Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, on Wednesday (May 17) lost his appeal against a 2021 corruption sentence in a Paris court. However, instead of spending time in jail, the former president will serve his time at his home but will have to wear&nbsp;an electronic tag. While Sarkozy is the first ex-president in post-war France to receive a custodial sentence for corruption, it is not the only legal battle he is currently embroiled in.

Let’s take a look at the life, career and legal woes of the former French president.&nbsp;

<h2>Who is Nicolas Sarkozy?</h2>

The 68-year-old conservative leader who also served as the former interior minister has been plagued by corruption investigations since the end of his five-year term between 2007-2012 as the President of France.&nbsp;

The critics dubbed Sarkozy's presidency as “bling-bling” as his leadership style has been described as brash, celebrity-driven and hyperactive for a role which is typically steeped in tradition and grandeur. This image was further solidified when he married his current wife, former supermodel and singer, Carla Bruni.&nbsp;

ALSO WATCH |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/french-court-upholds-3-year-sentence-of-former-president-sarkozy-593326">French court upholds 3-year sentence of former President Sarkozy</a>

The so-called “hyper-president” is also divorced twice and has one son from his second marriage and two sons from his first marriage. Sarkozy had also sought to become the president in 2016, however, the Republicans in France had instead nominated former Prime Minister François Fillon who lost against incumbent President Emmanuel Macron who took office in 2017.&nbsp;

Sarkozy’s political ambitions have long been overshadowed by investigations since he left office in 2012. However, he has managed to retain considerable influence and popularity on the right of French politics.

<h2>‘Wiretapping affair’&nbsp;</h2>

In 2014, Sarkozy was first placed under official investigation for influence peddling after he had left office for which he was later convicted. In France, the case known as the “wiretapping affair” where his wiretapped phone calls showed that he discussed the idea of offering a high-ranking judge a cushy job in Monaco, in exchange for information about a financing investigation.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/former-french-president-sarkozy-loses-corruption-appeal-prison-sentence-upheld-593252">Former French president Nicholas Sarkozy loses corruption appeal, to wear tag as sentence upheld</a>&nbsp;

At the time, prosecutors alleged that Sarkozy’s lawyer, Thierry Herzog, tried to obtain information from Judge Gilbert Azibert, about a case which involved illicit payments from L’Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt for Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential election campaign. The case was later dismissed.&nbsp;

However, it resurfaced in 2014 which led to a formal investigation against him. Two of Sarkozy’s phones were wiretapped by investigators a year prior who were looking into money flows from Libya and stumbled upon the secret line used by the former president and his lawyer, Herzog.&nbsp;

<h2>Recently upheld&nbsp;verdict of the case</h2>

In line with these allegations, Sarkozy was convicted in 2021 for corruption and influence peddling a ruling which he appealed and lost on Wednesday. However, his lawyers have since vowed to challenge it at France’s highest court, Cour de Cassation. The court reviews lower court rulings on the grounds of legal or procedural errors, but not factual aspects.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/frances-sarkozy-likely-to-avoid-jail-despite-new-conviction-417167">France's Sarkozy likely to avoid jail despite new conviction</a>

The appeals court in Paris upheld the three-year prison sentence and in line with the previous ruling said two of those years were suspended and that Sarkozy would wear an electronic bracelet for the remaining year. Meanwhile, the former French president’s lawyer maintained that he had committed no wrongdoing and described the ruling as “stupefying.”

“We will not give up this fight,” said defence lawyer Jacqueline Laffont. This comes after a lower court found Sarkozy guilty of trying to bribe a judge after leaving office and peddling influence in exchange for confidential information.&nbsp;

The presiding judge, Sophie Clement in Wednesday’s hearing also upheld convictions against Herzog and Azibert. According to Clement, Herzog’s judgement as a lawyer was clouded because of his friendship with Sarkozy. She also said that Herzog had breached professional codes of conduct by not warning the former president that what he was doing was illegal.&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/frances-sarkozy-to-face-trial-for-corruption-influence-peddling-127121">France's Sarkozy to face trial for corruption, influence peddling</a>

The judge also went on to dismiss Sarkozy’s claim that he was not aware of what Herzog and Azibert had discussed citing the wiretapped exchanges and also rejected the former president’s argument that wiretapped conversations cannot be presented as evidence.&nbsp;

<h2>‘Bygmalion affair’: Another campaign financing case</h2>

Another case related to Sarkozy’s campaign finances came to be known as the so-called ‘Bygmalion affair’ for which he was also convicted in 2021 and was handed a one-year prison sentence. The case centred around the accusation that Sarkozy’s party, then known as the UMP, worked with a PR company Bygmalion, to hide the actual cost of his failed 2012 presidential election bid.&nbsp;

As per French laws, candidates are only allowed to spend $24 million. However, Bygmalion provided a series of false invoices for more than $19 million to his party but not the campaign which, according to the prosecutors, effectively enabled Sarkozy’s party to spend over the limit. The former president was among 14 who were to witness a trial in relation to the case.&nbsp;

<h2>Did Sarkozy take money from Gaddafi?</h2>

Investigators who had wiretapped the ex-president’s phones were looking for evidence of money flows from Libya for which Sarkozy may soon face another trial. Earlier this month, prosecutors requested that Sarkozy should face trial over allegations that the Libyan government illegally contributed to his successful 2007 presidential bid.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/former-france-president-sarkozy-charged-over-libyan-campaign-financing-335737">Former France president Sarkozy charged over Libyan campaign financing</a>

France’s financial crimes prosecutor (PNF) has also called for a trial for 12 others after they allegedly sought millions of euros in financing from the regime of then-Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. The allegations were first made public by the late autocrat’s son.&nbsp;

However, Sarkozy has denied any wrongdoing and said some officials from his regime are seeking revenge against him for his decision to send French warplanes during the 2011 Libyan uprising.&nbsp;

Similarly, Claude Guéant who was the former president’s chief of staff and managing Sarkozy’s presidential campaign at the time, said he had “never seen a penny of Libyan financing,” as quoted by BBC, citing Franceinfo website. Along with Sarkozy, his then-head of campaign financing Eric Woerth and former minister Brice Hortefeux have also been accused by the PNF for their alleged involvement in the case.&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ex-french-president-nicolas-sarkozy-arrested-over-campaign-financing-36482">Ex-French president Nicolas Sarkozy 'arrested over campaign financing'</a>

The prosecutors have also sought charges including, “concealment of laundering public funds, passive corruption, illegal campaign financing and criminal conspiracy with a view to committing a crime punishable by 10 years in jail.”&nbsp;

In a 2018 interview, Sarkozy said, “There’s not even the smallest inkling of proof,” adding that these allegations had made his life a living hell. A French-Lebanese businessman Ziad Takieddine told French news website Mediapart that in 2006 and 2007, he handed over three suitcases stuffed with cash amounting to $6.2 million from Gaddafi to Sarkozy and Guéant.&nbsp;

<h2>Possible Russia investigation</h2>

In 2021, Sarkozy had also been placed under preliminary investigation for “influence peddling,” in Russia nearly seven years after he left office. According to reports, the former president came under scrutiny for advisory work he undertook for a Russian insurance company.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp; 
 
&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, on Wednesday (May 17) lost his appeal against a 2021 corruption sentence in a Paris court. However, instead of spending time in jail, the former president will serve his time at his home but will have to wear an electronic tag.

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, on Wednesday (May 17) lost his appeal against a 2021 corruption sentence in a Paris court. However, instead of spending time in jail, the former president will serve his time at his home but will have to wear an electronic tag. While Sarkozy is the first ex-president in post-war France to receive a custodial sentence for corruption, it is not the only legal battle he is currently embroiled in. Let’s take a look at the life, career and legal woes of the former French president. Who is Nicolas Sarkozy? The 68-year-old conservative leader who also served as the former interior minister has been plagued by corruption investigations since the end of his five-year term between 2007-2012 as the President of France. The critics dubbed Sarkozy's presidency as “bling-bling” as his leadership style has been described as brash, celebrity-driven and hyperactive for a role which is typically steeped in tradition and grandeur. This image was further solidified when he married his current wife, former supermodel and singer, Carla Bruni. ALSO WATCH | French court upholds 3-year sentence of former President Sarkozy The so-called “hyper-president” is also divorced twice and has one son from his second marriage and two sons from his first marriage. Sarkozy had also sought to become the president in 2016, however, the Republicans in France had instead nominated former Prime Minister François Fillon who lost against incumbent President Emmanuel Macron who took office in 2017. Sarkozy’s political ambitions have long been overshadowed by investigations since he left office in 2012. However, he has managed to retain considerable influence and popularity on the right of French politics. ‘Wiretapping affair’ In 2014, Sarkozy was first placed under official investigation for influence peddling after he had left office for which he was later convicted. In France, the case known as the “wiretapping affair” where his wiretapped phone calls showed that he discussed the idea of offering a high-ranking judge a cushy job in Monaco, in exchange for information about a financing investigation. ALSO READ | Former French president Nicholas Sarkozy loses corruption appeal, to wear tag as sentence upheld At the time, prosecutors alleged that Sarkozy’s lawyer, Thierry Herzog, tried to obtain information from Judge Gilbert Azibert, about a case which involved illicit payments from L’Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt for Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential election campaign. The case was later dismissed. However, it resurfaced in 2014 which led to a formal investigation against him. Two of Sarkozy’s phones were wiretapped by investigators a year prior who were looking into money flows from Libya and stumbled upon the secret line used by the former president and his lawyer, Herzog. Recently upheld verdict of the case In line with these allegations, Sarkozy was convicted in 2021 for corruption and influence peddling a ruling which he appealed and lost on Wednesday. However, his lawyers have since vowed to challenge it at France’s highest court, Cour de Cassation. The court reviews lower court rulings on the grounds of legal or procedural errors, but not factual aspects. ALSO READ | France's Sarkozy likely to avoid jail despite new conviction The appeals court in Paris upheld the three-year prison sentence and in line with the previous ruling said two of those years were suspended and that Sarkozy would wear an electronic bracelet for the remaining year. Meanwhile, the former French president’s lawyer maintained that he had committed no wrongdoing and described the ruling as “stupefying.” “We will not give up this fight,” said defence lawyer Jacqueline Laffont. This comes after a lower court found Sarkozy guilty of trying to bribe a judge after leaving office and peddling influence in exchange for confidential information. The presiding judge, Sophie Clement in Wednesday’s hearing also upheld convictions against Herzog and Azibert. According to Clement, Herzog’s judgement as a lawyer was clouded because of his friendship with Sarkozy. She also said that Herzog had breached professional codes of conduct by not warning the former president that what he was doing was illegal. ALSO READ | France's Sarkozy to face trial for corruption, influence peddling The judge also went on to dismiss Sarkozy’s claim that he was not aware of what Herzog and Azibert had discussed citing the wiretapped exchanges and also rejected the former president’s argument that wiretapped conversations cannot be presented as evidence. ‘Bygmalion affair’: Another campaign financing case Another case related to Sarkozy’s campaign finances came to be known as the so-called ‘Bygmalion affair’ for which he was also convicted in 2021 and was handed a one-year prison sentence. The case centred around the accusation that Sarkozy’s party, then known as the UMP, worked with a PR company Bygmalion, to hide the actual cost of his failed 2012 presidential election bid. As per French laws, candidates are only allowed to spend $24 million. However, Bygmalion provided a series of false invoices for more than $19 million to his party but not the campaign which, according to the prosecutors, effectively enabled Sarkozy’s party to spend over the limit. The former president was among 14 who were to witness a trial in relation to the case. Did Sarkozy take money from Gaddafi? Investigators who had wiretapped the ex-president’s phones were looking for evidence of money flows from Libya for which Sarkozy may soon face another trial. Earlier this month, prosecutors requested that Sarkozy should face trial over allegations that the Libyan government illegally contributed to his successful 2007 presidential bid. ALSO READ | Former France president Sarkozy charged over Libyan campaign financing France’s financial crimes prosecutor (PNF) has also called for a trial for 12 others after they allegedly sought millions of euros in financing from the regime of then-Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. The allegations were first made public by the late autocrat’s son. However, Sarkozy has denied any wrongdoing and said some officials from his regime are seeking revenge against him for his decision to send French warplanes during the 2011 Libyan uprising. Similarly, Claude Guéant who was the former president’s chief of staff and managing Sarkozy’s presidential campaign at the time, said he had “never seen a penny of Libyan financing,” as quoted by BBC, citing Franceinfo website. Along with Sarkozy, his then-head of campaign financing Eric Woerth and former minister Brice Hortefeux have also been accused by the PNF for their alleged involvement in the case. ALSO READ | Ex-French president Nicolas Sarkozy 'arrested over campaign financing' The prosecutors have also sought charges including, “concealment of laundering public funds, passive corruption, illegal campaign financing and criminal conspiracy with a view to committing a crime punishable by 10 years in jail.” In a 2018 interview, Sarkozy said, “There’s not even the smallest inkling of proof,” adding that these allegations had made his life a living hell. A French-Lebanese businessman Ziad Takieddine told French news website Mediapart that in 2006 and 2007, he handed over three suitcases stuffed with cash amounting to $6.2 million from Gaddafi to Sarkozy and Guéant. Possible Russia investigation In 2021, Sarkozy had also been placed under preliminary investigation for “influence peddling,” in Russia nearly seven years after he left office. According to reports, the former president came under scrutiny for advisory work he undertook for a Russian insurance company. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Explained | Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his many legal woes

After an Istanbul court sentenced the mayor to more than two and a half years in prison on accusations of insulting Supreme Electoral Council members, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared that the courts will fix any errors in an appeal process.

Erdogan: Nothing to do with ban on Mayor | Istanbul

Who is an employee? It may seem a simple question but it's not. In 2016, two Uber drivers in the United Kingdom took the app-based cab service to court.&nbsp;

These two drivers told the court that they worked for Uber but it said, the drivers did not work for the company and that they were self-employed. Is that something to fight over? Actually, it is.&nbsp;

The moment you employ someone, you are expected to give him or her employment benefits like minimum wage, annual leaves, insurance. These vary depending on a country's labour laws.&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-who-is-an-employee-366305/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In UK, there are three categories of employment status, employees, workers and self-employed contractors. Employees have the maximum protection as they enjoy the most benefits. Self-employed contractors have the least. So, when this case came up in court. Uber stuck to its claim and so did the two drivers. There was a four-year-long legal battle and then UK's top court said, uber drivers should be treated as workers and not self-employed. It meant that they are entitled to a minimum wage and a holiday pay.&nbsp;

It happened on the February 19. It was just the beginning of Uber's troubles. Four days later, the company was fined in Italy. Again, over the same employment debate.&nbsp;

Uber, and food delivery apps were told their couriers delivery personnel are employees. They should be treated as employees. Four companies were fined 733 million euros for breaching labour safety rules. The companies were told to pay the couriers delivery personnel, social security and insurance also give them adequate clothing, helmets, masks, scooters or bicycles, etc.&nbsp;

The decision of two courts in Italy and Britain to declare Uber drivers and food app couriers as employees is important for the whole world as it sets a precedent.&nbsp;

It's only a matter of time before such a case comes up in another country. It is important now as it ensures that there is no exploitation.&nbsp;

App-based cabs, and food delivery services have been around for some time now in India. They have generated employment for thousands of people. Many have migrated from rural areas to drive cabs in cities. Driving an Ola or an Uber was very lucrative a few years ago. Several people quit their desk jobs to drive cabs but the story slowly changed over the years. In 2017, some drivers approached a Delhi court as they said, the apps were exploiting them by not treating them as employees.&nbsp;

Soon, a video emerged of a Zomato delivery agent tasting food that he was tasked with delivering. While we all cringed, we overlooked the desperation in the video. &nbsp;

In India, a food delivery agent employed by a Zomato or a Swiggy barely earns a few thousand rupees a month. They work long shifts in polluted cities during extreme weather and yet they enjoy no benefits, such as sick leaves, insurance, etc. &nbsp;&nbsp;

They are called independent self-employed workers but they do not enjoy the benefit of that status. In other words, they cannot take up multiple jobs. The app-based cab drivers can, but the food couriers can't. When the pandemic struck many of these workers were fired without notice or compensation.&nbsp;

Their companies blamed the coronavirus but fingers were really pointing at the downside of gig economy. That's independent working. Today, the gig economy is worth over $3.7 trillion.&nbsp;

Freelancing, working multiple jobs and working from home have been trendy since the pandemic struck but what we don't realise is that such jobs have no cushions, no benefits.&nbsp;

The latest rulings by the courts in the UK and Italy have also put employers in a fix. Not only will they have to shell out more resources, they will also have to figure out how the resources are allocated. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Many cab drivers work for multiple service providers. How do you determine which company is supposed to give them employment benefits? Also, will the drivers be able to serve the rest of the companies once they are categorised as employees?&nbsp;

Will the end result be in favour of the drivers or will it create further troubles for them?&nbsp;

What the industry needs right now is to come up with a new model to ensure- that while companies survive those working are also not exploited.&nbsp;

Who is an employee? It may seem a simple question but it's not. In 2016, two Uber drivers in the United Kingdom took the app-based cab service to court. These two drivers told the court that they worked for Uber but it said, the drivers did not work for the company and that they were self-employed.

Who is an employee? It may seem a simple question but it's not. In 2016, two Uber drivers in the United Kingdom took the app-based cab service to court. These two drivers told the court that they worked for Uber but it said, the drivers did not work for the company and that they were self-employed. Is that something to fight over? Actually, it is. The moment you employ someone, you are expected to give him or her employment benefits like minimum wage, annual leaves, insurance. These vary depending on a country's labour laws. In UK, there are three categories of employment status, employees, workers and self-employed contractors. Employees have the maximum protection as they enjoy the most benefits. Self-employed contractors have the least. So, when this case came up in court. Uber stuck to its claim and so did the two drivers. There was a four-year-long legal battle and then UK's top court said, uber drivers should be treated as workers and not self-employed. It meant that they are entitled to a minimum wage and a holiday pay. It happened on the February 19. It was just the beginning of Uber's troubles. Four days later, the company was fined in Italy. Again, over the same employment debate. Uber, and food delivery apps were told their couriers delivery personnel are employees. They should be treated as employees. Four companies were fined 733 million euros for breaching labour safety rules. The companies were told to pay the couriers delivery personnel, social security and insurance also give them adequate clothing, helmets, masks, scooters or bicycles, etc. The decision of two courts in Italy and Britain to declare Uber drivers and food app couriers as employees is important for the whole world as it sets a precedent. It's only a matter of time before such a case comes up in another country. It is important now as it ensures that there is no exploitation. App-based cabs, and food delivery services have been around for some time now in India. They have generated employment for thousands of people. Many have migrated from rural areas to drive cabs in cities. Driving an Ola or an Uber was very lucrative a few years ago. Several people quit their desk jobs to drive cabs but the story slowly changed over the years. In 2017, some drivers approached a Delhi court as they said, the apps were exploiting them by not treating them as employees. Soon, a video emerged of a Zomato delivery agent tasting food that he was tasked with delivering. While we all cringed, we overlooked the desperation in the video. In India, a food delivery agent employed by a Zomato or a Swiggy barely earns a few thousand rupees a month. They work long shifts in polluted cities during extreme weather and yet they enjoy no benefits, such as sick leaves, insurance, etc. They are called independent self-employed workers but they do not enjoy the benefit of that status. In other words, they cannot take up multiple jobs. The app-based cab drivers can, but the food couriers can't. When the pandemic struck many of these workers were fired without notice or compensation. Their companies blamed the coronavirus but fingers were really pointing at the downside of gig economy. That's independent working. Today, the gig economy is worth over $3.7 trillion. Freelancing, working multiple jobs and working from home have been trendy since the pandemic struck but what we don't realise is that such jobs have no cushions, no benefits. The latest rulings by the courts in the UK and Italy have also put employers in a fix. Not only will they have to shell out more resources, they will also have to figure out how the resources are allocated. Many cab drivers work for multiple service providers. How do you determine which company is supposed to give them employment benefits? Also, will the drivers be able to serve the rest of the companies once they are categorised as employees? Will the end result be in favour of the drivers or will it create further troubles for them? What the industry needs right now is to come up with a new model to ensure- that while companies survive those working are also not exploited.

Courts set precedent to ensure exploitation of employees ends 

After the verdict over the 2018 murder of journalist <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/jamal-khashoggi-murder-saudi-arabia-court-hands-death-penalty-to-five-24-years-imprisonment-to-three-269717">Jamal Khashoggi</a> was announced, Turkey criticised it for falling short of being able to decrypt the killing and motive of the crime. For Turkey, the Saudi court failed to deliver justice.

The decision announced by the Saudi court "is far from meeting the expectations of both our country and the international community to shed light on the murder with all its dimensions and deliver justice," the foreign ministry said in a statement.&nbsp;

A Saudi Arabian court&nbsp;on Monday sentenced five people to death for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi Kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018.

The criminal court of Riyadh has sentenced five people to death for committing and directly participating in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

The court sentenced 24 years of imprisonment to three individuals for their role in covering up the crime and violating the law.

And charges against three individuals have been dismissed.

Khashoggi, a Washington Post contributor and US resident, was killed in October 2018 by Saudi agents while at Saudi Arabia's consulate in Istanbul to obtain paperwork ahead of his wedding to Hatice Cengiz.

For decades, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/khashoggis-killers-will-pay-the-price-says-turkish-president-228875">Khashoggi was close to the Saudi royal family</a> and also served as an adviser to the government.

(With inputs from agencies)

After the verdict over the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi was announced, Turkey criticised it for falling short of being able to decrypt the killing and motive of the crime.

After the verdict over the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi was announced, Turkey criticised it for falling short of being able to decrypt the killing and motive of the crime. For Turkey, the Saudi court failed to deliver justice. The decision announced by the Saudi court "is far from meeting the expectations of both our country and the international community to shed light on the murder with all its dimensions and deliver justice," the foreign ministry said in a statement. A Saudi Arabian court on Monday sentenced five people to death for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi Kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018. The criminal court of Riyadh has sentenced five people to death for committing and directly participating in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. The court sentenced 24 years of imprisonment to three individuals for their role in covering up the crime and violating the law. And charges against three individuals have been dismissed. Khashoggi, a Washington Post contributor and US resident, was killed in October 2018 by Saudi agents while at Saudi Arabia's consulate in Istanbul to obtain paperwork ahead of his wedding to Hatice Cengiz. For decades, Khashoggi was close to the Saudi royal family and also served as an adviser to the government. (With inputs from agencies)

Khashoggi verdict 'far from justice': Turkey

Three people were killed in a shootout at a Thai courtroom on Tuesday during a hearing into an inheritance dispute, according to police, who said two of the victims were lawyers.

The gunman opened fire on the opposing side in the dispute in Chanthaburi provincial court before a guard shot back and fatally wounded him.

National police office spokesman Krissana Pattanacharoen said three people including the assailant were confirmed dead, while others were injured in the melee.

"Two are lawyers another one is the shooter," he said, adding that they are still investigating why the courtroom feud turned deadly.

The identities of the victims were not released.

Gruesome images of the bloody courtroom scene, some 250 kilometres&nbsp;southeast of Bangkok, circulated on social media.

Thailand has high rates of gun ownership and petty personal disputes, romantic and business rivalries are often resolved with bullets.

But the incident is the latest in a series of high-profile courthouse shootings that have exposed flaws in the legal system's security.

A week ago three drug suspects,&nbsp;including an American,&nbsp;shot and stabbed their way out of a court in the seaside town of Pattaya before being tracked down by police.

Early last month a Thai judge in the insurgency-battered south shot himself in the chest in front of a packed court after acquitting several murder suspects and decrying the judicial system in an impassioned speech.

Three people were killed in a shootout at a Thai courtroom on Tuesday during a hearing into an inheritance dispute, according to police, who said two of the victims were lawyers.

Three people were killed in a shootout at a Thai courtroom on Tuesday during a hearing into an inheritance dispute, according to police, who said two of the victims were lawyers. The gunman opened fire on the opposing side in the dispute in Chanthaburi provincial court before a guard shot back and fatally wounded him. National police office spokesman Krissana Pattanacharoen said three people including the assailant were confirmed dead, while others were injured in the melee. "Two are lawyers another one is the shooter," he said, adding that they are still investigating why the courtroom feud turned deadly. The identities of the victims were not released. Gruesome images of the bloody courtroom scene, some 250 kilometres southeast of Bangkok, circulated on social media. Thailand has high rates of gun ownership and petty personal disputes, romantic and business rivalries are often resolved with bullets. But the incident is the latest in a series of high-profile courthouse shootings that have exposed flaws in the legal system's security. A week ago three drug suspects, including an American, shot and stabbed their way out of a court in the seaside town of Pattaya before being tracked down by police. Early last month a Thai judge in the insurgency-battered south shot himself in the chest in front of a packed court after acquitting several murder suspects and decrying the judicial system in an impassioned speech.

Two lawyers, gunman killed in Thai courtroom shootout: Police

A plea was filed on Monday in the Supreme Court seeking NIA investigation and lodging of FIR against Facebook, WhatsApp, and NSO Group under the provisions of the Information Technology (IT) Act and the Indian Penal Code for allegedly violating fundamental privacy of Indians. 
 
RSS Idealogue KN Govindacharya filed the petition seeking a direction to initiate perjury proceedings against WhatsApp for allegedly misleading apex court in a case by claiming that users data is fully encrypted and no one including WhatsApp has the key. 
 
The plea was filed in the wake of reports about WhatsApp's revelation that some journalists, lawyers and human rights activists were spied upon using a surveillance technology developed by Israel-based NSO Group. 
 
Govindacharya also sought protection and enforcement of the fundamental right of privacy of crores of Indians, which is being violated by illegal surveillance being carried out by Apps and Internet Companies.

A plea was filed on Monday in the Supreme Court seeking NIA investigation and lodging of FIR against Facebook, WhatsApp, and NSO Group under the provisions of the Information Technology (IT) Act and the Indian Penal Code for allegedly violating fundamental privacy of Indians.

A plea was filed on Monday in the Supreme Court seeking NIA investigation and lodging of FIR against Facebook, WhatsApp, and NSO Group under the provisions of the Information Technology (IT) Act and the Indian Penal Code for allegedly violating fundamental privacy of Indians. RSS Idealogue KN Govindacharya filed the petition seeking a direction to initiate perjury proceedings against WhatsApp for allegedly misleading apex court in a case by claiming that users data is fully encrypted and no one including WhatsApp has the key. The plea was filed in the wake of reports about WhatsApp's revelation that some journalists, lawyers and human rights activists were spied upon using a surveillance technology developed by Israel-based NSO Group. Govindacharya also sought protection and enforcement of the fundamental right of privacy of crores of Indians, which is being violated by illegal surveillance being carried out by Apps and Internet Companies.

Plea filed in SC seeking NIA investigation against WhatsApp, others for snooping

courts

Courts, News on Courts, stories on Courts, articles on Courts, Courts stories at Wion, Courts news, Courts latest news