warrant

Bolivia’s former president is being investigated ‘for armed uprising’ against the state, among other things.

A court in Bolivia has issued an arrest warrant for former President Evo Morales.

The Santa Cruz district prosecutor’s office said Morales is being investigated for “armed uprising against the security and sovereignty of the state, terrorism and attacks on the safety of means of transport”.

Morales backed protests in June by farmers and truckers against an economic crisis, rising living costs and conservative President Rodrigo Paz’s austerity plans.

“They will not intimidate us,” he responded to the charges in a post on X.

Morales said the government was going after him “to conceal the true drama Bolivia is experiencing: a deep economic and social crisis…a model that has abandoned the people and protects corruption”.

Morales, Bolivia’s first Indigenous president, rose from poverty to serve three terms as president, one of Latin America’s longest-serving leaders.

He was in office from 2006 until his fraught 2019 ouster, when he was forced to resign after elections tainted by claims of fraud.

Initially refusing to leave power, he eventually had to go, casting a shadow over nearly 14 years of economic progress and poverty reduction mixed with accusations of political heavy-handedness.

He went into exile in Mexico and later, Argentina, returning a year later after his political ally Luis Arce won the presidency.

In late 2024, allegations surfaced against him of trafficking a minor and statutory rape of a 15-year-old girl who became pregnant.

By early 2025, Morales’s supporters cut off roads and paralysed the country in protest against the charges, which he rejected. He has also refused to appear at court hearings.

As the unrest over Bolivia’s economic crisis was brewing in May, Morales was found in contempt of court, and a renewed warrant for his arrest on the rape charges was issued.

His supporters threatened to “throw the country into turmoil” if he was arrested, at a time when protests had shut down roads and forced the government to airlift food to some areas.

After Paz declared a state of emergency in June and the protests slowed, the latest investigation began, triggered by a criminal complaint over Morales’s involvement with the demonstrations.

The complaint, filed by the civic group Comit pro Santa Cruz and later picked up by the Interior Ministry, alleges that Morales’s supporters “caused a shortage of food, fuel and medicine” by blocking transport in the country for 53 days.

The charges filed on Wednesday were outlined in a document published by local media, according to German wire service DPA.

The order instructs police to detain Morales and bring him to the special anticorruption unit.

“We will continue fighting alongside the people, as we have always done, with the conviction that Bolivia deserves a different path: one of dignity, sovereignty, social justice, and the recovery of hope for all,” said Morales responding to the latest charges.

July 17 (Asia Today) — A South Korean court Thursday rejected an arrest warrant for former Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung over allegations that he participated in former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s failed declaration of martial law.

The Seoul Central District Court said prosecutors had not sufficiently demonstrated that Shim was likely to destroy evidence.

The court also said the progress of the investigation and related court proceedings made it difficult to conclude that he posed a flight risk.

The court separately rejected an arrest warrant for Jeon Moo-gon, a former head of the policy planning division at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office.

The court said Jeon’s arguments, the progress of the investigation and the evidence collected did not indicate that he was likely to flee or destroy evidence.

Shim and Jeon are accused of reviewing plans to dispatch prosecutors to a joint martial law investigation headquarters under instructions from then-Justice Minister Park Sung-jae on Dec. 3, 2024.

Investigators also suspect they discussed how to handle crimes that would fall under military court jurisdiction after the martial law declaration.

They are further accused of participating in the preparation of a document concerning court jurisdiction under martial law.

The second special counsel team led by Kwon Chang-young requested arrest warrants for Shim and Jeon on Tuesday on allegations of participating in an insurrection and abusing their authority to obstruct the exercise of rights.

The special counsel team’s failure to secure their detention could complicate its investigation into allegations that senior prosecution officials participated in the martial law attempt.

— 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=20260716010006339

MADISON, Wis. — A federal judge on Tuesday declined to overturn a Wisconsin judge’s obstruction of justice conviction for helping a man evade immigration officers who showed up at a courtroom looking to detain him.

The case against Hannah Dugan, who resigned from the Milwaukee County Circuit Court following her conviction, was an early test of how the courts would respond to President Trump’s sweeping immigration crackdown.

Trump allies branded Dugan as an activist judge, while her supporters said she was unfairly targeted.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman postponed Dugan’s sentencing June 3 to consider arguments about whether he should overturn her conviction. But in his ruling Tuesday, Adelman said Dugan’s conviction would stand. He did not immediately set a sentencing date.

“The court’s decision is wrong,” Dugan’s legal defense team said in a statement.

Questions about a similar case in Virginia

Dugan’s attorney had argued that her conviction in helping Eduardo Flores-Ruiz leave the courthouse was invalid and should be overturned. He said that was necessary because a federal appeals court in April overturned a key Virginia immigration case that the judge and prosecutors had cited in Dugan’s case.

In the Virginia case, an immigrant who was in the country illegally was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and later escaped. He was recaptured and indicted on a charge of obstructing a pending immigration proceeding.

The federal appeals court found that the ICE action did not constitute a “pending proceeding,” as is required under the federal obstruction law.

Dugan’s attorneys argue that she should not have been charged because there was no “pending proceeding” against the immigrant in her courtroom being sought by ICE agents, only a warrant filed for his arrest. The filing of a warrant does not constitute a “proceeding” under the law, Dugan’s attorneys argued.

Prosecutors countered that the facts in the Virginia case are different and don’t apply to Dugan’s. They also argued that other cases support Dugan’s conviction.

Adelman said the attempted arrest of Flores-Ruiz did count as a “pending proceeding,” in part because it was a planned and targeted operation rather than an arrest resulting from a random encounter.

“Defendant argues that ICE was acting as a law enforcement agency here,” Adelman wrote. “But this ignores the fact that, unlike, say, the FBI, ICE can issue its own warrants and adjudicate and effectuate a removal, as it did with Flores-Ruiz, without the involvement of a court. This makes a difference.”

Dugan faces 5 years in prison, but will likely get probation

Dugan, 67, faces up to five years in prison after a jury convicted her Dec. 19, 2025, but she is unlikely to be sentenced to time behind bars. Federal sentencing guidelines generally call for probation for defendants like her, who have no criminal history and are convicted of a nonviolent crime.

Dugan resigned from her position as a Milwaukee County circuit judge two weeks after her conviction amid threats of impeachment from Republican state lawmakers. She had been a judge for nine years.

The Trump administration brought the case against Dugan as the president pressed ahead with his sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump’s administration and his allies branded Dugan as an activist judge, while Dugan’s attorneys said she was being unfairly targeted and argued, unsuccessfully, that she was immune from being charged because she was a judge.

Dugan’s case marked the first time that a state judge in Wisconsin went to trial on charges of obstructing immigration agents. She was acquitted of concealing an individual to prevent arrest, which is considered a misdemeanor.

Dugan helped an immigrant wanted by ICE agents

On April 18, 2025, immigration officers went to the Milwaukee County courthouse after learning Flores-Ruiz had reentered the country illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.

Dugan confronted agents outside her courtroom and directed them to the chief judge’s office because she told them their administrative warrant wasn’t sufficient grounds to arrest Flores-Ruiz.

After the agents left, she led Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside and arrested him after a foot chase. A week later, FBI agents arrested Dugan in the courthouse, leading her outside in handcuffs.

Flores-Ruiz was deported in November.

Bauer writes for The Associated Press.