does not materialize at the estimated magnitude and speed,” the council said.

Jaime Bastías, director of the auditing school at Finis Terrae University, told UPI the IMF’s downgrade was “absolutely” expected because Chile’s central bank had already made a similar adjustment, while debate over financing the government’s proposal continues to intensify.

“The government’s plan can be an engine that helps us face the storm we are going through, but that is heavily conditioned on the state maintaining orderly public finances. The IMF says that if the proposed tax cuts are not offset through other channels, the country’s debt will grow too much, and that will create another problem,” Bastías warned.

Carlos Smith, a researcher at the Center for Business and Society Research at Universidad del Desarrollo, told UPI the IMF report shows that both external and domestic factors are likely to weaken household income and affect consumer spending.

“Consumption is one of the main drivers of Chile’s GDP. The IMF expects it to contract and that is already beginning to show, along with a very weak labor market. Chile is in a much weaker condition,” he said.

Smith said that although the IMF lowered its growth forecasts, the organization still appears optimistic about the long-term positive impact of the government’s proposed reforms.

“The impact will materialize more slowly than the finance minister expects. Therefore, the IMF is suggesting more efficient alternatives such as lower costs or more limited subsidies to create new jobs,” Smith said.

He added that while Ciles should adjust some aspects of the reform, he believes the plan is still moving in the right direction.

“I agree with the IMF that the proposal needs refinement and should focus on removing obstacles to investment projects without lowering the standards of our legislation or environmental protections. If that is achieved, I believe there is a possibility of reaching 3% growth by the end of the decade,” he said.

Bastías agreed, saying Chile could grow at 3% by 2030 if copper prices remain high, production increases and more private investment arrives.

“It is an optimistic scenario where we need to focus on stimulating those three factors. If that favorable future does not materialize, we will all pay the costs,” he said.

Reporting from Sacramento — Few California Democrats have garnered more praise from the party’s various constituencies than Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, who has led the state’s charge against the administration of President Trump with 47 lawsuits on issues including immigration and healthcare.

But in recent months, Becerra has come under criticism from progressives and civil rights leaders for his reticence to support legislative checks on police use of force. That blowback could have ramifications for an ambitious politician who seems primed for ever-higher offices.

On Tuesday, Becerra announced that his office would not seek criminal charges against two Sacramento police officers involved in the fatal shooting of Stephon Clark, an unarmed African American man.

While that decision was not unexpected, it built on another recent controversy in which Becerra was sued by civil rights groups for not releasing use-of-force records. He later outraged many progressive allies by threatening legal action over police misconduct records he said were improperly released to the media.

Becerra has long walked a line of presenting himself as both a civil rights defender and a friend of law enforcement. But has also disappointed some supporters for not taking a stand in support of legislation that would toughen use-of-force rules as well as a proposal that the state Department of Justice routinely provide independent investigation of police shootings.

“A Democratic attorney general, in particular, is kind of torn between two worlds — the law enforcement entities and officials with which he or she must work and build credibility with, and Democratic constituencies that are highly suspicious of, if not downright hostile to, law enforcement,” said Garry South, a Democratic political consultant.

“Becerra is now caught between these two constituencies in a pretty public way,” said South, who managed Gov. Gray Davis’ 1998 and 2002 campaigns that portrayed Davis as a law-and-order Democrat. Sen. Kamala Harris faced the same pressures when she was attorney general, South said.

Capitol watchers see Becerra as a possible contender some day for higher office, including governor or U.S. senator if one of those jobs opens up.

But Becerra risks alienating key voters by his handling of the Clark case and his refusal to take a position on legislation making it easier to prosecute police officers, said the Rev. Shane Harris, a civil rights activist who has long served as a delegate for the California Democratic Party.

“He needs to realize that if he wants to be governor someday, he is going to need black votes and brown votes,” said Harris, president of the People’s Alliance for Justice. “If he has any aspirations, they just went out the window for now. This right here really took him backwards when it comes to the black vote in the state of California.”

Harris said Becerra could regain ground with minority voters by supporting tough reform legislation and embracing calls for the attorney general’s office to independently investigate all fatal police shootings.

Then-Gov. Jerry Brown appointed Becerra as attorney general in 2017 after he served 12 terms in Congress — a perch that provided little opportunity to be involved in state discussions of law enforcement oversight. Many activists did not know where he would stand on policing matters.

He won election last year with strong support from police groups, including big campaign checks from the California Statewide Law Enforcement Assn. political action committee, the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the Assn. of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs PAC, the Long Beach Police Officers Assn. and the Oakland Police Officers Assn. PAC.

Becerra is too close to the law enforcement community, said Melina Abdullah, a professor of Pan-African Studies at Cal State L.A. and a member of the Black Lives Matter movement.

“I think the complete unwillingness of the attorney general to intervene in the murders of black people by law enforcement — even under the most extreme circumstances, like Stephon Clark — demonstrates either a completely failed moral compass or a shameful submission to political cowardice,” Abdullah said.

On Tuesday, Becerra defended his actions in police use-of-force cases as “by the book” and based on the evidence.

He resisted the idea that his office should routinely “parachute in,” as he calls it, and investigate officer-involved shootings that are now reviewed by prosecutors in each of the state’s 58 counties.

“I don’t have the capacity and the resources to try to take over the work of 58 different D.A.s in this one shop,” Becerra said.

He said local prosecutors are “far closer” to what is going on in their communities.

He said he knows the African American community feels hurt by the shooting of Clark, but added “I think there is a lot of hurt in the Police Department too, because they are under a microscope and two of their fellow officers are now under a microscope.”

The attorney general’s actions on law enforcement issues have frustrated some people who supported his election last year, including civil rights attorney John Burris, who represented Rodney King in his civil rights lawsuit against the Los Angeles Police Department.

“I’m disappointed,” Burris said after Becerra’s announcement in the Stephon Clark case. “I supported him wholeheartedly [during the election]. I think I had higher hopes for him in the beginning.”

Burris said he has asked Becerra in the last few years to look at other police shootings and the attorney general has always sided with the local district attorneys in not pursuing action against officers.

“At the end of the day, the attorney general is law enforcement, and they have to work with law enforcement throughout the state,” Burris said. “That’s what makes it very difficult for him and others to be very critical of the local police unless the evidence is overwhelming.”

The Clark decision was not the only action that concerned some Becerra allies.

Becerra is under criticism from groups including the First Amendment Coalition, which sued him last month after he refused to release records related to investigations of shootings or confirmed cases of sexual assault by officers.

The lawsuit alleges that Becerra is required to turn over the documents by a law — SB 1421 — that was approved last year. Police unions have sued to keep records from being released.

The ACLU of Southern California is “very disappointed” that Becerra is refusing to make public records ordered released by the state Legislature, said Melanie Ochoa, a staff attorney for the group.

“It is unfortunate that the state’s top cop is sending a message that it is OK for agencies to deny the public access to information about serious police misconduct and uses of deadly force — particularly when we already have numerous courts that have decided that agencies must release this information,” Ochoa said.

Becerra’s actions on the release of records are defended by Robert Harris, a director with the Los Angeles Police Protective League.

Harris praised Becerra for withholding such records in the Justice Department’s possession while court cases deciding whether the law applied to investigations of incidents that occurred before this year were pending.

“I think that’s an appropriate decision until we have a definitive answer,” Harris said.

Becerra defended his actions on the release of police misconduct records, citing privacy laws.

“My progressive values are still there,” Becerra told The Times.

“If I have your Social Security numbers, and there’s a good chance I do in one of my databases … you would not want me to disclose it lightly,” Becerra added. “My job is to protect that privacy.”

In January, in response to a group of journalists in Berkeley, the state’s Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training released a list of 12,000 names of police officers and job applicants who had been convicted of crimes.

Becerra later said the state office made a mistake in releasing the names to reporters for the Investigative Reporting Program at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism.

In a letter, he told the reporters to destroy the records, arguing that possession of the data was a criminal offense.

Becerra said this week that his letter to Berkeley was part of due diligence to enforce the law.

“Someone needs to ask the folks that are in possession of information that they are unauthorized to possess or use, what don’t they understand about the law that says, ‘You are in possession of information that you shouldn’t have.’ It’s like stolen property,” he said.

The attorney general also finds himself in the center of a storm of controversy over possible legislative measures to reduce excessive force.

Becerra refused Tuesday to take a position on pending legislation by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) that would make it easier to criminally prosecute law enforcement officers who kill civilians.

Police unions and chiefs are supporting a separate measure that would instead focus on internal department policies and training.

Becerra said he has withheld taking a position on the two use-of-force bills because he has not read them yet and he wanted to first complete the investigation into the Clark shooting, which he wanted to be seen as independent and fair.

“I have not gone through the bills to the point of making decisions,” Becerra told reporters at a news conference on the Clark shooting.

“I will get involved because it’s important,” he said. “I don’t intend to be AWOL when it comes to the discussion of how we write this new chapter.”

Coverage of California politics »

patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

Twitter: @mcgreevy99