rights

Programme, which started after Korean War as a way of removing mixed-race children from society, violated human rights.

South Korea’s president has apologised for a notorious foreign adoption scheme set up after the 1950-53 Korean War that caused “anxiety, pain, and confusion” to more than 14,000 children sent abroad.

President Lee Jae-myung said in a Facebook post on Thursday that he was offering “heartfelt apology and words of comfort” to South Koreans adopted abroad and their adoptive and birth families, seven months after a Truth and Reconciliation Commission said the programme violated the human rights of adoptees.

The commission, which investigated complaints from 367 adoptees in Europe, the United States and Australia, held the government accountable for facilitating adoptions through fraudulent practices, including falsifying records to portray children as abandoned orphans and switching identities.

Lee said he felt “heavy-hearted” when he thought about the “anxiety, pain and confusion” that South Korean adoptees would have suffered when they were sent abroad as children, and asked officials to formulate systems to safeguard the human rights of adoptees and support their efforts to find their birth parents.

Mass international adoptions began after the Korean War as a way to remove mixed-race children born to local mothers and American GI fathers from a society that emphasised ethnic homogeneity, with more than 140,000 children sent overseas between 1955 and 1999.

Foreign adoptions have continued in more recent times, with more than 100 children on average, often babies born to unmarried women who face ostracism in a conservative society, still being sent abroad for adoption each year in the 2020s.

After years of delay, South Korea in July ratified The Hague Adoption Convention, an international treaty meant to safeguard international adoptions. The treaty took effect in South Korea on Wednesday.

Former president Kim Dae-jung apologised during a meeting with overseas adoptees in 1998, saying: “From the bottom of my heart, I am truly sorry. I deeply feel that we have committed a grave wrong against you.”

But he stopped short of acknowledging the state’s responsibility for the decades of malpractice.

From ancient cities to beaches, Spain has something for everyone. Millions of tourists flock to its coastal towns and islands every year to enjoy the sand, sea, and culture. But what about the locals?

In the past decade, rents have almost doubled, but wages have stayed the same. Hundreds of thousands of properties have become holiday lets, and developers are snapping up real estate to cash in on the tourism boom. A housing crisis is in full swing, and homelessness is rising fast. Now, residents are fighting back. Armed with water pistols and lawyers, they are calling on governments to protect their interests. But will it be enough?

People & Power meets some of the people suffering the consequences of Spain’s tourism industry, and those fighting to stay in their homes.

Athens, Greece – Greece has drawn criticism and concern from rights groups and a United Nations office after passing what it considers to be the European Union’s strictest refugee deportation policy earlier this month.

The law was put to use on September 12, when three Turkish citizens were convicted of illegal residence and handed stiff jail sentences. Two men were given two years of imprisonment and fines of 5,000 euros ($5,870), while the third, aged 19, the youngest of the group, was handed a 10-month prison sentence.

Athens plans to test-drive the law through a likely minefield of legal challenges in the coming months. Humanitarian organisations say the measure unfairly includes children and stigmatises refugees and migrants as criminals.

Greek Minister for Migration and Asylum Thanos Plevris told Parliament on September 2 that the law was “the strictest returns policy in the whole EU” and claimed there was “a lot of interest from European countries, especially EU members, to adopt this law as a law that will force an illegal migrant to return”.

Rights groups, which are gearing up to challenge the legislation, say it far outshoots a draft Returns Regulation the European Commission wants to make binding on all member states by June 2026.

The new law has shortened deadlines and raised penalties for unauthorised residence.

For example, rejected asylum applicants will be fitted with ankle monitors and given just two weeks to remove themselves voluntarily. If they do not, they face, like the two Turkish nationals, a 5,000-euro ($5,870) fine and between two and five years of confinement in closed camps.

Children, more than a fifth of arrivals this year, are not exempt. If people wish to appeal, they have to do it in four days.

“We always claim that it’s not legal to put children in detention,” said Federica Toscano from Save the Children. The law is “not aligned with the [UN] Convention on the Rights of the Child”, and is “absolutely challengeable”.

The Greek Ombudsman, an independent authority monitoring public services, also objected to the law’s maximum reprieve of 60 days, down from 120, so children can complete their school year.

The Ombudsman suggested the law sets out to prove the proposition that all undocumented people are criminals.

Ankle monitors, it said, which are not mentioned in the draft Returns Regulation, “deepen the view of migrants as criminals and put their treatment on a par with that reserved for indictees, convicts and prisoners on leave”.

“Refugees are entitled to effective access to international protection without punishment for violating migration policy,” says the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Under the Geneva Convention, “the quest for asylum … is not a criminal offence, but a human right”.

The EU approves about 45 percent of asylum applications on average.

Of the remainder, 90 percent end up staying on European soil because there is no effective policy to return them, say European officials.

“Without a returns policy, no migration policy has any meaning,” said Greece’s then-migration minister, Makis Voridis, presenting the new proposals in Parliament’s European Affairs Committee on May 15.

Irregular entry into the country has been raised to a felony. Anyone arriving without documents can be detained for two years, up from 18 months.

A provision that legalises anyone after seven years of undocumented residence is being abolished.

Greece’s predicament

Plevris has defended the hardened law, arguing that Greece guards external EU borders.

“It’s easy to defend borders when there’s three or four countries people have to cross to get to you. Compare us to other first reception countries,” he said.

Since 2015, Greece has been the arrival point of 46 percent of more than 2.8 million undocumented people entering Europe, according to UNHCR.

Many have moved on to other EU member states, but because of EU rules, rejected asylum seekers or asylum recipients who lose their protected status would be returned to their country of arrival in the EU for deportation.

Greek officials admit they do not expect refugees and migrants to spend five years in detention. The draconian rules, they say, are designed to force them to return voluntarily once they are convicted.

That is because it is legally difficult to deport anyone forcibly.

The law has a second aim – to deter what Greece views as so-called economic migrants travelling to Europe when there are Geneva Convention signatories closer to home.

“It’s a massive programme that costs a lot of money and involves a whole web of private actors. So I think that would be pretty difficult to set up,” said Hope Barker, who works for the Global Strategic Communications Council, a nongovernmental group seeking to influence environmental and migration policy.

Greece’s Union of Administrative Judges objected that the law did not define flight risk, leaving incarceration decisions to the discretion of the police. The law “needs to provide a comprehensive list of criteria, not an indicative one”, it said.

The Council of Bar Associations of Greece also weighed in with objections to tightened deadlines for appeal and the criminalisation of undocumented entry.

“Danger to life and limb vastly outranks whatever law is broken by entering Greece illegally,” it said.

The EU’s guinea pig?

Repeatedly, these bodies pointed out, the new law violates the existing EU Returns Regulation, which dates back to 2008, but observers of EU migration policy say the European Commission is deliberately allowing Greece to push the boundaries.

“Greece has become something of a testing ground for many EU measures, especially on the Greek islands,” Amnesty International’s Olivia Sundberg told Al Jazeera, citing the Closed Controlled Access Centres built to house thousands of asylum seekers.

“In a lot of ways, Greece is a place that has tested things out before they became EU law, and if they worked well, they were carried over into [EU] directives,” she said.

The EU is now looking for ways to implement returns.

“There is this whole push for what they call ‘innovative solutions’,” said Barker. “So one of these is obviously return hubs in third countries, another is getting people to sign up to voluntary returns,” she told Al Jazeera.

Italy has been testing third-country hubs through a deal with Albania, but Italian courts have ordered some of the asylum seekers sent there for processing returned to Italy.

Greece’s law casts a wider net, suggesting returnees should seek protection in any safe country closer to their country of origin.

But Greece’s Ombudsman has objected to this.

Passing the burden “allows a return process to a country the returnee doesn’t come from, or hasn’t passed through and has no connection to, except that it is geographically close to his country of origin. In this case, it’s no longer a ‘returns’ procedure but a ‘displacement’ procedure”, the Ombudsman said.

Some observers say Europe is in danger of falling short of its own human rights charter.

“Migration is becoming a rule of law issue rather than an implementation of law issue,” said Amnesty’s Sundberg.

Others point out that Europe is an ageing continent in need of more workers to sustain its tax base and social security systems in the coming decades.

“How are we going to create an environment of reception of the people we need, when we take this type of measure?” asked Lefteris Papayiannakis, who heads the Greek Council for Refugees, a legal aid charity. “If you can’t attract them, what’s your next move?”

Besides, he said, the measures exude desperation.

“You’re creating an impression now that you’re not in control. But if we compare the situation now with 2015, or the [flight of] Ukrainians in 2022, it’s a completely different situation,” Papayiannakis said.

“How can you justify being up in arms now about a very small number of migrants compared to the number … you’re going to need?”

Prominent Egyptian-British human rights activist Alaa Abd El-Fattah has been freed after spending most of the past 12 years in prison, his family said, a day after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi pardoned him and five other prisoners.

“I can’t even describe what I feel,” Abd El-Fattah’s mother, Laila Soueif, said from her house in Giza early on Tuesday as she stood next to her son, surrounded by jubilant family and friends.

“We’re happy, of course. But our greatest joy will come when there are no [political] prisoners in Egypt,” she said.

Considered to be among the most high-profile political prisoners in Egypt, Abd El-Fattah’s lengthy imprisonment and repeated hunger strikes had prompted international pleas for the Egyptian government to release him.

The former blogger had been detained before the Arab Spring uprising that toppled Egypt’s hardline leader, Hosni Mubarak, in 2011 and during the years of upheaval that followed.

But it was his criticism of government crackdowns on political dissidents after then-army chief el-Sisi gained power in Egypt in 2014 that landed him his lengthiest prison stints by far.

In 2014, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison for protesting without permission. He was briefly released in 2019, but remained on parole, and was arrested again later that year and sentenced to another five-year term.

Friends, family and supporters shared photos on social media of the activist after his release, showing a smiling Abd El-Fattah embracing his mother and other relatives.

His sister, Mona Seif, celebrated her brother’s release on social media: “The world is full of nightmares, injustice, violence, and many things that break the heart.. but we can take a breath and give happiness a chance to fill our hearts.. and keep going.”

“Oh Lord, the same joy for the families of all the detainees,” she wrote in a separate post.

“Can you imagine if this happened, how much beauty and happiness would fill our world in a single moment?”

An exceptionally kind day 💛

Alaa is free pic.twitter.com/nmg4oROSTi

— Mona Seif (@Monasosh) September 22, 2025

Abd El-Fattah’s lengthy detention had become emblematic of the fraying of Egypt’s democracy.

“I strongly welcome the news that Alaa Abd El-Fattah has received a Presidential pardon,” United Kingdom Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said.

“I’m grateful to President Sisi for this decision. We look forward to Alaa being able to return to the UK, to be reunited with his family.”

Abd El-Fattah, who obtained UK citizenship through his mother in 2021, comes from a family of well-known activists and intellectuals who had launched several campaigns for his release.

His mother met UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer earlier this year to lobby for her son’s release.

Intensifying her campaign in September 2024, when she was expecting her son’s release due to the time he spent in pre-trial detention, Soueif staged a lengthy hunger strike in the UK, ending it only after pleas from her family as her health significantly deteriorated.

Starmer had promised he would do everything he could to secure the release of Abd El-Fattah, who has also staged multiple hunger strikes in detention, most recently in early September, to protest against his imprisonment and in solidarity with his mother.

But his most dramatic hunger strike was in 2022, as Egypt hosted the annual United Nations climate summit in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. The strike ended when Abd El-Fattah lost consciousness and was revived with fluids.

Egypt’s National Council for Human Rights, a state-funded body, also welcomed his release, saying it signalled a growing emphasis on swift justice for Egyptian authorities.

San Diego City Councilmember Marni von Wilpert doesn’t generally agree with political parties redrawing congressional maps to gain power.

But after President Trump persuaded Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to redraw his state’s maps in order to improve Republican chances of retaining control of Congress in 2026, Von Wilpert said she decided California’s only option was to fight back with new maps of its own, favoring Democrats.

There’s too much at stake for LGBTQ+ people and other marginalized Californians to do otherwise, said Von Wilpert — who is bisexual and running to unseat Republican incumbent Rep. Darrell Issa, a Trump ally whose district in San Diego and Riverside counties will be redrawn if voters approve the plan.

“We can’t sit on the sidelines anymore and just hope that the far right will play fair or play by the rule book,” said Von Wilpert, 42. “If we don’t fight back now, I don’t know what democracy is going to be left for us to fight for in the future.”

San Diego City Councilmember Marni von Wilpert is challenging Republican incumbent Rep. Darrell Issa, whose Southern California district would be redrawn if voters approve the redistricting plan of California Democrats.

(Sandy Huffaker / For The Times)

Von Wilpert’s challenge to Issa — who did not respond to a request for comment — makes her part of a growing wave of LGBTQ+ candidates running for office at a time when many on the right and in the Trump administration are working aggressively to push queer people out of the American mainstream, including by challenging drag queen performances, queer library books and an array of Pride displays, and by questioning transgender people’s right to serve in the military, receive gender-affirming healthcare, participate in sports or use public restrooms.

They are running to counter those efforts, but also to resist other administration policies that they believe threaten democracy and equality more broadly, and to advocate around local issues that are important to them and their neighbors, said Elliot Imse, executive director of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute.

The institute, which has trained queer people on running for and holding political office since 1991, has already provided 450 people with in-person training so far this year, compared with 290 people all of last year, Imse said. It recently had to cap a training in Los Angeles at 54 people — its largest cohort in more than a decade — and a first-of-its-kind training for transgender candidates at 12 people, despite more than 50 applying.

“LGBTQ+ people have been extremely motivated to run for office across the country because of the attacks on their equality,” Imse said. “They know the risk, they know the potential for harassment, but those fears are really overcome by the desire to make a difference in this moment.”

“This isn’t about screaming we are trans, this is about screaming we are human — and showing that we are here, that we are competent leaders,” said Josie Caballero, voting and elections director at Advocates for Trans Equality, which helped run the training.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) at the DC Blockchain Summit in Washington on March 26, 2025. The summit brings together policymakers and influencers to discuss important issues facing the crypto industry.

(Kent Nishimura / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Across the country

Queer candidates still face stiff resistance in some parts of the country. But they are winning elections elsewhere like never before — Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware became the first out transgender member of Congress last year — and increasingly deciding to run.

Some are Republicans who support Trump and credit him with kicking open the political door for people like them by installing gay leaders in his administration, such as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

Ed Williams, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, an LGBTQ+ organization, said his group has seen “a surge in interest” under Trump, with “new members and chapters springing up across the country.” He said that “LGBT conservatives stand with President Trump’s fight for commonsense policies that support our schools and parents, put America first, and create opportunities for all Americans.”

Ryan Sheridan, 35, a gay psychiatric nurse practitioner challenging fellow Republican incumbent Rep. Ann Wagner for her House seat in Missouri, said Trump has made the Republican Party a “more welcoming environment” for gay people. He said he agrees with Trump that medical interventions for transgender youth should be stopped, but also believes others in the LGBTQ+ community misunderstand the president’s perspective.

“I do not believe that he is anti-trans. I do not believe he is anti-gay,” Sheridan said. “I understand the fear might be real, but I would encourage anybody that is deeply fearful to explore some alternative points of view.”

Many more LGBTQ+ candidates, however, are Democrats or progressives — and say they were driven to run in part by their disdain for Trump and his policies.

LGBTQ+ candidates and prospective candidates listen to speakers at an LGBTQ+ Victory Institute training in downtown Los Angeles in September.

(David Butow / For The Times)

JoAnna Mendoza, a bisexual retired U.S. Marine, said she is running to unseat Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.) because she took an oath to defend the U.S. and its values, and she believes those values are under threat from an administration with no respect for LGBTQ+ service members, immigrants or other vulnerable groups.

Mike Simmons, the first out LGBTQ+ state senator in Illinois, is running for the House seat of retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and leaning into his outsider persona as a gay Black man and the son of an Ethiopian asylum seeker. “I symbolize everything Donald Trump is trying to erase.”

Texas state Rep. Jolanda Jones, who is a lesbian, said she is running for the House seat of the late Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-Texas), in a historically Black district being redrawn in Houston, because she believes “we need more gay people — but specifically Black gay people — to run and be in a position to challenge Trump.”

Colorado state Rep. Brianna Titone, who is running for Colorado treasurer, said it is critical for LGBTQ+ people — especially transgender people like her — to run, including locally. Trump is looking for ways to attack blue state economies, she said, and queer people need to help ensure resistance strategies don’t include abandoning LGBTQ+ rights.

“We’re going to be extorted, and our economy is going to suffer for that, and we’re going to have to withstand that,” she said.

Rep. Brianna Titone speaks during the general assembly at the Colorado State Capitol on April 23, 2025.

(AAron Ontiveroz / Denver Post via Getty Images)

Jordan Wood, who is gay, served as chief of staff to former Rep. Katie Porter of Orange County before co-founding the Constitution-backing organization democracyFIRST. He’s now back in his native Maine challenging centrist Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins.

Collins, who declined to comment, has supported LGBTQ+ rights in the past, including in military service and marriage, and has at times broken with her party to stand in Trump’s way. However, Wood said Collins has acquiesced to Trump’s autocratic policies, including in recent budget battles.

“This is a moment with our country in crisis where we need our political leaders to pick sides and to stand up to this administration and its lawlessness,” Wood said.

Candidates said they’ve had hateful and threatening comments directed toward them because of their identities, and tough conversations with their families about what it will mean to be a queer elected official in the current political moment. The Victory Institute training included information on how best to handle harassment on the campaign trail.

However, candidates said they also have had young people and others thank them for having the nerve to defend the LGBTQ+ community.

Kevin Morrison, a gay county commissioner in the Chicago suburbs who is running for the House seat of Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who is running for Senate, recently had that experience after defending a transgender high school athlete at a local school board meeting.

Morrison said the response he got from the community, including many of the school’s alumni, was “incredibly positive” — and showed how ready people are for new LGBTQ+ advocates in positions of power who “lead from a place of empathy and compassion.”

In California

LGBTQ+ candidates are running across California — which has been a national leader in electing LGBTQ+ candidates, but never had an out transgender state representative.

Maebe Pudlo, 39, is an operations manager for the SELAH Neighborhood Homeless Coalition and an elected member of the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council. She is also transgender, and running for the Central and East L.A. state Senate seat of María Elena Durazo, who is running for county supervisor.

Pudlo, who also works as a drag queen, said that simply existing each day is a “political and social statement” for her. But she decided to run for office after seeing policy decisions affecting transgender people made without any transgender voices at the table.

“Unfortunately, our lives have been politicized and trans people have become political pawns, and it’s really disgusting to me,” Pudlo said.

Like every other queer candidate who spoke to The Times, Pudlo, who has previously run for Congress, said her platform is about more than LGBTQ+ issues. It’s also about housing and healthcare and defending democracy more broadly, she said, noting her campaign slogan is “Keep Fascism Out of California.”

Still, Pudlo said she is keenly aware of the current political threats to transgender people, and feels a deep responsibility to defend their rights — for everyone’s sake.

“This whole idea of rolling back civil rights for trans people specifically — that should be concerning for anybody who cares about democracy,” Pudlo said. “Because if they’ll do it to my community, your community is next.”

Former Palm Springs Mayor Lisa Middleton speaks at a training event for LGBTQ+ candidates and prospective candidates in L.A. in September. Also in the photo are, from left, LGBTQ+ Victory Fund President Evan Low, West Hollywood City Councilmember Danny Hang, Culver City Councilmember Bubba Fish and Virginia state Sen. Danica Roem.

(David Butow / For The Times)

Juan Camacho, a 44-year-old Echo Park resident also running for Durazo’s seat, said he feels a similar responsibility as a gay Mexican immigrant — particularly as Trump rolls out the “Project 2025 playbook” of attacking immigrants, Latinos and LGBTQ+ people, he said.

Brought to the U.S. by his parents as a toddler before becoming documented under President Reagan’s amnesty program, Camacho said he understands the fear that undocumented and mixed-status families feel, and he wants to use his privilege as a citizen now to push back.

Veteran California legislative leader Toni Atkins, who has long been out and is now running for governor, said the recent attacks on LGBTQ+ and especially transgender people have been “pretty disheartening,” but have also strengthened her resolve — after 50 years of LGBTQ+ people gaining rights in this country — to keep fighting.

“It’s what it’s always been: We want housing and healthcare and we want equal opportunity and we want to be seen as contributing members of society,” she said. “We have a responsibility to be visible and, as Harvey Milk said, to ‘give them hope.’”

‘Mass surveillance’ tech has enabled world’s most restrictive state to exert ‘control in all parts of life’, UN Human Rights Office says.

North Korea has further tightened its grip on its population over the past decade, executing people for activities like sharing foreign TV dramas, according to a major United Nations report.

The UN Human Rights Office said on Friday that tech-enabled state repression under the Kim dynasty, which has governed with absolute power for seven decades, had grown over a decade of “suffering, repression, and increased fear”.

“No other population is under such restrictions in today’s world,” concluded the agency’s report, which is based on interviews with more than 300 witnesses and victims who had fled the country and reported the further erosion of freedoms.

“To block the people’s eyes and ears, they strengthened the crackdowns. It was a form of control aimed at eliminating even the smallest signs of dissatisfaction or complaint,” recounted one escapee, cited in the report.

James Heenan, head of the UN Human Rights Office for North Korea, told a Geneva briefing that the number of executions for both normal and political crimes had increased since COVID-era restrictions.

An unspecified number of people had already been executed under new laws imposing the death penalty for distributing foreign TV series, including the popular K-Dramas from South Korea, he added.

The clampdown has been aided by the expansion of “mass surveillance” systems through technological advances, which have subjected citizens to “control in all parts of life” over the past 10 years, the report said.

Heenan also reported that children were being made to work in forced labour, including so-called “shock brigades” for tough sectors such as coal mining and construction.

“They’re often children from the lower level of society, because they’re the ones who can’t bribe their way out of it, and these shock brigades are engaged in often very hazardous and dangerous work,” he said.

Last year, the UN indicated that the forced labour could, in some cases, amount to slavery, making it a crime against humanity.

The sweeping review comes more than a decade after a landmark UN report documented executions, rapes, torture, deliberate starvation, and the detention of between 80,000 and 120,000 people in prison camps.

The new report covered developments since 2014, noting the government’s adoption of new laws, policies and procedures providing a legal framework for repression.

UN rights chief Volker Turk said in a statement: “If the DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] continues on its current trajectory, the population will be subjected to more suffering, brutal repression and fear.”

North Korea’s Geneva diplomatic mission and its London embassy have not yet commented on the report.

Foreign Minister Cho Hyun says he is ‘deeply concerned’ over detention of 300 South Koreans, while opposition calls it a ‘grave matter’.

South Korean President Lee Jae-myung has ordered all-out efforts to respond to the arrests of hundreds of the country’s citizens in an immigration raid on a Hyundai Motor-LG car battery factory in the United States.

Thursday’s arrest of some 475 workers – more than 300 of them South Korean nationals – at the plant near Savannah in the southern US state of Georgia was the largest single-site enforcement operation carried out by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an arm of the US Department of Homeland Security.

South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun on Saturday said President Lee has instructed officials to swiftly resolve the matter, stressing that the rights and interests of South Korean nationals and the business operations of South Korean companies investing in the US “must not be infringed upon”, South Korea’s official Yonhap news agency said in a report.

Cho said the government has set up a team to respond to the arrest of more than 300 Koreans at the facility, under construction in the southern state of Georgia, and that he may go to Washington, DC, to meet with officials if needed.

“We are deeply concerned and feel a heavy sense of responsibility over the arrests of our nationals,” Cho was quoted by Yonhap before an emergency meeting on Saturday to tackle the incident.

“We will discuss sending a senior Foreign Ministry official to the site without delay, and, if necessary, I will personally travel to Washington to hold consultations with the US administration,” he said.

The plant where the raid took place – part of US President Donald Trump’s escalating immigration crackdown – is intended to supply batteries for electric vehicles.

Responding to a reporter’s question about the immigration raid, Trump on Friday remarked during an event at the White House, “I would say that they were illegal aliens, and ICE was just doing its job.”

Steven Schrank, an ICE official, justified the detentions, saying some of those detained had illegally crossed the US border, others arrived with visas that prohibited them from working, and some overstayed their work visas.

South Korea’s opposition People Power Party (PPP) reacted angrily to the detentions, warning they “could pose a serious risk” to the country.

“This is a grave matter that could lead to broader repercussions for Korean companies and communities across the United States,” PPP chairman Jang Dong-hyeok said in a statement.

Senior PPP spokesperson Park Sung-hoon blamed Lee for the incident, saying his “pragmatic diplomacy” towards the US “failed to ensure both the safety of citizens and the competitiveness” of South Korean businesses.

He said Lee’s government even promised at least $50bn of investments during his recent meeting with Trump, a gesture that only resulted in a “crackdown” against South Korean citizens.

In a statement, Hyundai said it was “closely monitoring” the situation, adding that none of those detained “is directly employed” with the company.

LG Energy Solution said it was “gathering all relevant details”, adding it “will fully cooperate with the relevant authorities”.

South Korea, Asia’s fourth-biggest economy, is a key automaker and electronics producer with multiple plants in the US. Its companies have invested billions of dollars to build factories in the US, in a bid to access the US market and avoid tariff threats from Trump.

More details are emerging about a company that allegedly paid Los Angeles Clippers star Kawhi Leonard millions to circumvent the NBA’s salary cap, including that the team came close in 2021 to granting naming rights for its Inglewood arena to Aspiration Partners.

Clippers owner Steve Ballmer nearly granted naming rights to the company, but ended up choosing financial services firm Intuit to grace the $2-billion venue, a source familiar with the matter said. Intuit, which has a $186-billion net worth and developed TurboTax, Credit Karma and QuickBooks, ended up paying a reported $500 million over 23 years for the naming rights.

Four years later, Aspiration, a sustainability firm that also generated and sold carbon credits, is out of business. Co-founder Joseph Sanberg has agreed to plead guilty to defrauding multiple investors and lenders. Listed among creditors in Aspiration’s bankruptcy documents is Leonard, raising questions about whether his $28-million endorsement deal with the company skirted NBA salary cap rules.

One of the investors Sanberg defrauded was Ballmer, listed by Fortune magazine as the sixth-richest person in the world, with a net worth of $157 billion. The Clippers owner invested $50 million in Aspiration, which in turn entered into a $330-million sponsorship agreement with the team.

This week, the Athletic reported allegations that Aspiration agreed to pay Leonard $28 million for a job with no responsibilities, in an effort to circumvent the NBA salary cap. Ballmer was interviewed Thursday night by ESPN’s Ramona Shelburne and denied involvement in Leonard’s deal with Aspiration, but the NBA has launched an investigation.

Ballmer said he was “conned” by the company and that the Clippers did not circumvent NBA salary cap rules, which the team was accused of doing in a podcast report by Pablo Torre of the Athletic.

A plane flies over the Intuit Dome in Inglewood.

(Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times)

Ballmer told Shelburne that Aspiration offered more than Intuit for dome naming rights, and a Clippers spokesman confirmed that account. However, Ballmer insisted that the Clippers did not violate NBA rules against skirting the salary cap, and the team had agreed to a contract extension with Leonard and the sponsorship deal with Aspiration before the player and the company met.

“We were done with Kawhi, we were done with Aspiration,” Ballmer said. “The deals were all locked and loaded. Then, they did request to be introduced to Kawhi, and under the rules, we can introduce our sponsors to our athletes. We just can’t be involved.”

The Clippers signed Leonard to a four-year, $176-million contract in August 2021 even though he was recovering from a partially torn ACL in his right knee that kept him sidelined the entire 2021-22 season. Ballmer said the sponsorship deal with Aspiration was completed in September 2021 and that the Clippers introduced Leonard to Aspiration two months later.

“As part of our cooperation with the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission, we produced texts and emails,” Ballmer said. “It was part of the document production in their investigation. We even found the email that made the first introduction [between Aspiration and Leonard]. It was early in November.

“Where could any of this circumvention happened? It couldn’t have, it didn’t. The introduction got made and they were off to the races on their own. We weren’t involved.”

The Boston Sports Journal reported that Leonard did not appear in promotional material as other endorsers did because Aspiration executives “saw no brand synergy with Leonard and chose not to use his services. They instead preferred to partner with climate-focused influencers.”

Ballmer couldn’t explain why Leonard did no marketing or endorsement work for Aspiration, telling Shelburne that he never spoke with the player about his deal with the company.

“I don’t know why they did what they did and I don’t know how different it is, I really don’t,” he said. “And, frankly, any speculation would be crazy. These were guys who committed fraud. Look, they conned me. I made an investment in these guys thinking it was on the up-and-up and they conned me. At this stage, I have no ability to predict why they did anything they did.”

The salary cap is a dollar amount that limits what teams can spend on player payroll. The purpose of the cap is to ensure parity, preventing the wealthiest teams from outspending smaller markets to acquire the best players.

Circumventing the cap by paying a player outside of his contract is strictly prohibited. Teams that exceed the cap must pay luxury tax penalties that grow increasingly severe. Revenues from the tax penalties are then distributed in part to smaller-market teams and in part to teams that do not exceed the salary cap.

The NBA said it will investigate the allegations laid out by Torre. Ballmer said he welcomes the probe. If allegations were made against a team other than the Clippers, “I’d want the league to investigate, to take it seriously,” he said.

“We know the rules, and if anything is not clear, we remind ourselves what the rules are. And we make it absolutely clear we will abide by those rules.”

The cap was implemented before the 1984-85 season at a mere $3.6 million. Ten years later, it was $15.9 million, and 10 years after that it had risen to $43.9 million. By the 2014-15 season it was $63.1 million.

The biggest spike came before the 2016-2017 season when it jumped to $94 million because of an influx of revenue from a new nine-year, $24-billion media rights deal with ESPN and TNT.

Salary cap rules negotiated between the NBA and the players’ union are spelled out in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Proven incidents of teams circumventing the cap are few, with a violation by the Minnesota Timberwolves in 2000 serving as the most egregious.

The Timberwolves made a secret agreement with free agent and former No. 1 overall draft pick Joe Smith, signing him to a succession of below-market one-year deals in order to enable the team to go over the cap with a huge contract ahead of the 2001-02 season.

The NBA voided his contract, fined the Timberwolves $3.5 million, and stripped them of five first-round draft picks — two of which were later returned. Also, owner Glen Taylor and general manager Kevin McHale were suspended.

Then-NBA commissioner David Stern told the Minnesota Star Tribune at the time: “What was done here was a fraud of major proportions. There were no fewer than five undisclosed contracts tightly tucked away, in the hope that they would never see the light of day. … The magnitude of this offense was shocking.”

According to Article 13 of the CBA, if the Clippers were found to have circumvented the cap, it would be a first offense punishable by a $4.5-million fine, the loss of one first-round draft pick, and voiding of Leonard’s contract. However, the Clippers don’t have a first-round pick until 2027.

Al-Haq, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) and Al-Mezan targeted for engaging with ICC, state department says.

The United States has added three prominent Palestinian rights groups, Al-Haq, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) and Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights to its sanctions list.

The groups were added to the Department of the Treasury’s “Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List” on Thursday.

In a subsequent statement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the rights groups were targeted for having “directly engaged in efforts by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute Israeli nationals, without Israel’s consent”.

The Trump administration had previously sanctioned the ICC in response to its investigation and subsequent arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes committed in Gaza.

All three groups had provided evidence on Israeli abuses in the case.

“The United States will continue to respond with significant and tangible consequences to protect our troops, our sovereignty, and our allies from the ICC’s disregard for sovereignty, and to punish entities that are complicit in its overreach,” Rubio said.

We condemn in the strongest terms the draconian sanctions imposed by The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) on our organisations: @alhaq_org , @AlMezanCenter & @pchrgaza/1

— Al-Haq الحق (@alhaq_org) September 4, 2025

The Ramallah-based Al-Haq has been a leading organisation both in the occupied Palestinian territory and internationally seeking accountability for Israeli abuses, while leading litigation in several countries.

The Gaza City-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights have been leading independent organisation that have documented Israel’s ongoing war in Gaza.

In a statement shared by all three organisations, they condemned “in the strongest terms the draconian sanctions” imposed by the Trump administration.

“These measures in times of live genocide against our People, is a coward[ly], immoral, illegal and undemocratic act,” the statement said.

“Only states with complete disregard to international law and our shared humanity can take such heinous measures against human rights orgs working to end a genocide,” the statement said.

The U.S. just sanctioned three of the most prominent Palestinian human rights groups: @alhaq_org, @pchrgaza, and @AlMezanCenter.

Shameful but not surprising.

This administration bends over backwards to put Israel First every time. pic.twitter.com/ocXBYJllki

— Mohsen Farshneshani (@mFarshneshani) September 4, 2025

In a post on the social media platform X, Mohsen Farshneshani, a sanctions lawyer and advisor at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), described the organisations as “three of the most prominent Palestinian human rights groups”.

“Shameful but not surprising,” Farshneshani wrote. “This administration bends over backwards to put Israel First every time.”

The US previously sanctioned the Ramallah-based Addameer, a human rights organisation focused on Palestinian prisoners and detainees, in June.

At the time, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, which both work closely with the group, said the sanctions “would make day-to-day operations harder and harder, including for their employees, assisted communities and service suppliers. This will also negatively affect their engagement with their partner organizations, locally and internationally, including US-based groups”.

“The US is using its sanctions regime to do the bidding of the Israeli government, which has long systematically sought to muzzle human rights reporting and advocacy,” it added.

In July, the Trump administration also sanctioned the Palestinian Authority (PA), which administers the occupied West Bank, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which represents Palestinians internationally.

At the same time, the Trump administration has revoked sanctions imposed under former US President Joe Biden on Israelis from illegal settlements and organisations accused of violence.

The Israeli military onslaught on Gaza City continues nonstop, resulting in the killing of more than 50 Palestinians, including aid seekers, as it seeks to seize control of the enclave’s biggest urban centre – home to some 1 million people.

At least 105 Palestinians were killed across Gaza on Tuesday as Israeli strikes levelled densely populated areas, particularly al-Sabra neighbourhood, which has been under attack for days. At least 32 of those were killed while seeking aid.

The attacks are intensified as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel is facing a “decisive stage” of the war as it prepares to seize Gaza City despite global condemnation.

“Palestinians are in a cage in Gaza City right now, trying to survive as many air strikes as possible. Wherever they go, the air strikes follow them,” said Al Jazeera’s Hind Khoudary.

“They are also dying from the food and aid blockade as they are not able to get the basic means of sustenance,” she said, reporting from Deir el-Balah in central Gaza.

Palestinians are struggling to survive the dual threats of targeted attacks and starvation, with at least 13 people dying of starvation in the past 24 hours, bringing the total hunger-related death toll since the war began to 361. Eighty-three of those deaths have been recorded since a global hunger monitor confirmed famine conditions in Gaza on August 22.

Among those killed on Tuesday were at least 21 people, including seven children, who were struck by an Israeli drone while queuing for water in the al-Mawasi area near Khan Younis in southern Gaza.

Images posted online by Palestinian Civil Defence spokesperson Mahmoud Basal showed children’s bodies and water containers stained with blood at the attack site, which Israel had previously declared a so-called “safe zone”.

“They were standing in line to fill up water … when the occupation forces directly targeted them, turning their search for life into a new massacre,” Basal said on Tuesday.

In Gaza City, an Israeli strike on the al-Af family home killed 10 people, mostly women and children, Gaza officials said.

“These crimes expose the criminal fascist nature of the enemy,” Gaza’s Government Media Office said in a statement, accusing Washington of complicity. It called Israel’s actions “war crimes under international law” and urged the UN Security Council to halt the “brutal genocide”.

Two more journalists, Rasmi Salem of al-Manara and Eman al-Zamli, were killed in the latest attacks, bringing the total number of journalists killed since October 7, 2023, to more than 270. The war in Gaza has become the deadliest conflict for media workers ever recorded, press watchdogs say.

Israel starts ground assault in Gaza City

On Tuesday, thousands of Israeli reservists reported for duty as efforts to end the war seemed to be stalling.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed al-Ansari said Hamas had accepted a ceasefire proposal, but Israel had yet to respond.

“There has been no Israeli response yet,” he said, adding that negotiations with mediators and the United States had stalled. He warned that Israel’s plan to occupy Gaza “poses a threat to everyone”, including Israeli captives.

But Israel has tightened its siege of Gaza City in recent days, barring even limited humanitarian aid deliveries.

Israeli Army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir confirmed ground operations were intensifying. “We are going to deepen our operation,” he told reservists as tens of thousands of troops were called up. Israeli media reported that 365 soldiers have refused to report for duty.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity, said in a video statement on Tuesday that “we are working to defeat Hamas.”

Yemen’s Houthi movement said its forces launched four drones targeting Israel’s General Staff headquarters near Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport, a power station, and the port of Ashdod, days after Israel killed Yemeni Prime Minister Ahmed al-Rahawi along with top officials in Sanaa.

The group claimed its drones “successfully hit their targets.” It also said a missile and drone attack struck a cargo vessel in the Red Sea for violating a ban on entering Israeli ports.

International ‘indifference’ to Palestine

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry welcomed Belgium’s decision to recognise the State of Palestine on Tuesday and urged other nations to follow suit, saying it was “in line with international law and UN resolutions” and necessary to halt “genocide, displacement, starvation, and annexation”.

In a separate statement, the ministry accused the international community of “alarming” indifference to Gaza’s economic collapse and Israel’s seizure of Palestinian tax revenues. It called for urgent financial support to “enhance the resilience of citizens and their steadfastness on their homeland’s soil”.

Emergency food supplies are running out in Nigeria, Kenya, Somalia and South Sudan, Save the Children warns.

Millions of children across four African countries could die of malnutrition in the next three months, Save the Children has warned, as emergency food supplies dwindle as a result of international aid cuts.

Save the Children said on Thursday that Nigeria, Kenya, Somalia and South Sudan were expected to run out of so-called “ready-to-use therapeutic food” (RUTF), a nutritional paste that has a long shelf life and does not need refrigeration.

In Nigeria alone, the lives of 3.5 million children under age five who are suffering from severe acute malnutrition will be under threat without access to treatment and nutrition support, the humanitarian group said.

“Imagine being a parent with a severely malnourished child,” Yvonne Arunga, Save the Children’s regional director for East and Southern Africa, said in a statement.

“Now imagine that the only thing that could help your child bounce back from the brink of death is therapeutic food and that food is out of stock when it was once available.”

The warning comes just months after the United Nations announced sweeping programme cuts in June amid what the UN’s humanitarian office described as “the deepest funding cuts ever to hit the international humanitarian sector”.

“We have been forced into a triage of human survival,” UN aid chief Tom Fletcher said at the time.

“The math is cruel, and the consequences are heartbreaking. Too many people will not get the support they need, but we will save as many lives as we can with the resources we are given.”

Key international donors, led notably by the United States, have drastically scaled back foreign aid funding, leading to widespread concern that critical aid – from food and healthcare to poverty reduction – will be affected in countries around the world.

In July, as part of US President Donald Trump’s push to scale back federal spending, Congress approved a package that slashed the country’s foreign aid expenditures by about $8bn.

Last month, Doctors Without Borders (known by its French acronym MSF) reported that at least 652 malnourished children had died at its facilities in northern Nigeria in the first half of 2025 due to a lack of timely care.

“We are currently witnessing massive budget cuts, particularly from the United States, the United Kingdom, and other European countries, which are having a real impact on the treatment of malnourished children,” said Ahmed Aldikhari, MSF’s country representative in Nigeria.

On Thursday, Save the Children said staff at one of its clinics in northwestern Kenya have been forced to try to get food from other facilities to help feed malnourished children.

“And if [the children] are not supported, I know very soon [we] will be losing them,” said Sister Winnie, who runs the facility in Turkana.

About 105,000 RUTF cartons are needed through the end of the year across Kenya, Save the Children said, but only about 79,000 have been secured so far, with stocks expected to run out in October.

The group said that overall, shortfalls in nutrition funding could cut off treatment to 15.6 million people in 18 countries around the world, including more than 2.3 million severely malnourished children this year.

The situation is expected to deteriorate further in 2026, it added.

President Trump declared Tuesday that federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., should seek the death penalty for murders committed in the capital, claiming without explanation that “we have no choice.”

“That’s a very strong preventative,” he said of his decision. “I don’t know if we’re ready for it in this country, but we have it.”

Trump’s pronouncement is about much more than deterring killings, though. With speed and brazenness, Trump seems intent on creating a new, federal arrest and detention system outside of existing norms, aimed at everyday citizens and controlled by his whims. The death penalty is part of it, but stomping on civil rights is at the heart of it — ruthlessly exploiting anxiety about crime to aim repression at whatever displeases him, from immigration protesters to murderers.

This administration “is using the words of crime and criminals to get themselves a permission structure to erode civil rights and due processes across our criminal, legal and immigration systems in ways that I think should have everyone alarmed,” Rena Karefa-Johnson told me. She’s a former public defender who now works with Fwd.us, a bipartisan criminal justice advocacy group.

Authoritarians love the death penalty, and have long used it to repress not crime, but dissent. It is, after all, both the ultimate power and the ultimate fear, that the ruler of the state holds the lives of his people in his hands.

Though we are far from such atrocities, Spain’s purge of “communists” and other dissenters under Francisco Franco, Rodrigo Duterte’s extrajudicial killings of alleged drug dealers in the Philippines (though the death penalty remains illegal there) and the routine executions, even of journalists, under the repressive rulers in Saudi Arabia are chilling examples.

What each of those regimes shares in common with this moment in America is the rhetoric of making a better society — often by purging perceived threats to order — even if that requires force, or the loss of rights.

Suddenly, violent criminals become no different than petty criminals, and petty criminals become no different than immigrants or protesters. They are all a threat to a nostalgic lost glory of the homeland that must be restored at any cost, animals that only understand force.

“We have no choice.”

The result is that the people become, if not accustomed to masked agents and the military on our streets, too scared to protest it, fearful they will become the criminal target, the hunted animal.

Already, the National Guard in D.C. is carrying live weapons. With great respect to the women and men who serve in the Guard, and who no doubt individually serve with honor, they are not trained for domestic law enforcement. Forget the legalities, the Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act, which should prevent troops from policing American citizens, and does prevent them from making arrests.

Who do we want these soldiers to shoot? Who have they been told to shoot? A kid with a can of spray paint? A pickpocket? A drug dealer? A flag burner? A sandwich thrower?

We don’t even know what their orders are. What choices they will have to make.

But we do know that police do not walk around openly holding their guns, and certainly do not stroll with rifles. For civilian law enforcement, their guns are defensive weapons, and they are trained to use them as such.

Few walking by these troops, even the most law abiding, can fail to feel the power of those weapons at the ready. It is a visceral knowledge that to provoke them could mean death. That is a powerful form of repression, meant to stop dissent through fear of repercussion.

It is a power that Trump is building on multiple fronts. After declaring his “crime emergency” in D.C., Trump mandated a serious change in the mission of the National Guard.

President Trump with members of law enforcement and National Guard troops in Washington on Aug. 21, 2025.

(Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press)

He ordered every state to train soldiers on “quelling civil disturbances,” and to have soldiers ready to rapidly mobilize in case of protests. That same executive order also creates a National Guard force ready to deploy nationwide at the president’s command — presumably taking away states’ rights to decide when to utilize their troops, as happened in California.

Trump has already announced his intention to send them to Chicago, called Baltimore a “hellhole” that also may be in need and falsely claimed that, “in California, you would’ve not had the Olympics had I not sent in the troops” because “there wouldn’t be anything left” without their intervention.

Retired Maj. Gen. Randy Manner, a former acting vice chief of the National Guard Bureau, told ABC that “the administration is trying to desensitize the American people to get used to American armed soldiers in combat vehicles patrolling the streets of America. “

Manner called the move “extremely disturbing.”

Add to that Trump’s desire to imprison opponents. In recent days, the FBI raided the home of former National Security Advisor John Bolton, a Republican who has criticized Trump, especially on his policy toward Ukraine. Then Trump attempted to fire Lisa D. Cook, a Biden appointee to the Federal Reserve board, after accusing her of mortgage fraud in another apparent attempt to bend that independent agency to his will on the economy.

On Wednesday, Trump wrote on social media that progressive billionaire George Soros and his son Alex should be charged under federal racketeering laws for “their support of Violent Protests.”

“We’re not going to allow these lunatics to rip apart America any more, never giving it so much as a chance to “BREATHE,” and be FREE,” Trump wrote. “Soros, and his group of psychopaths, have caused great damage to our Country! That includes his Crazy, West Coast friends. Be careful, we’re watching you!”

Consider yourselves threatened, West Coast friends.

But of course, we are already living under that thunder. Dozens of average citizens are facing serious charges in places including Los Angeles for their participation in immigration protests.

Whether they are found guilty or not, their lives are upended by the anxiety and expense of facing such prosecutions. And thousands are being rounded up and deported, at times seemingly grabbed solely for the color of their skin, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, arguably the most Trump-loyal law enforcement agency, sees its budget balloon to $45 billion, enough to keep 100,000 people detained at a time.

Despite Trump’s maelstrom of dread-inducing moves, resistance is alive, well and far from futile.

A new Quinnipiac University national poll found that 56% of voters disapprove of the National Guard being deployed in D.C.

This week, the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. for a second time failed to convince a grand jury to indict a man who threw a submarine sandwich at federal officers — proof that average citizens not only are sane, but willing to stand up for what is right.

That comes after a grand jury three times rejected the same kind of charge against a woman who was arrested after being shoved against a wall by an immigration agent.

Californians will decide this in November whether to redraw their electoral maps to put more Democrats in Congress. Latino leaders in Chicago are protesting possible troops there. People are refusing to allow fear to define their actions.

Turns out, we do have a choice.

Mohammed Ibrahim, a 16-year-old Palestinian American, has been held in Israeli prison without contact with his family since being illegally detained in February. His relatives and rights groups are calling for his release, citing his worsening health and lack of due process.

Uganda is the latest of several countries to strike a deportation deal with the United States as President Donald Trump ramps up controversial efforts to remove migrants from the country.

In a statement on Thursday, Uganda’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Kampala had agreed for Washington to send over third-country nationals who face deportation from the US, but are unwilling to return to their home countries. The ministry said that the agreement was made under certain conditions.

Rights groups and law experts have condemned Trump’s controversial plans to deport millions of undocumented migrants. Those already deported include convicted criminals and “uniquely barbaric monsters,” according to the White House.

African countries, such as Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland, have accepted similar deals, reportedly in exchange for lower tariffs. The US’s actions are exploitative and tantamount to treating the continent as a “dumping ground,” Melusi Simelane of the Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) told Al Jazeera, adding that Washington was especially focusing on countries with weak human rights protection.

Here’s what you need to know about the Uganda deal and what countries might be getting in return for hosting US deportees:

What did Uganda agree to?

In a statement posted on X on Thursday, Bagiire Vincent Waiswa, the permanent secretary of Uganda’s Foreign Ministry, said the country had agreed to a “temporary arrangement” with the US. He did not state the timelines for when the deportations would begin or end.

There are caveats regarding the people who would be transferred, the statement continued, including that Uganda will not accept people with criminal records or unaccompanied minors and that it “prefers” that Africans be transferred as part of the deal.

“The two parties are working out the detailed modalities on how the agreement shall be implemented,” the statement added.

A US State Department statement confirmed that Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had held discussions over the phone regarding “migration, reciprocal trade, and commercial ties”.

The deal’s announcement came after weeks of speculation in local Ugandan media regarding whether the East African nation would accept US deportees.

On Wednesday, Foreign Affairs Minister Henry Okello Oryem denied the media reports, saying Uganda did not have the facilities to accommodate deportees.

Speaking to The Associated Press news agency, Oryem said Uganda was discussing issues of “visas, tariffs, sanctions and related issues” with the US, but not of migration.

“We are talking about cartels: people who are unwanted in their own countries. How can we integrate them into local communities in Uganda?” he told the AP.

A day later, Uganda’s narrative had flipped.

What might Uganda gain from this?

The Foreign Ministry’s statement on Thursday did not state what Uganda might be getting in return.

Other countries, including Eswatini, have reportedly accepted deportees in exchange for lower tariffs.

Uganda has been hit with 15 percent tariffs on goods entering the US, as part of Trump’s reciprocal tariff wars. Senior government officials in early August told local media that the tariffs would disrupt Ugandan exports, especially in the agricultural sector, and that Kampala would enter negotiations for a better deal.

Coffee, vanilla, cocoa beans and petroleum products are some of Uganda’s key exports to the US. Kampala is particularly keen on boosting coffee exports to the US and competing with bigger suppliers like Colombia. The US, on the other hand, exports machinery, such as aircraft parts, to Uganda, which imposes an 18 percent tariff on imported products.

The US and Uganda have historically enjoyed friendly ties, with the US routinely sending aid to Kampala. However, after Uganda passed an anti-homosexuality bill into law in 2023, relations turned sour, and the US accused Uganda of “human rights violations”. The law proscribes punishment, including life sentences, for same-sex relations.

Washington thereafter cut aid funding for HIV programs and issued visa restrictions on Ugandan government officials “complicit in undermining the democratic process.” The US also banned Uganda from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a trade programme that helped African countries trade tariff-free with the US, but that Trump’s tariffs have effectively killed.

The World Bank additionally banned Uganda from its loans for two years, although the restriction was lifted this June.

Rights activists say the deal on deportees could make the US administration more favourably inclined towards Uganda, but at the expense of those deported.

“The proposed deal runs afoul of international law,” human rights lawyer Nicholas Opiyo told the AP. He added that such an arrangement leaves the legal status of deportees unclear as to whether they are refugees or prisoners.

“We are sacrificing human beings for political expediency; in this case, because Uganda wants to be in the good books of the United States,” Opiyo said.“That I can keep your prisoners if you pay me; how is that different from human trafficking?”

Does Uganda already host refugees?

Yes, Uganda is Africa’s largest refugee host country. It already hosts some 1.7 million refugees, largely from neighbouring South Sudan, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which are all dealing with armed conflict and unrest.

The United Nations has, in the past, hailed the country as having a “progressive refugee policy” and “maintaining an open-door approach to asylum”.

However, opposition activists are sounding the alarm over the government’s dismal human rights record. Uganda has been ruled by Museveni since 1986, with his party winning contested elections in landslides. Opposition members and journalists are often targeted in arrests. Some report being tortured in detention.

Speaking to the AP, opposition lawmaker Muwada Nkunyingi said the US deal could give Museveni’s government further Western legitimacy ahead of general elections scheduled for January 2026.

The deal was struck to “clear their image now that we are heading into the 2026 elections,” Nkunyingi said. He urged the US not to ignore what he described as human rights issues in Uganda.

What other countries has the US sent people to?

Eswatini, Rwanda and South Sudan have struck similar agreements with the US.

Eswatini, in July, accepted five unnamed men from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba and Yemen.

Tricia McLaughlin, Department for Homeland Security assistant secretary, described them as “individuals so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back”. She added that they were convicted of offences ranging from child rape to murder, and faced up to 25 years in jail. The men are presently held in detention facilities and will be sent back to their countries, according to officials who did not state a timeline.

Activists accuse the Eswatini government of engaging in the deal in exchange for lower tariffs from the US. The tiny country, which exports apparel, fruits, nuts and raw sugar to the US, was hit with a 10 percent tariff.

“No country should have to be engaged in the violation of international human rights laws, including breaching its domestic laws, to please the Global North in the name of trade,” Simulane of SALC, who is leading an ongoing court case challenging the Eswatini government’s decision, told Al Jazeera. The move, he said, was against the country’s constitution, which mandates that international agreements pass through parliament.

“What we want, at the core, is for the agreement to be published for public scrutiny, and for the public to understand (if) it indeed is in line with our national interest,” Simulane said. “We further want the agreement declared unconstitutional because it lacked parliamentary approval.”

South Africa, which borders Eswatini on three sides, summoned the smaller country’s diplomats earlier in August to raise security concerns about the arrangement.

Similarly, the US sent eight “barbaric” criminals to South Sudan in July. The DHS listed them as being from Cuba, Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, Mexico and South Sudan. They were convicted of crimes such as first-degree murder, robbery, drug trafficking, and sexual assault, the DHS said.

The men were initially diverted to Djibouti for months pending a legal challenge in the US. However, in late June, the US Supreme Court approved the move to South Sudan.

Rwanda, too, has confirmed that it will take 250 deportees from the US at an unnamed date. According to government spokesperson Yolande Makolo, the deportees will enjoy “workforce training, health care and accommodation”. The country previously struck a controversial migrant deal for a fee with the United Kingdom. That deal, however, fell through when the new Labour government was elected in the UK in 2024.

Outside Africa, El Salvador has taken in 300 migrants, mainly from Venezuela, for a $6m fee.

Costa Rica accepted 200 asylum seekers from Afghanistan, China, Ghana, India and Vietnam. While many have been repatriated, some 28 people were still in detention by June. It is unclear what the US offered in return.

Nearly 300 people from countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and China were sent to Panama in February.

Aug. 20 (UPI) — Rebels from M23, a rebel group backed by Rwanda, killed at least 140 people in July in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Human Rights Watch said.

The resurgence of killings of mostly Hutu civilians in at least 14 villages and farming areas near Virunga National Park in eastern DRC comes as the United States and Qatar have been working to broker peace in the region.

Human Rights Watch called the killings “executions.”

Between July 10 and 30, “M23 fighters summarily executed local residents and farmers, including women and children, in their villages, fields, and near the Rutshuru River,” Human Rights Watch said.

“Credible reports indicate the number of people killed in Rutshuru territory since July may exceed 300, among the worst atrocities by the M23 since its resurgence in late 2021,” it added.

The rebels have denied any role in these killings, calling the charges a “blatant misrepresentation of the facts,” BBC reported.

“The M23 armed group, which has Rwandan government backing, attacked over a dozen villages and farming areas in July and committed dozens of summary executions of primarily Hutu civilians,” said Clémentine de Montjoye, senior Great Lakes researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Unless those responsible for these war crimes, including at the highest levels, are appropriately investigated and punished, these atrocities will only intensify.”

Witnesses said that M23 fighters told them to immediately bury the bodies in the fields or leave them unburied, preventing families from having funerals. M23 fighters also threw bodies, including of women and children, into the Rutshuru River, Human Rights Watch said.

The mass killings appear to be part of a military campaign against opposing armed groups, especially the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda, a largely Rwandan Hutu armed group created by participants in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

In the killings reported to Human Rights Watch, most victims were ethnic Hutu and some were ethnic Nande.

Rwanda has not responded to the HRW claim, but it has denied the U.N. accusations, calling them “gratuitous” and “sensational allegations.” It claims that an armed group opposed to M23 committed the killings.

Rwanda denies allegations that it provides military support to M23, which is largely made up of the Tutsi ethnic group that was targeted by Hutu militias in the genocide.

Human Rights Watch reported first-person accounts of witnesses. In one, a woman saw her husband killed by M23 fighters with a machete. The same day, “We were forced to walk toward the place where our lives were going to end,” she said. The group included about 70 women and girls. After walking all day, they were forced to sit on a riverbank to be shot at. She was only able to escape because she fell into the river without being shot.

Fighting between DRC government troops and M23 escalated in January, when the rebels captured large parts of the mineral-rich east, including the regional capital Goma.

Thousands have been killed and hundreds of thousands of civilians forced from their homes in the ongoing conflict, the United Nations says.

On June 27, DRC and Rwanda signed a peace agreement in Washington, D.C., after 30 years of conflict between the two nations.

Then on July 19, DRC and M23 rebels backed by Rwanda signed a declaration of peace after nearly four years of fighting. The rebels were not involved in the agreement in Washington but the declaration must follow the Washington Accord brokered by the United States.

As negotiations were set to resume last week, M23 walked away from the peace talks. It said Kinshasa had failed to meet commitments outlined in the deal.

Around 7 million people have been displaced in Congo, which has a population of 106 million. Rwanda also borders Uganda to the south.

The Congolese army has also accused the M23 of violating the cease-fire.

MIAMI — A federal judge on Monday considered whether detainees at a temporary immigrant detention center in the Florida Everglades have been denied their legal rights.

In the second of two lawsuits challenging practices at the facility known as “Alligator Alcatraz,” civil rights attorneys sought a preliminary injunction to ensure that detainees at the site have confidential access to their lawyers, which they say hasn’t happened. Florida officials dispute that claim.

The civil rights attorneys also wanted U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz to identify an immigration court that has jurisdiction over the detention center so that petitions can be filed for the detainees’ bond or release. The attorneys say that hearings for their cases have been routinely canceled in federal Florida immigration courts by judges who say they don’t have jurisdiction over the detainees in the Everglades.

At the start of Monday’s hearing, government attorneys said they would designate the immigration court at the Krome North Service Processing Center in the Miami area as having jurisdiction over the detention center in the Everglades in an effort to address some of the civil rights attorneys’ constitutional concerns. The judge told the government attorneys that he didn’t expect them to change that designation without good reason.

But before delving into the core issues of the detainees’ rights, Ruiz wanted to hear about whether the lawsuit was filed in the proper jurisdiction in Miami. The state and federal government defendants have argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility was built is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida’s Southern District is the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier County, which is in the state’s Middle District.

The hearing ended without the judge making an immediate ruling. Ruiz suggested that the case against the federal defendants might be appropriate for the Southern District, but the case against the state defendants might be better in the Middle District.

Court for the Southern District is held in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Fort Pierce, Key West, and West Palm Beach, while Middle District courthouses are located in Tampa, Fernandina, Fort Myers, Jacksonville, Live Oak, Ocala, Orlando and St. Petersburg.

All parties have agreed that if the complaints against the state are moved to another venue, then the complaints against the federal government should be moved as well. It wasn’t immediately clear how Ruiz, a Trump appointee, handing the case off to another judge would affect the ultimate outcome of the case.

The hearing over legal access comes as another federal judge in Miami considers whether construction and operations at the facility should be halted indefinitely because federal environmental rules weren’t followed. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams on Aug. 7 ordered a 14-day halt to additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week.

Meanwhile, Gov. Ron DeSantis announced last week that his administration was preparing to open a second immigration detention facility dubbed “Deportation Depot” at a state prison in north Florida. DeSantis justified building the second detention center by saying President Trump’s administration needs the additional capacity to hold and deport more immigrants.

The state of Florida has disputed claims that “Alligator Alcatraz” detainees have been unable to meet with their attorneys. The state’s lawyers said that since July 15, when videoconferencing started at the facility, the state has granted every request for a detainee to meet with an attorney, and in-person meetings started July 28. The first detainees arrived at the beginning of July.

But the civil rights attorneys said that even if lawyers have been scheduled to meet with their clients at the detention center, it hasn’t been in private or confidential, and it is more restrictive than at other immigration detention facilities. They said scheduling delays and an unreasonable advance-notice requirement have hindered their ability to meet with the detainees, thereby violating their constitutional rights.

Civil rights attorneys said officers are going cell to cell to pressure detainees into signing voluntary removal orders before they’re allowed to consult their attorneys, and some detainees have been deported even though they didn’t have final removal orders. Along with the spread of a respiratory infection and rainwater flooding their tents, the circumstances have fueled a feeling of desperation among detainees, the attorneys wrote in a court filing.

The judge promised a quick decision.

Fischer and Schneider write for the Associated Press.

Watching the often vitriolic debates in Congress these days can be disturbing. But disagreement and debate are part of our national DNA. Consider the Bill of Rights, which was as controversial when it was first debated as parts of it still are today.

FOR THE RECORD:
Rights: An Op-Ed article Monday on the Bill of Rights said it was ratified 118 years ago. It was ratified 218 years ago. —

The founders of our country, united in the revolution, were divided over the issue of including a bill of rights in the Constitution of 1787. And although those first 10 amendments were eventually ratified — 118 years ago today — the outcome was at times in doubt.

James Madison and other Federalists opposed adding a bill of rights. They argued that the document hammered out at the Constitutional Convention granted only limited powers to the national government and that it was therefore unnecessary to enumerate rights the new government had no power to abridge. They also argued that by enumerating specific rights, other unnamed rights might not be protected.

Virginia delegate George Mason argued vehemently for a bill of rights. When the majority at the convention failed to act, he and two others refused to sign the completed Constitution. The Anti-Federalists, among them Patrick Henry, argued that the strong national government proposed in the Constitution threatened state sovereignty and individual rights.

The lack of a bill of rights provoked conflict as states debated ratifying the Constitution. Five states ratified easily, but a strong, organized opposition emerged at the Massachusetts convention. Finally, two delegates, John Adams and John Hancock, negotiated a compromise. Massachusetts would ratify but would also recommend amendments to the Constitution to the new Congress.

Subsequent states made similar calls for amendments, many about safeguarding basic rights. After the Constitution was finally ratified, the first Congress met and took up the question of rights. Responding to seven states’ calls for amendments, Rep. James Madison addressed the House on the issue. Originally in opposition, Madison had changed his mind. He prepared the list of amendments that, after much more debate, conflict and compromise, became our Bill of Rights.

Today we still debate the Bill of Rights. But these debates focus on the meaning of the amendments, not their inclusion.

Consider the 2nd Amendment. Can everyone have as many guns or any kind of gun, or can guns be restricted, registered and regulated?

What does the 1st Amendment mean? Can the Ten Commandments be displayed in government buildings? What place does prayer have in public schools?

Then there are the due process rights contained in the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments. Are prisoners held by the U.S. in places such as Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, entitled to those rights?

We may disagree, but these and many other issues that we care about — that define our lives — are debated and contested based on those words written so long ago.

Given the nature of modern political discourse, too often driven by partisanship, power-seeking and punditry, one wonders if we would be able to craft a constitution or a bill of rights today.

Indeed, can we even manage to address the controversial issues that do face us? How many Madisons are out there willing to compromise or reverse positions for the good of the country?

For our democracy to continue to flourish, we must have an educated and involved citizenry. We must have leaders who can debate and compromise to find solutions to our vexing problems.

And we must educate our young people to take these civic roles in the future. This vital task must be borne by both parents and schools.

Research shows that parents can play a major role in the development of their children’s civic education. You can make a big difference by engaging your children in discussions about issues and politics, watching and discussing the news with them, and by taking them to the polls or public meetings with you.

Schools must encourage civic learning. Students should have plenty of practice in structured discussion of politics and controversial issues to help them learn to analyze cause and effect and multiple points of view, present fact- and logic-based opinions, and listen to what others have to say.

Research shows that students who have the opportunity to participate in simulations such as legislative hearings, mock trials and, yes, even constitutional conventions not only learn more but develop greater civic skills and interest in politics.

Although we need to make sure our children are proficient in math and reading, it is vitally important to the future of our democracy that they also learn what it means to be a competent and involved citizen.

We celebrate the Bill of Rights, not only for its importance but because of the actions that brought it into being — the passionate and reasonable contributions of wise leaders and active citizens.

Jonathan Estrin and Marshall Croddy are president and vice president, respectively, of the Constitutional Rights Foundation, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit dedicated to civic education.

Since the controversial ban on July 7, more than 700 people have been detained at peaceful protests.

London’s Metropolitan Police say at least 60 people will face prosecution for “showing support” for Palestine Action, the activist group outlawed as a “terrorist organisation” last month for protesting Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Three others have already been charged.

“We have put arrangements in place that will enable us to investigate and prosecute significant numbers each week if necessary,” the force said in a statement on Friday.

Since the controversial ban on July 7, more than 700 people have been detained at peaceful protests, including 522 arrested at a protest last weekend for holding signs backing the group, believed to be the largest number of arrests at a single protest in the capital’s history.

Critics, including the United Nations, Amnesty International and Greenpeace, have called the ban an overreach that risks stifling free speech.

Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said the latest decisions were the “first significant numbers” from recent demonstrations, adding: “Many more can be expected in the next few weeks. People should be clear about the real-life consequences for anyone choosing to support Palestine Action.”

The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission has also warned against a “heavy-handed” approach, urging the government and police to ensure protest policing is proportionate and guided by clear legal tests.

The initial three prosecutions earlier this month stemmed from arrests during a July demonstration, with defendants charged under the Terrorism Act. Police said convictions for such offences could carry sentences of up to six months in prison, along with other penalties.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley praised the rapid coordination between officers and prosecutors, saying he was “proud of how our police and CPS teams have worked so speedily together to overcome misguided attempts to overwhelm the justice system”.

Home Office Minister Yvette Cooper defended the Labour government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action, stating: “UK national security and public safety must always be our top priority. The assessments are very clear, this is not a non-violent organisation.”

The group was banned days after claiming responsibility for a break-in at an air force base in southern England, which the government claims caused an estimated 7 million pounds ($9.3 million) in damage to two aircraft. The home office has accused it of other “serious attacks” involving “violence, significant injuries and extensive criminal damage”.

Palestine Action has said its actions target the United Kingdom’s indirect military support for Israel amid the war in Gaza.

The UK’s Liberal Democrats voiced “deep concern” over using “anti-terrorism powers” against peaceful protesters.

Hundreds of thousands of people have demonstrated in several UK cities for nearly two years, calling for an end to Israel’s war on Gaza and for the British government to stop all weapons sales to the country.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said last month that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine by September unless Israel takes “substantive steps” to end its war on Gaza and commits to a lasting peace process. Many who have been protesting to end Palestinian suffering have said the move is too little, too late.

More than 40 years after L.A. produced the most financially successful Olympic Games in history, the 2028 Summer Olympics will feature a new advertising revenue path for the Games.

In an Olympic first, venues used for the 2028 Olympics and Paralympics will be allowed to have corporate sponsor names after LA28 and the International Olympic Committee came to a tradition-bucking agreement announced Thursday.

Historically, the IOC has sought to limit corporate influence by keeping venues free from advertising. Major sponsors are still ubiquitous at the Games, where only Visa credit cards are accepted and Coca-Cola products monopolize the concession stands, but venues and fields of play have remained commercial-free. The traditional clean venue policy has forced L.A. organizers to refer to SoFi Stadium, which will host Olympic swimming, officially as “2028 Stadium” or “the Stadium in Inglewood.”

Not only will the new agreement help logistically by not requiring well-known venues to adopt generic temporary nicknames, but it will ease costs as existing signage can remain in place outside of the venue.

“Our job is to push and our job is to do what’s best for the Olympics in Los Angeles,” LA28 chairman Casey Wasserman told The Times. “Our job in those conversations [with the IOC] was to explain why this was more than just about money. It was about experience and value and opportunity.”

The additional revenue opportunities from naming rights agreements will help cover what LA28 has promised will be a privately funded Games.

Wasserman said the private organizing committee has contracts for about 70% of the projected $2.5-billion domestic sponsorship goal. Any money that comes from the new naming opportunities are additions to the previously estimated revenue, Wasserman said. Needing to cover the budget of $7.1 billion, LA28 has added eight corporate sponsors this year, already surpassing the total from 2024.

“The momentum is meaningful and real,” Wasserman said. “We feel good about where we are, but we certainly don’t take that for granted.”

For venues that already have sponsorship names, such as Crypto.com Arena, BMO Stadium or the Intuit Dome, the existing company can sign on as a founding-level partner to retain its naming rights during the Games, the highest level of domestic sponsorship. Otherwise, the venue will be renamed without a sponsor.

The changes have already begun. LA28 announced that Honda Center will retain its name for the Olympic volleyball competition after the Japanese automaker established its deal with LA28 in June. Squash will make its Olympic debut at the newly named Comcast Squash Center at Universal Studios as the company also holds U.S. broadcasting rights to the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Broadcasters can now refer to the venues with their corporate sponsor names, providing a major global stage. Any signage outside of the venue will remain in place for existing structures. Naming rights are available for the 19 temporary facilities with first bidding opportunities going to members of The Olympic Partners (TOP) program.

But the field of play will remain free from visible sponsorships.

“The IOC is always looking to recognize and support the critical role and contributions of Olympic commercial partners, both TOP and domestic. We also want to support LA28 in their efforts to create new approaches and commercial opportunities, whilst maintaining the principles of the ‘clean venue policy’ that is unique to the Olympic Games,” an IOC spokesperson said in a statement to The Times. “It is a reality that many venues in L.A. and in the U.S. already have commercial naming rights and have become commonly recognized as such by the general public. Therefore, following discussions, the IOC is supporting the LA28 initiative that takes into account market realities of venue naming and generates critical revenue to stage the Games.”

With less than three years before the Olympics open on July 14, 2028, the Games delivery process has come with challenges. Soon after the IOC’s coordination commission left the city to glowing reviews of LA28’s planning progress in June, immigration raids and protests began in Los Angeles. This month, President Trump named himself the chair of a task force to oversee the federal government’s involvement in the Games, but concerns about safety and visas for would-be international visitors have persisted.

In L.A., where the city recently closed a nearly $1-billion budget deficit, transportation updates have lagged behind and leaders are in negotiations with Olympic organizers about services including security, trash removal and traffic control. Though LA28 has promised to cover all expenses related to the Games, taxpayers still face potential risk.

If the group goes over budget, L.A. would be responsible for the first $270 million of the deficit.