Texas has made it illegal for social media platforms to ban users "based on their political viewpoints". Prominent Republican politicians have accused Facebook, Twitter and others of censoring conservative views.

Texas has made it illegal for social media platforms to ban users "based on their political viewpoints". Prominent Republican politicians have accused Facebook, Twitter and others of censoring conservative views. Former US President Donald Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter after a group of his supporters attacked the Capitol in January. The social networks have all denied stifling conservative views. However, these platforms do enforce these terms of service which prohibit content such as incitement to violence and coordinated disinformation. "Social media websites have become our modern-day public square," Texas Governor Greg Abbott was quoted by BBC. He said this after he signed the bill into law on Thursday. "They are a place for healthy public debate where information should be able to flow freely. Also read | 'Clearly unconstitutional': US Justice Department sues Texas over restrictive abortion law "But there is a dangerous movement by social media companies to silence conservative viewpoints and ideas." Meanwhile, the US Justice Department has filed a lawsuit against the state as it claimed the abortion law in Texas ''clearly unconstitutional." "This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans, whatever their politics or party, should fear," US attorney general Merrick Garland told the reporters. Earlier, US President Joe Biden had slammed the Texas abortion law and said it creates an ''almost un-American'' vigilante system. While Vice President Kamala Harris had said ''the right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is not negotiable." Despite massive protest, the US Supreme Court had refused to block the near-total ban on abortion, setting the stage for an intervention by the Justice Department. The harshest abortion law in the US, called the ''Texas Heartbeat Act'' took effect on September 1. Under the law, abortion is banned once the heartbeat of a child is detected, usually near six weeks of pregnancy. It faced massive backlash as it makes no exceptions for rape or incest. People in Texas are allowed to sue the doctors who perform the procedure as well as report drivers who drop clients to abortion clinics.

Texas now passes social media 'de-platforming' law

Various American companies including Lyft Inc, American Airlines Group Inc and Silicon Laboratories Inc, have expressed their displeasure at new Texas laws on abortion, handguns, and voting limitations.

Lyft and Uber Technologies Inc said that they will cover all legal fees for the ride-hail companies' drivers sued under a law that puts in place a near-total ban on abortion.

Also, Lyft will donate $1 million to women's health provider Planned Parenthood, chief executive Logan Green said.&nbsp;

"This is an attack on women's access to healthcare and on their right to choose," Green said of the new Texas law.

Meanwhile, Republican leaders in as many as six US states are rushing to follow the lead of Texas in adopting an extreme abortion ban that has been slammed as unconstitutional and built to encourage vigilantism among the public.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-lashes-out-at-us-supreme-court-for-texas-abortion-law-410322">Also read |&nbsp;Joe Biden lashes out at US supreme court for Texas abortion law</a>

US President Joe Biden has openly condemned the US supreme court for rejecting to ban the abortion law.

Biden said the supreme court judges, all appointed by former President Donald Trump, delivered an assault on a woman’s rights.

"The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Biden said in a statement. "This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest."

Texas abortion law is one of the toughest and most restrictive abortion bans in the US in the past couple of decades.

Various American companies including Lyft Inc, American Airlines Group Inc and Silicon Laboratories Inc, have expressed their displeasure at new Texas laws on abortion, handguns, and voting limitations.

Various American companies including Lyft Inc, American Airlines Group Inc and Silicon Laboratories Inc, have expressed their displeasure at new Texas laws on abortion, handguns, and voting limitations. Lyft and Uber Technologies Inc said that they will cover all legal fees for the ride-hail companies' drivers sued under a law that puts in place a near-total ban on abortion. Also, Lyft will donate $1 million to women's health provider Planned Parenthood, chief executive Logan Green said. "This is an attack on women's access to healthcare and on their right to choose," Green said of the new Texas law. Meanwhile, Republican leaders in as many as six US states are rushing to follow the lead of Texas in adopting an extreme abortion ban that has been slammed as unconstitutional and built to encourage vigilantism among the public. Also read | Joe Biden lashes out at US supreme court for Texas abortion law US President Joe Biden has openly condemned the US supreme court for rejecting to ban the abortion law. Biden said the supreme court judges, all appointed by former President Donald Trump, delivered an assault on a woman’s rights. "The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Biden said in a statement. "This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest." Texas abortion law is one of the toughest and most restrictive abortion bans in the US in the past couple of decades.

US companies lash out at Texas law changes

Republican leaders in as many as six US states are rushing to follow the lead of Texas in adopting an extreme abortion ban that has been slammed as unconstitutional and built to encourage vigilantism among the public.

On Wednesday, the law went into effect in Texas, banning abortion past six weeks of a pregnancy, including for victims of incest or rape.

The law also gave any private citizen the option to sue someone providing an abortion or anyone even believed to be peripherally assisting someone to get an abortion.

Within a day of the law going into effect, six other states, including North Dakota, Mississippi, Indiana, Florida, South Dakota and Arkansas have said they are looking to adopt a similar ban.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-lashes-out-at-us-supreme-court-for-texas-abortion-law-410322">Also read |&nbsp;Joe Biden lashes out at US supreme court for Texas abortion law</a>

Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has openly condemned the US supreme court for rejecting to ban the abortion law.

Biden said the supreme court judges, all appointed by former President Donald Trump, delivered an assault on a woman’s rights.

"The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Biden said in a statement. "This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest."

Texas abortion law is one of the toughest and most restrictive abortion bans in the US in the past couple of decades. 
&nbsp;

Republican leaders in as many as six US states are rushing to follow the lead of Texas in adopting an extreme abortion ban that has been slammed as unconstitutional and built to encourage vigilantism among the public.

Republican leaders in as many as six US states are rushing to follow the lead of Texas in adopting an extreme abortion ban that has been slammed as unconstitutional and built to encourage vigilantism among the public. On Wednesday, the law went into effect in Texas, banning abortion past six weeks of a pregnancy, including for victims of incest or rape. The law also gave any private citizen the option to sue someone providing an abortion or anyone even believed to be peripherally assisting someone to get an abortion. Within a day of the law going into effect, six other states, including North Dakota, Mississippi, Indiana, Florida, South Dakota and Arkansas have said they are looking to adopt a similar ban. Also read | Joe Biden lashes out at US supreme court for Texas abortion law Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has openly condemned the US supreme court for rejecting to ban the abortion law. Biden said the supreme court judges, all appointed by former President Donald Trump, delivered an assault on a woman’s rights. "The Supreme Court's ruling overnight is an unprecedented assault on a woman's constitutional rights under Roe v. Wade, which has been the law of the land for almost fifty years," Biden said in a statement. "This (Texas) law is so extreme it does not even allow for exceptions in the case of rape or incest." Texas abortion law is one of the toughest and most restrictive abortion bans in the US in the past couple of decades.

Republicans in six states to adopt law similar to Texas anti-abortion law

China passed a sweeping privacy law aimed at preventing businesses from collecting sensitive personal data Friday, as the country faces an uptick in internet scams and Beijing targets tech giants hoovering up personal data.

Under the new rules passed by China's top legislative body, state and private entities handling personal information will be required to reduce data collection and obtain user consent.

The Chinese state security apparatus will maintain access to swathes of personal data, however. Beijing has long been accused of harnessing big tech to accelerate repression in the northwestern Xinjiang province and elsewhere.

The new rules are also expected to further rattle China's tech sector, with companies like ride hailing giant Didi and gaming behemoth Tencent in regulators' crosshairs in recent months over misuse of personal data.

Chinese tech stocks including Alibaba and Tencent dipped after Friday morning's announcement.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/capitol-hill-bomb-threat-standoff-ends-as-suspect-surrenders-407037">Also read |&nbsp;Capitol Hill bomb threat standoff ends as suspect surrenders</a>

The law aims to protect those who "feel strongly about personal data being used for user profiling and by recommendation algorithms or the use of big data in setting prices," a spokesman for the National People's Congress told state news agency Xinhua earlier this week.

It will prevent companies from setting different prices for the same service based on clients' shopping history.

Tens of thousands of consumers have complained about having to pay more for hailing a taxi using an iPhone than a cheaper mobile phone model or for tickets if they are profiled as a business traveller, China's consumer protection watchdog said.&nbsp;

The law is modelled after the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, one of the world's strictest online privacy protection laws.

"China's new privacy regime is one of the toughest in the world," said Kendra Schaefer, a partner at Beijing-based consulting firm Trivium China. "China is not really looking at the short term with this law."

Instead, she said, it aims "to establish the foundations for the digital economy over the next 40 or 50 years."

The law, which comes into effect on November 1, also stipulates that the personal data of Chinese nationals cannot be transferred to countries with lower standards of data security than China -- rules which may present problems for foreign businesses.

Companies that fail to comply can face fines of up to 50 million yuan or five percent of their annual turnover.

The law says sensitive personal data includes information which if leaked can lead to "discrimination... or seriously threaten the safety of individuals" including race, ethnicity, religion, biometric data or a person's whereabouts.

But Chinese cities across the country are peppered with surveillance cameras, some outfitted for facial recognition, collecting biometric information daily.&nbsp;

In the restive region of Xinjiang, home to most of China's Uighur ethnic minority,&nbsp;rights groups say residents are forced to install software on their mobile phones that allow police to access their location, photos or text messages.

China passed a sweeping privacy law aimed at preventing businesses from collecting sensitive personal data Friday, as the country faces an uptick in internet scams and Beijing targets tech giants hoovering up personal data.

China passed a sweeping privacy law aimed at preventing businesses from collecting sensitive personal data Friday, as the country faces an uptick in internet scams and Beijing targets tech giants hoovering up personal data. Under the new rules passed by China's top legislative body, state and private entities handling personal information will be required to reduce data collection and obtain user consent. The Chinese state security apparatus will maintain access to swathes of personal data, however. Beijing has long been accused of harnessing big tech to accelerate repression in the northwestern Xinjiang province and elsewhere. The new rules are also expected to further rattle China's tech sector, with companies like ride hailing giant Didi and gaming behemoth Tencent in regulators' crosshairs in recent months over misuse of personal data. Chinese tech stocks including Alibaba and Tencent dipped after Friday morning's announcement. Also read | Capitol Hill bomb threat standoff ends as suspect surrenders The law aims to protect those who "feel strongly about personal data being used for user profiling and by recommendation algorithms or the use of big data in setting prices," a spokesman for the National People's Congress told state news agency Xinhua earlier this week. It will prevent companies from setting different prices for the same service based on clients' shopping history. Tens of thousands of consumers have complained about having to pay more for hailing a taxi using an iPhone than a cheaper mobile phone model or for tickets if they are profiled as a business traveller, China's consumer protection watchdog said. The law is modelled after the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, one of the world's strictest online privacy protection laws. "China's new privacy regime is one of the toughest in the world," said Kendra Schaefer, a partner at Beijing-based consulting firm Trivium China. "China is not really looking at the short term with this law." Instead, she said, it aims "to establish the foundations for the digital economy over the next 40 or 50 years." The law, which comes into effect on November 1, also stipulates that the personal data of Chinese nationals cannot be transferred to countries with lower standards of data security than China -- rules which may present problems for foreign businesses. Companies that fail to comply can face fines of up to 50 million yuan or five percent of their annual turnover. The law says sensitive personal data includes information which if leaked can lead to "discrimination... or seriously threaten the safety of individuals" including race, ethnicity, religion, biometric data or a person's whereabouts. But Chinese cities across the country are peppered with surveillance cameras, some outfitted for facial recognition, collecting biometric information daily. In the restive region of Xinjiang, home to most of China's Uighur ethnic minority, rights groups say residents are forced to install software on their mobile phones that allow police to access their location, photos or text messages.

China passes tough new online privacy law

Polish MPs on Wednesday voted in favour of a new law that critics say will curb media freedom and hit ties with the United States, but the ruling coalition also lost several key votes, putting its long-term future in doubt.

The media law would prevent companies from outside the European Economic Area from holding a controlling stake in Polish media companies.

That would force US group Discovery to sell its majority stake in TVN, one of&nbsp;Poland's biggest private TV networks whose news channel TVN24 is often highly critical of the government.

The ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party says the law is needed to stop hostile foreign powers from taking control of powerful broadcasters and is in line with rules in other European countries.

But critics say it opens a path for a state-controlled company to take control of TVN, following a takeover of the regional newspaper group Polska Press by state energy giant PKN Orlen.

TVN urged the Senate and the president to reject the law, labelling the vote "an unprecedented attack on freedom of expression and media independence".

The vote came during a stormy session of parliament that at one point was interrupted when MPs approved an opposition motion to suspend proceedings to delay the media law vote.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/covid-19-may-become-a-mostly-childhood-disease-in-few-years-study-404960">Also read |&nbsp;COVID-19 may become a mostly childhood disease in few years: Study&nbsp;</a>

In the end, the session resumed and the media law passed by 228 votes in favour and 216 against in the 460-seat lower house of parliament.

Thousands of people took to the streets in rallies across&nbsp;Poland&nbsp;on Tuesday over the draft law.

The United States is "deeply troubled" by the draft legislation, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, warning that it "threatens media freedom and could undermine&nbsp;Poland's strong investment climate".

'Fraudsters! Fraudsters!'

Earlier in the parliamentary session, the government lost four key votes, a day after a junior partner walked out of the governing coalition led by PiS.

In one of the votes, MPs voted by 229 to 227 to suspend the session to postpone a vote on the media law.

But speaker Elzbieta Witek, a PiS member, ordered another vote, which the government won by 230 to 225 to resume proceedings despite howls of outrage from the opposition.

"Fraudsters! Fraudsters!" the MPs chanted, accusing the government of buying support to win the vote.

"The parliamentary majority, glued together with the mud of corruption and blackmail, is crumbling before our eyes," tweeted former EU chief Donald Tusk, who heads up the opposition Civic Platform.

"It may go on for a while but it is no longer able to govern."

The lost votes do not mean that the government will collapse, as a formal vote of no confidence would be need for that to happen, and PiS could potentially continue as a minority government.

But commentators have said a minority government would be difficult to sustain long-term as it would have to rely on the far-right Confederation party, which is highly critical of the government.

The next elections are scheduled for 2023.

The United Right coalition, which is dominated by the PiS, has governed&nbsp;Poland&nbsp;since 2015.

It has been accused by the European Union of rolling back democratic freedoms but is still popular among many Poles, mainly for its social welfare reforms.

Polish MPs on Wednesday voted in favour of a new law that critics say will curb media freedom and hit ties with the United States, but the ruling coalition also lost several key votes, putting its long-term future in doubt.

Polish MPs on Wednesday voted in favour of a new law that critics say will curb media freedom and hit ties with the United States, but the ruling coalition also lost several key votes, putting its long-term future in doubt. The media law would prevent companies from outside the European Economic Area from holding a controlling stake in Polish media companies. That would force US group Discovery to sell its majority stake in TVN, one of Poland's biggest private TV networks whose news channel TVN24 is often highly critical of the government. The ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party says the law is needed to stop hostile foreign powers from taking control of powerful broadcasters and is in line with rules in other European countries. But critics say it opens a path for a state-controlled company to take control of TVN, following a takeover of the regional newspaper group Polska Press by state energy giant PKN Orlen. TVN urged the Senate and the president to reject the law, labelling the vote "an unprecedented attack on freedom of expression and media independence". The vote came during a stormy session of parliament that at one point was interrupted when MPs approved an opposition motion to suspend proceedings to delay the media law vote. Also read | COVID-19 may become a mostly childhood disease in few years: Study In the end, the session resumed and the media law passed by 228 votes in favour and 216 against in the 460-seat lower house of parliament. Thousands of people took to the streets in rallies across Poland on Tuesday over the draft law. The United States is "deeply troubled" by the draft legislation, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, warning that it "threatens media freedom and could undermine Poland's strong investment climate". 'Fraudsters! Fraudsters!' Earlier in the parliamentary session, the government lost four key votes, a day after a junior partner walked out of the governing coalition led by PiS. In one of the votes, MPs voted by 229 to 227 to suspend the session to postpone a vote on the media law. But speaker Elzbieta Witek, a PiS member, ordered another vote, which the government won by 230 to 225 to resume proceedings despite howls of outrage from the opposition. "Fraudsters! Fraudsters!" the MPs chanted, accusing the government of buying support to win the vote. "The parliamentary majority, glued together with the mud of corruption and blackmail, is crumbling before our eyes," tweeted former EU chief Donald Tusk, who heads up the opposition Civic Platform. "It may go on for a while but it is no longer able to govern." The lost votes do not mean that the government will collapse, as a formal vote of no confidence would be need for that to happen, and PiS could potentially continue as a minority government. But commentators have said a minority government would be difficult to sustain long-term as it would have to rely on the far-right Confederation party, which is highly critical of the government. The next elections are scheduled for 2023. The United Right coalition, which is dominated by the PiS, has governed Poland since 2015. It has been accused by the European Union of rolling back democratic freedoms but is still popular among many Poles, mainly for its social welfare reforms.

Polish MPs approve controversial media law but government wobbles

Former president Jacob Zuma addressed countrymen&nbsp;on Sunday evening from his Nkandla home on matters related to the Constitutional Court judgment against him.&nbsp;

“No honest person can accuse me of being an enemy of the rule of law, consistent with this point, I am pursuing peaceful and constitutional methods to deal with this situation by approaching the courts, again," Zuma said adding, “All I am asking is fairness and consistency.”&nbsp;

The former President said he is not asking for sympathy but justice.&nbsp;

Zuma&nbsp;added, “I acknowledge and appreciate the Constitutional Court for its recent announcement where it indicated on the 12th of July,&nbsp;it will give me audience.”&nbsp;

Last week,&nbsp;the apex court sentenced Zuma to 15-month imprisonment after he was found guilty of contempt of court for failing to appear before the Zondo Commission.&nbsp;&nbsp;

On Friday, Zuma and his legal team filed an urgent application to the Constitutional Court to rescind and reconsider its decision and take into account his unstable health and Constitutional Court agreed to hear Zuma’s rescission application.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The former President was&nbsp;supposed&nbsp;to&nbsp;hand himself over to the police on Sunday before midnight.&nbsp;&nbsp;

In his address&nbsp;on&nbsp;Sunday evening, the former President reiterated, "Contrary to the mainstream narrative and propaganda against me, I've never refused not to appear before the State Capture Commission." He said if Zondo had recused himself and allowed Zuma's submission to&nbsp;'be made to somebody neutral'&nbsp;the nation would have heard Zuma's version on&nbsp;'all the unsubstantiated allegations against me’.&nbsp;

“My age and health condition and any other mitigating circumstances were not considered when the imprisonment was decided,” he said.&nbsp;&nbsp;

“Even murderers, serial killers, bank&nbsp;robbers&nbsp;and child molesters are granted an opportunity to give mitigation after conviction but before sentencing. In my case,&nbsp;a strange procedure was adopted by asking me for mitigation before I was found guilty of any crime,” he said,&nbsp;in his address.&nbsp;&nbsp;

"Sending me to jail during the height of a pandemic at my age is the same as sentencing me to death," Zuma said.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Zuma's legal team is expected to argue in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Tuesday that his sentence must be stayed pending the outcome of his rescission application.&nbsp;

Former president Jacob Zuma addressed countrymen on Sunday evening from his Nkandla home on matters related to the Constitutional Court judgment against him. “No honest person can accuse me of being an enemy of the rule of law, consistent with this point, I am pursuing peaceful and constitutional methods to deal with this situation by approaching the courts, again," Zuma said adding, “All I am asking is fairness and consistency.

Former president Jacob Zuma addressed countrymen on Sunday evening from his Nkandla home on matters related to the Constitutional Court judgment against him. “No honest person can accuse me of being an enemy of the rule of law, consistent with this point, I am pursuing peaceful and constitutional methods to deal with this situation by approaching the courts, again," Zuma said adding, “All I am asking is fairness and consistency.” The former President said he is not asking for sympathy but justice. Zuma added, “I acknowledge and appreciate the Constitutional Court for its recent announcement where it indicated on the 12th of July, it will give me audience.” Last week, the apex court sentenced Zuma to 15-month imprisonment after he was found guilty of contempt of court for failing to appear before the Zondo Commission. On Friday, Zuma and his legal team filed an urgent application to the Constitutional Court to rescind and reconsider its decision and take into account his unstable health and Constitutional Court agreed to hear Zuma’s rescission application. The former President was supposed to hand himself over to the police on Sunday before midnight. In his address on Sunday evening, the former President reiterated, "Contrary to the mainstream narrative and propaganda against me, I've never refused not to appear before the State Capture Commission." He said if Zondo had recused himself and allowed Zuma's submission to 'be made to somebody neutral' the nation would have heard Zuma's version on 'all the unsubstantiated allegations against me’. “My age and health condition and any other mitigating circumstances were not considered when the imprisonment was decided,” he said. “Even murderers, serial killers, bank robbers and child molesters are granted an opportunity to give mitigation after conviction but before sentencing. In my case, a strange procedure was adopted by asking me for mitigation before I was found guilty of any crime,” he said, in his address. "Sending me to jail during the height of a pandemic at my age is the same as sentencing me to death," Zuma said. Zuma's legal team is expected to argue in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Tuesday that his sentence must be stayed pending the outcome of his rescission application.

Zuma: No honest person can accuse me of being an enemy of rule of law 

Hong Kong authorities have used a new national security law to target dissent and justify 'censorship, harassment, arrests and prosecutions that violate human rights', Amnesty International said on Wednesday, a year after the law was implemented. 
 
Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law in June last year that sets out punishment for anything it deems as subversion, secession, colluding with foreign forces and terrorism with up to life in prison, setting the city on a more authoritarian path. 
 
Authorities have said the law would affect an 'extremely small minority' of people and that it had restored stability after months of often-violent protests in 2019. They have said rights and freedoms in the former British colony remain protected but they are not absolute. 
 
Most high-profile democratic politicians and activists have been arrested under the new law or for protest-related charges, or are in self-exile.

"In one year, the National Security Law has put Hong Kong on a rapid path to becoming a police state and created a human rights emergency for the people living there," said Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific Regional Director Yamini Mishra. 
 
"Ultimately, this sweeping and repressive legislation threatens to make the city a human rights wasteland increasingly resembling mainland China." 
 
The Hong Kong government did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 
 
Authorities have said all arrests have been lawful and no one was above the law, regardless of their occupation. 
 
In its 47-page report, the international human rights group cited analysis of court judgements, court hearing notes and interviews with activists, concluding the legislation has been used 'to carry out a wide range of human rights violations'. 
 
Hong Kong returned to Chinese rule in 1997 with the promise of a high degree of autonomy from Beijing and that wide-ranging rights and freedoms would be protected for at least 50 years. 
 
Mishra said the law "has infected every part of Hong Kong society and fomented a climate of fear that forces residents to think twice about what they say, what they tweet and how they live their lives". 
 
More than 100 people were arrested and more than 60 charged in the first year under the security law, according to a tally by Reuters. 
 
"Hong Kong's NSL has been used as a false pretext to curb dissent," the rights group said, referring to the security law. 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

Hong Kong authorities have used a new national security law to target dissent and justify 'censorship, harassment, arrests and prosecutions that violate human rights', Amnesty International said on Wednesday, a year after the law was implemented.

Hong Kong authorities have used a new national security law to target dissent and justify 'censorship, harassment, arrests and prosecutions that violate human rights', Amnesty International said on Wednesday, a year after the law was implemented. Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law in June last year that sets out punishment for anything it deems as subversion, secession, colluding with foreign forces and terrorism with up to life in prison, setting the city on a more authoritarian path. Authorities have said the law would affect an 'extremely small minority' of people and that it had restored stability after months of often-violent protests in 2019. They have said rights and freedoms in the former British colony remain protected but they are not absolute. Most high-profile democratic politicians and activists have been arrested under the new law or for protest-related charges, or are in self-exile. "In one year, the National Security Law has put Hong Kong on a rapid path to becoming a police state and created a human rights emergency for the people living there," said Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific Regional Director Yamini Mishra. "Ultimately, this sweeping and repressive legislation threatens to make the city a human rights wasteland increasingly resembling mainland China." The Hong Kong government did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Authorities have said all arrests have been lawful and no one was above the law, regardless of their occupation. In its 47-page report, the international human rights group cited analysis of court judgements, court hearing notes and interviews with activists, concluding the legislation has been used 'to carry out a wide range of human rights violations'. Hong Kong returned to Chinese rule in 1997 with the promise of a high degree of autonomy from Beijing and that wide-ranging rights and freedoms would be protected for at least 50 years. Mishra said the law "has infected every part of Hong Kong society and fomented a climate of fear that forces residents to think twice about what they say, what they tweet and how they live their lives". More than 100 people were arrested and more than 60 charged in the first year under the security law, according to a tally by Reuters. "Hong Kong's NSL has been used as a false pretext to curb dissent," the rights group said, referring to the security law. (With inputs from agencies)

Hong Kong security law is 'a human rights emergency': Amnesty

EU leaders holding a summit Thursday attacked&nbsp;Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban over a new law in his country banning LGBTQ content in schools, which they view as homophobic and contrary to EU values.

Orban was virtually isolated as most of his 26 counterparts rounded on him in what one EU official described as an "in-depth and at times even emotional debate".

The most strident was Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte -- who, on his way into the summit, had told journalists "for me,&nbsp;Hungary&nbsp;has no place in the EU anymore".

Facing Orban inside, Rutte said: "You have passed the line. This time it is too much,"&nbsp;according to another EU official in the room.

Others joined in the criticism, delivering a scathing broadside to&nbsp;Hungary's nationalist leader, who has frequently clashed with Brussels and with EU counterparts over his socially conservative policies and perceived undercutting of democratic norms.

"Being homosexual is not a choice. Being homophobic is a choice. We cannot accept legislation that is legitimising such a behaviour," Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo was said to have told Orban.

"You've crossed a red line," Luxembourg's Prime Minister Xavier Bettel -- the only openly gay leader at the summit -- reportedly said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/deaths-outnumber-births-in-britain-for-the-first-time-since-1976-393790">Also Read |&nbsp;Deaths outnumber births in Britain for the first time since 1976</a>

The extraordinary attacks overshadowed the first day of the two-day summit, whose agenda also covered fraught ties with Russia and Turkey, and the bloc's handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

'Not a diplomatic discussion'

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said early Friday, after the lengthy first day came to an end, that "it was certainly a controversial, but very, very frank discussion".

She said "we all made it very clear here what fundamental values we are pursuing" and the European Commission "will now continue to deal with the Hungarian law".&nbsp;

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said before the summit that her executive would challenge the basis of the law.

De Croo told journalists after leaving the summit that the haranguing of Orban was unprecedented at such gatherings.

"This was not a diplomatic discussion, this was quite confrontational," he said.

He added that only Poland and Slovenia -- the latter "a little bit" -- had offered&nbsp;Hungary&nbsp;support.&nbsp;

Orban however was characteristically defiant in the room.

As he headed into the summit on Thursday he insisted to journalists that his fellow leaders had misunderstood the legislation.

"This is not against homosexuality... It's about the right of the kids and the parents," he said.

"It's about how a child learns about sexuality... and decisions about that are exclusively the business of parents," he said.

'Grave concerns'

Even before the summit, most EU countries -- 17 of them, including heavyweights Germany, France, Italy and Spain -- had made their criticism clear.

They signed a joint declaration raising "grave concerns" over the Hungarian law and a follow-up letter deploring any threats to "the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation".

UN chief Antonio Guterres, who attended the opening of the summit, also said of the Hungarian law: "No discrimination is acceptable in any circumstances, and any discrimination against LGBTIQ+ people is totally unacceptable in our modern societies."

Hungary's law titled the "Anti-Paedophilia Act", was originally aimed at toughening punishments for child abuse.

But its final draft contains amendments that critics say conflate paedophilia with homosexuality.&nbsp;

The law bans the "promotion of homosexuality"&nbsp;to under-18s, and says that only government-approved instructors are allowed to teach sex education in schools. &nbsp;

Firms cannot run ads showing support for the LGBTQ community if they are seen as targeting minors, according to the law.&nbsp;

EU leaders holding a summit Thursday attacked Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban over a new law in his country banning LGBTQ content in schools, which they view as homophobic and contrary to EU values.

EU leaders holding a summit Thursday attacked Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban over a new law in his country banning LGBTQ content in schools, which they view as homophobic and contrary to EU values. Orban was virtually isolated as most of his 26 counterparts rounded on him in what one EU official described as an "in-depth and at times even emotional debate". The most strident was Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte -- who, on his way into the summit, had told journalists "for me, Hungary has no place in the EU anymore". Facing Orban inside, Rutte said: "You have passed the line. This time it is too much," according to another EU official in the room. Others joined in the criticism, delivering a scathing broadside to Hungary's nationalist leader, who has frequently clashed with Brussels and with EU counterparts over his socially conservative policies and perceived undercutting of democratic norms. "Being homosexual is not a choice. Being homophobic is a choice. We cannot accept legislation that is legitimising such a behaviour," Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo was said to have told Orban. "You've crossed a red line," Luxembourg's Prime Minister Xavier Bettel -- the only openly gay leader at the summit -- reportedly said. Also Read | Deaths outnumber births in Britain for the first time since 1976 The extraordinary attacks overshadowed the first day of the two-day summit, whose agenda also covered fraught ties with Russia and Turkey, and the bloc's handling of the coronavirus pandemic. 'Not a diplomatic discussion' German Chancellor Angela Merkel said early Friday, after the lengthy first day came to an end, that "it was certainly a controversial, but very, very frank discussion". She said "we all made it very clear here what fundamental values we are pursuing" and the European Commission "will now continue to deal with the Hungarian law". Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said before the summit that her executive would challenge the basis of the law. De Croo told journalists after leaving the summit that the haranguing of Orban was unprecedented at such gatherings. "This was not a diplomatic discussion, this was quite confrontational," he said. He added that only Poland and Slovenia -- the latter "a little bit" -- had offered Hungary support. Orban however was characteristically defiant in the room. As he headed into the summit on Thursday he insisted to journalists that his fellow leaders had misunderstood the legislation. "This is not against homosexuality... It's about the right of the kids and the parents," he said. "It's about how a child learns about sexuality... and decisions about that are exclusively the business of parents," he said. 'Grave concerns' Even before the summit, most EU countries -- 17 of them, including heavyweights Germany, France, Italy and Spain -- had made their criticism clear. They signed a joint declaration raising "grave concerns" over the Hungarian law and a follow-up letter deploring any threats to "the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation". UN chief Antonio Guterres, who attended the opening of the summit, also said of the Hungarian law: "No discrimination is acceptable in any circumstances, and any discrimination against LGBTIQ+ people is totally unacceptable in our modern societies." Hungary's law titled the "Anti-Paedophilia Act", was originally aimed at toughening punishments for child abuse. But its final draft contains amendments that critics say conflate paedophilia with homosexuality. The law bans the "promotion of homosexuality" to under-18s, and says that only government-approved instructors are allowed to teach sex education in schools. Firms cannot run ads showing support for the LGBTQ community if they are seen as targeting minors, according to the law.

EU leaders confront Hungary PM over LGBTQ law

New&nbsp;Zealand&nbsp;said on Friday that it plans to strengthen its hate speech laws, and increase penalties for inciting hatred and discrimination, in response to the attack by a white supremacist in Christchurch two years ago that killed 51 Muslims.

The move comes after a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch attack on March 15, 2019, recommended changes to hate speech and hate crime laws, which it said were weak deterrents for people targeting religious and other minority groups with hate.

New&nbsp;Zealand's hate speech laws have resulted in just one prosecution and two civil claims so far, the Royal Commission had noted.

"Protecting our right to freedom of expression while balancing that right with protections against ‘hate speech’ is something that requires careful consideration and a wide range of input,” Justice Minister Kris Faafoi said at a press conference.

The government proposed&nbsp;new&nbsp;criminal offences for hate speech that it said would be clearer and more effective.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-delta-variant-is-infecting-vaccinated-people-says-israel-393811">Also Read |&nbsp;COVID-19: Delta variant is infecting vaccinated people, says Israel</a>

Under the proposal a person who "intentionally stirs up, maintains or normalises hatred" would break the law if they did so by being threatening, abusive or insulting, including by inciting violence, the government said.

Punishment for such offences would be increased to a maximum of three years in prison or a fine of up to NZ$50,000. Currently, the punishment is up to NZ$7,000 or three months in jail.

It also proposed provisions that would protect trans, gender diverse and intersex people from discrimination. Current laws only target speech that "excite hostility" against a person or group on the grounds of their colour, race or ethnicity.

The proposals are now open for public consultation.

Australian Brenton Tarrant killed 51 people and injured dozens when he opened fire on Muslim worshippers in two mosques in Christchurch, shortly after releasing a racist manifesto online, and streamed the shootings live on Facebook.

With support across the political spectrum,&nbsp;New&nbsp;Zealand&nbsp;swiftly banned the sale of the high-capacity semi-automatic weapons Tarrant used. But changes to hate speech laws have been more contentious as some political parties said it would impede free speech.

"The government’s proposed hate speech laws are a huge win for cancel culture and will create an even more divided society,”&nbsp;New&nbsp;Zealand's smaller ACT Party leader David Seymour said in a statement.

New Zealand said on Friday that it plans to strengthen its hate speech laws, and increase penalties for inciting hatred and discrimination, in response to the attack by a white supremacist in Christchurch two years ago that killed 51 Muslims.

New Zealand said on Friday that it plans to strengthen its hate speech laws, and increase penalties for inciting hatred and discrimination, in response to the attack by a white supremacist in Christchurch two years ago that killed 51 Muslims. The move comes after a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch attack on March 15, 2019, recommended changes to hate speech and hate crime laws, which it said were weak deterrents for people targeting religious and other minority groups with hate. New Zealand's hate speech laws have resulted in just one prosecution and two civil claims so far, the Royal Commission had noted. "Protecting our right to freedom of expression while balancing that right with protections against ‘hate speech’ is something that requires careful consideration and a wide range of input,” Justice Minister Kris Faafoi said at a press conference. The government proposed new criminal offences for hate speech that it said would be clearer and more effective. Also Read | COVID-19: Delta variant is infecting vaccinated people, says Israel Under the proposal a person who "intentionally stirs up, maintains or normalises hatred" would break the law if they did so by being threatening, abusive or insulting, including by inciting violence, the government said. Punishment for such offences would be increased to a maximum of three years in prison or a fine of up to NZ$50,000. Currently, the punishment is up to NZ$7,000 or three months in jail. It also proposed provisions that would protect trans, gender diverse and intersex people from discrimination. Current laws only target speech that "excite hostility" against a person or group on the grounds of their colour, race or ethnicity. The proposals are now open for public consultation. Australian Brenton Tarrant killed 51 people and injured dozens when he opened fire on Muslim worshippers in two mosques in Christchurch, shortly after releasing a racist manifesto online, and streamed the shootings live on Facebook. With support across the political spectrum, New Zealand swiftly banned the sale of the high-capacity semi-automatic weapons Tarrant used. But changes to hate speech laws have been more contentious as some political parties said it would impede free speech. "The government’s proposed hate speech laws are a huge win for cancel culture and will create an even more divided society,” New Zealand's smaller ACT Party leader David Seymour said in a statement.

New Zealand plans stronger hate speech laws in response to Christchurch attack

The first person charged under the national security law in Hong Kong pleaded not guilty as his trial began on Wednesday, almost a year after he was accused of driving his motorbike into officers at a rally while carrying a flag with a protest slogan. 
 
The case of Tong Ying-kit is seen as a departure from Hong Kong's common law traditions, as he was denied bail and a jury, and a test of the government's claim that the slogan 'Liberate Hong Kong! Revolution of our times' is secessionist. 
 
Tong, 24, was arrested on July 1, 2020, hours after the enactment of the national security law, which punishes what China deems as subversion, secessionism, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces with up to life in prison. 
 
Tong faces charges of terrorism and inciting secession, as well as an alternative charge of dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm, which can lead to up to seven years in prison. He pleaded not guilty to all charges. 
 
Tong has been denied bail. Hong Kong's common law has traditionally allowed defendants to seek release unless prosecutors can show lawful grounds for their detention. Under the new law, the burden is now placed on the defendant to prove they will not break the law if released on bail. 
 
On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to deny Tong a trial by jury, citing a threat to the personal safety of jurors and their family members. 
 
His trial will be held by a panel of three judges instead: Esther Toh, Anthea Pang and Wilson Chan. 
 
Hong Kong's Judiciary describes trial by jury as one of the most important features of the city's legal system, a common law tradition designed to offer defendants additional protection against the possibility of authorities overreaching their power. 
 
Article 46 of the security law, drafted by Beijing, where courts are controlled by the Communist Party and conviction rates are close to 100%, states three instances in which juries can be scrapped: protecting state secrets, cases involving foreign forces and protecting jurors' safety. 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

The first person charged under the national security law in Hong Kong pleaded not guilty as his trial began on Wednesday, almost a year after he was accused of driving his motorbike into officers at a rally while carrying a flag with a protest slogan.

The first person charged under the national security law in Hong Kong pleaded not guilty as his trial began on Wednesday, almost a year after he was accused of driving his motorbike into officers at a rally while carrying a flag with a protest slogan. The case of Tong Ying-kit is seen as a departure from Hong Kong's common law traditions, as he was denied bail and a jury, and a test of the government's claim that the slogan 'Liberate Hong Kong! Revolution of our times' is secessionist. Tong, 24, was arrested on July 1, 2020, hours after the enactment of the national security law, which punishes what China deems as subversion, secessionism, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces with up to life in prison. Tong faces charges of terrorism and inciting secession, as well as an alternative charge of dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm, which can lead to up to seven years in prison. He pleaded not guilty to all charges. Tong has been denied bail. Hong Kong's common law has traditionally allowed defendants to seek release unless prosecutors can show lawful grounds for their detention. Under the new law, the burden is now placed on the defendant to prove they will not break the law if released on bail. On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to deny Tong a trial by jury, citing a threat to the personal safety of jurors and their family members. His trial will be held by a panel of three judges instead: Esther Toh, Anthea Pang and Wilson Chan. Hong Kong's Judiciary describes trial by jury as one of the most important features of the city's legal system, a common law tradition designed to offer defendants additional protection against the possibility of authorities overreaching their power. Article 46 of the security law, drafted by Beijing, where courts are controlled by the Communist Party and conviction rates are close to 100%, states three instances in which juries can be scrapped: protecting state secrets, cases involving foreign forces and protecting jurors' safety. (With inputs from agencies)

First person charged under Hong Kong's national security law pleads not guilty

A protest erupted in Muzaffarabad city in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) against a "discriminatory and suppressive" legislation, which regularise an unspecified number of ad hoc, temporary and contractual employees.

Protestors hit the road and accused the government of nepotism, corruption, and working to further oppress the people of PoK.

The government in the region had earlier come up with the law addressing the years-long demands of regularisation of the contractual workers' jobs but the protestors said that only those who had allegiance or any other form of connection with the ruling party got the job.

The legislation by the occupied region "legislative assembly" was brought to regularise an unspecified number of ad hoc, temporary and contractual employees in the name of "humanity".

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indian-government-dismisses-reports-of-army-strikes-in-pok-344156">Also Read |&nbsp;Indian government dismisses reports of Army strikes in PoK</a>

A petition has also been filed in the High Court of the region challenging the law.

The petitioners, who included five youth and two prominent civil society activists, said that the law was "inconsistent and in contravention" with the occupied region's 'Constitution' and had been passed in derogation of the UN Charter of Human Rights, Dawn reported.

Youth in Pakistan occupied Kashmir has been denied employment systematically over the years.

Even Pakistan's National Testing Service, which administers academic performance evaluation tests in Pakistan doesn't consider the youth of the region.

The protesters have vowed to continue their demonstrations until the law is rolled back by the government or is annulled by the court.

The unemployment rate in Pakistan occupied Kashmir is amongst the worst among the regions controlled by Islamabad.

A protest erupted in Muzaffarabad city in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) against a "discriminatory and suppressive" legislation, which regularise an unspecified number of ad hoc, temporary and contractual employees.

A protest erupted in Muzaffarabad city in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) against a "discriminatory and suppressive" legislation, which regularise an unspecified number of ad hoc, temporary and contractual employees. Protestors hit the road and accused the government of nepotism, corruption, and working to further oppress the people of PoK. The government in the region had earlier come up with the law addressing the years-long demands of regularisation of the contractual workers' jobs but the protestors said that only those who had allegiance or any other form of connection with the ruling party got the job. The legislation by the occupied region "legislative assembly" was brought to regularise an unspecified number of ad hoc, temporary and contractual employees in the name of "humanity". Also Read | Indian government dismisses reports of Army strikes in PoK A petition has also been filed in the High Court of the region challenging the law. The petitioners, who included five youth and two prominent civil society activists, said that the law was "inconsistent and in contravention" with the occupied region's 'Constitution' and had been passed in derogation of the UN Charter of Human Rights, Dawn reported. Youth in Pakistan occupied Kashmir has been denied employment systematically over the years. Even Pakistan's National Testing Service, which administers academic performance evaluation tests in Pakistan doesn't consider the youth of the region. The protesters have vowed to continue their demonstrations until the law is rolled back by the government or is annulled by the court. The unemployment rate in Pakistan occupied Kashmir is amongst the worst among the regions controlled by Islamabad.

Protest in PoK against 'discriminatory, exclusionary' job regularisation law

South Korea is trying to increase its future working population by making it easier for children of foreign residents to become citizens, but its plans have run into trouble in the face of rising anti-China sentiment. 
 
A measure proposed by the Ministry of Justice, first made public in April, called for easing the pathway to citizenship for children born to long-term foreign residents, by simply notifying the ministry. 
 
A presidential petition opposing the revision has gathered over 300,000 signatures. The chatroom of an online hearing held to discuss the proposal in May was overwhelmed with expletive-laced complaints by the tens of thousands of viewers. 
 
The justice ministry has said it is still taking into account public opinion and the advice of experts before submitting the proposal to the Ministry of Government Legislation. 
 
"Given the strong backlash, I would say the ministry has already lost much of the momentum to push ahead with the proposal," said Jang Yun-mi, an attorney, who specialises in issues related to children. 
 
The controversy highlights the challenges South Korea faces as it seeks to ensure a robust future population in the face of declining birthrates and rapidly aging workers, and the potential policy implications of increasingly negative views of China, its biggest trading partner. 
 
Data from last year suggests only about 3,930 people would be eligible under the rule change, but the fact that 3,725 of them were of Chinese heritage prompted much of the criticism. 
 
South Korean views have been coloured by what some see as economic bullying by Beijing, its poor handling of the COVID-19 crisis, and the assertion by some Chinese that dearly held aspects of Korean food and culture, such as kimchi and the traditional hanbok dress, have roots in China. 
 
Among immigrant communities, the proposed measures are not seen as worth the backlash, said Kim Yong-phil, editor-in-chief of E Korea World, a local newspaper for Chinese-Koreans. 
 
"Anti-Chinese people could use this issue as a pretext to attack Chinese-Koreans," he said.

(With inputs from agencies)

South Korea is trying to increase its future working population by making it easier for children of foreign residents to become citizens, but its plans have run into trouble in the face of rising anti-China sentiment.

South Korea is trying to increase its future working population by making it easier for children of foreign residents to become citizens, but its plans have run into trouble in the face of rising anti-China sentiment. A measure proposed by the Ministry of Justice, first made public in April, called for easing the pathway to citizenship for children born to long-term foreign residents, by simply notifying the ministry. A presidential petition opposing the revision has gathered over 300,000 signatures. The chatroom of an online hearing held to discuss the proposal in May was overwhelmed with expletive-laced complaints by the tens of thousands of viewers. The justice ministry has said it is still taking into account public opinion and the advice of experts before submitting the proposal to the Ministry of Government Legislation. "Given the strong backlash, I would say the ministry has already lost much of the momentum to push ahead with the proposal," said Jang Yun-mi, an attorney, who specialises in issues related to children. The controversy highlights the challenges South Korea faces as it seeks to ensure a robust future population in the face of declining birthrates and rapidly aging workers, and the potential policy implications of increasingly negative views of China, its biggest trading partner. Data from last year suggests only about 3,930 people would be eligible under the rule change, but the fact that 3,725 of them were of Chinese heritage prompted much of the criticism. South Korean views have been coloured by what some see as economic bullying by Beijing, its poor handling of the COVID-19 crisis, and the assertion by some Chinese that dearly held aspects of Korean food and culture, such as kimchi and the traditional hanbok dress, have roots in China. Among immigrant communities, the proposed measures are not seen as worth the backlash, said Kim Yong-phil, editor-in-chief of E Korea World, a local newspaper for Chinese-Koreans. "Anti-Chinese people could use this issue as a pretext to attack Chinese-Koreans," he said. (With inputs from agencies)

Proposed changes to S Korea citizenship law face anti-China headwinds

China on Thursday passed a law which may become its weapon in countering foreign sanctions in future. China is currently facing pressure from the United States and the European Union over trade, technology, Hong Kong and Xinjiang.

As per the law Individuals or entities involved in making or implementing discriminatory measures against Chinese citizens or entities could be put on an anti-sanctions list by a "relevant department" in the Chinese government.

Those who are in the list may be denied entry into China or be expelled from China. Their assets within China may be seized or frozen. They could be restricted from doing business with entities or people within China.

The new law is China's most wide-ranging legal tool which it can use to retaliate against foreign sanctions. The law is intended to give China's retaliatory measures more legitimacy and predictability.

Foreign companies, however, worry about the dampening impact it might have on foreign investment.

China's top legislature, the National People's Congress (NPC) standing committee passed the law on Thursday, according to state television CCTV.

All 14 vice-chairpersons of the committee are under U.S. sanctions for passing the National Security Law last year that critics say has crippled political freedoms in Hong Kong. Beijing says it was needed to restore stability in the city.

President Xi Jinping called last November for the ruling Communist Party to use legal means to defend China's sovereignty, security and interests against foreign parties.

The NPC said in its annual work report in March that it wants to "upgrade our legal toolbox" to address the risks from foreign sanctions and interference.&nbsp;

In January, the commerce ministry announced mechanisms to assess if foreign restrictions on Chinese trade and business activities were justified, and for Chinese individuals or companies to sue for compensation in a Chinese court.

The United States and its allies have increasingly sanctioned Chinese officials to express concern about how China treats its Muslim Uyghur minority in Xinjiang and pro-democracy activities in Hong Kong, triggering counter-sanctions by China on U.S. and EU politicians and officials.

Washington has also targeted Chinese companies such as Huawei and ZTE for violating U.S. sanctions on Iran or North Korea, an act China called "long-arm jurisdiction".

(With inputs from agencies)

China on Thursday passed a law which may become its weapon in countering foreign sanctions in future. China is currently facing pressure from the United States and the European Union over trade, technology, Hong Kong and Xinjiang.

China on Thursday passed a law which may become its weapon in countering foreign sanctions in future. China is currently facing pressure from the United States and the European Union over trade, technology, Hong Kong and Xinjiang. As per the law Individuals or entities involved in making or implementing discriminatory measures against Chinese citizens or entities could be put on an anti-sanctions list by a "relevant department" in the Chinese government. Those who are in the list may be denied entry into China or be expelled from China. Their assets within China may be seized or frozen. They could be restricted from doing business with entities or people within China. The new law is China's most wide-ranging legal tool which it can use to retaliate against foreign sanctions. The law is intended to give China's retaliatory measures more legitimacy and predictability. Foreign companies, however, worry about the dampening impact it might have on foreign investment. China's top legislature, the National People's Congress (NPC) standing committee passed the law on Thursday, according to state television CCTV. All 14 vice-chairpersons of the committee are under U.S. sanctions for passing the National Security Law last year that critics say has crippled political freedoms in Hong Kong. Beijing says it was needed to restore stability in the city. President Xi Jinping called last November for the ruling Communist Party to use legal means to defend China's sovereignty, security and interests against foreign parties. The NPC said in its annual work report in March that it wants to "upgrade our legal toolbox" to address the risks from foreign sanctions and interference. In January, the commerce ministry announced mechanisms to assess if foreign restrictions on Chinese trade and business activities were justified, and for Chinese individuals or companies to sue for compensation in a Chinese court. The United States and its allies have increasingly sanctioned Chinese officials to express concern about how China treats its Muslim Uyghur minority in Xinjiang and pro-democracy activities in Hong Kong, triggering counter-sanctions by China on U.S. and EU politicians and officials. Washington has also targeted Chinese companies such as Huawei and ZTE for violating U.S. sanctions on Iran or North Korea, an act China called "long-arm jurisdiction". (With inputs from agencies)

China passes law to tackle international sanctions

It was the final day of classes at Stanford Law School, May 27, when Nicholas Wallace said he was blindsided by a message from one of the deans informing him that his graduation was in jeopardy for potential misconduct.

His offense: sending an email flyer to fellow law students in January that he pretended was from the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative and libertarian group with a chapter at the law school.

The satirical flyer promoted a discussion about the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, featuring Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton. The title of the mock event: "The Originalist Case for Inciting Insurrection."

The chapter’s leaders were not amused. They filed a complaint on March 27 with the university, which said in a message to Wallace that it wasn’t until May 22 that the complainants had asked the administration to pursue the matter.

"I was astounded," Wallace, 32, said in an interview Wednesday. "I couldn’t believe that without any more than this letter of concern they placed my graduation and everything I’ve worked for for the last three years, they’ve placed that under threat."

Wallace’s predicament drew national attention from both free speech groups and conservatives. It served as another example of the intense debate over political speech on college campuses in America.

In response to questions on Wednesday, a spokesman for Stanford University said in an email that Wallace would be allowed to graduate after all, after administrators consulted with the university’s legal counsel, who concluded the matter involved issues of protected speech.

"In cases where the complaint is filed in proximity to graduation, our normal procedure includes placing a graduation diploma hold on the respondent," said the spokesman, E.J. Miranda. "The complaint was resolved as expeditiously as possible, and the respondent and complainant have been informed that case law supports that the email is protected speech."

Miranda said that the university would also review its procedures for placing holds on student diplomas in judicial cases close to graduation.

The president of the campus chapter of the Federalist Society did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday night.

Hawley, who received his undergraduate degree from Stanford University, was widely criticized for objecting to the certification of the presidential election results. Paxton has drawn scrutiny for his appearance at a rally in support of Donald Trump in Washington on the day of the siege.

Representatives for Hawley and Paxton did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday night.

Grabbing attention itself was Wallace’s satirical flyer, which he said he had emailed to a Listserv forum for law school students on Jan. 25, nearly three weeks after the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The flyer said that the event was being presented by the Federalist Society on January 6.

"Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event," the flyer said, offering Grubhub coupons to the first 30 students who RSVP’d for the fictitious program. "Although widely believed to conflict in every way with the rule of law, violent insurrection can be an effective approach to upholding the principle of limited government."

Two days after the satirical flyer was sent by Wallace, it was the focus of a fact check article by USA Today, which reported that the email was a form of satire.

In a complaint to the university, unidentified officers of the Federalist Society chapter said that Wallace’s email had caused significant harm and had led other organizations to cancel their events with the group.

"Wallace defamed the student group, its officers, Sen. Josh Hawley, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton," the complaint said. "Wallace, impersonating the Stanford Federalist Society, wrote on the flyer that ‘Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event,’ insinuating that the student group was encouraging and hosting a riot. He also wrote that Attorney General Paxton advocates for ‘overturn(ing) the results of a free and fair election’ by ‘calling on a violent mob to storm the Capitol.’ And he wrote that Sen. Hawley believes that violent insurrections are justified."

The names of the complainants were redacted from the complaint, which was posted online on Monday by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group working to defend free speech on college campuses. Wallace had sought the group’s help.

"By instituting an investigation and placing a hold on Wallace’s degree days before his graduation, Stanford betrays its legal and moral commitments to respect its students’ expressive rights," the group said in a letter on Tuesday to one of the law school’s deans.

The flap drew the notice of Slate magazine. The writer of that article, Mark Joseph Stern, was the featured speaker in a conversation about the Federalist Society that Wallace said he had organized about a month after he sent the satirical email.

Wallace’s cause was also taken up by Laurence H. Tribe, a constitutional law professor emeritus at Harvard University.

"Mocking an ideologically-based group can’t be made a basis for denying academic privileges in any open society worthy of respect," Tribe wrote on Twitter. "If accurate, this report shows Stanford Law School to be unworthy of treatment as an academic institution."

George Conway, one of the founders of the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, also rallied behind Wallace.

"As someone who been involved with the Federalist Society for over 35 years, I agree that this is totally ridiculous,"&nbsp;Conway said on Twitter, responding to Tribe.

Wallace, who is from Ann Arbor, Michigan, and received his undergraduate degree from the University of Washington in Seattle, said that he is supposed to take the bar exam this summer in his home state and then start a job with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Washington, D.C.

He said that he would not have been able to take the bar exam without his law school diploma, which he will receive on June 12.

It was the final day of classes at Stanford Law School, May 27, when Nicholas Wallace said he was blindsided by a message from one of the deans informing him that his graduation was in jeopardy for potential misconduct.

It was the final day of classes at Stanford Law School, May 27, when Nicholas Wallace said he was blindsided by a message from one of the deans informing him that his graduation was in jeopardy for potential misconduct. His offense: sending an email flyer to fellow law students in January that he pretended was from the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative and libertarian group with a chapter at the law school. The satirical flyer promoted a discussion about the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, featuring Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton. The title of the mock event: "The Originalist Case for Inciting Insurrection." The chapter’s leaders were not amused. They filed a complaint on March 27 with the university, which said in a message to Wallace that it wasn’t until May 22 that the complainants had asked the administration to pursue the matter. "I was astounded," Wallace, 32, said in an interview Wednesday. "I couldn’t believe that without any more than this letter of concern they placed my graduation and everything I’ve worked for for the last three years, they’ve placed that under threat." Wallace’s predicament drew national attention from both free speech groups and conservatives. It served as another example of the intense debate over political speech on college campuses in America. In response to questions on Wednesday, a spokesman for Stanford University said in an email that Wallace would be allowed to graduate after all, after administrators consulted with the university’s legal counsel, who concluded the matter involved issues of protected speech. "In cases where the complaint is filed in proximity to graduation, our normal procedure includes placing a graduation diploma hold on the respondent," said the spokesman, E.J. Miranda. "The complaint was resolved as expeditiously as possible, and the respondent and complainant have been informed that case law supports that the email is protected speech." Miranda said that the university would also review its procedures for placing holds on student diplomas in judicial cases close to graduation. The president of the campus chapter of the Federalist Society did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday night. Hawley, who received his undergraduate degree from Stanford University, was widely criticized for objecting to the certification of the presidential election results. Paxton has drawn scrutiny for his appearance at a rally in support of Donald Trump in Washington on the day of the siege. Representatives for Hawley and Paxton did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday night. Grabbing attention itself was Wallace’s satirical flyer, which he said he had emailed to a Listserv forum for law school students on Jan. 25, nearly three weeks after the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol. The flyer said that the event was being presented by the Federalist Society on January 6. "Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event," the flyer said, offering Grubhub coupons to the first 30 students who RSVP’d for the fictitious program. "Although widely believed to conflict in every way with the rule of law, violent insurrection can be an effective approach to upholding the principle of limited government." Two days after the satirical flyer was sent by Wallace, it was the focus of a fact check article by USA Today, which reported that the email was a form of satire. In a complaint to the university, unidentified officers of the Federalist Society chapter said that Wallace’s email had caused significant harm and had led other organizations to cancel their events with the group. "Wallace defamed the student group, its officers, Sen. Josh Hawley, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton," the complaint said. "Wallace, impersonating the Stanford Federalist Society, wrote on the flyer that ‘Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event,’ insinuating that the student group was encouraging and hosting a riot. He also wrote that Attorney General Paxton advocates for ‘overturn(ing) the results of a free and fair election’ by ‘calling on a violent mob to storm the Capitol.’ And he wrote that Sen. Hawley believes that violent insurrections are justified." The names of the complainants were redacted from the complaint, which was posted online on Monday by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group working to defend free speech on college campuses. Wallace had sought the group’s help. "By instituting an investigation and placing a hold on Wallace’s degree days before his graduation, Stanford betrays its legal and moral commitments to respect its students’ expressive rights," the group said in a letter on Tuesday to one of the law school’s deans. The flap drew the notice of Slate magazine. The writer of that article, Mark Joseph Stern, was the featured speaker in a conversation about the Federalist Society that Wallace said he had organized about a month after he sent the satirical email. Wallace’s cause was also taken up by Laurence H. Tribe, a constitutional law professor emeritus at Harvard University. "Mocking an ideologically-based group can’t be made a basis for denying academic privileges in any open society worthy of respect," Tribe wrote on Twitter. "If accurate, this report shows Stanford Law School to be unworthy of treatment as an academic institution." George Conway, one of the founders of the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, also rallied behind Wallace. "As someone who been involved with the Federalist Society for over 35 years, I agree that this is totally ridiculous," Conway said on Twitter, responding to Tribe. Wallace, who is from Ann Arbor, Michigan, and received his undergraduate degree from the University of Washington in Seattle, said that he is supposed to take the bar exam this summer in his home state and then start a job with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Washington, D.C. He said that he would not have been able to take the bar exam without his law school diploma, which he will receive on June 12.

A law student mocked the federalist society. It jeopardized his graduation.

The year is 2021, and abortion is still a taboo. Laws are being passed to ban abortion after the 6th week, before most women even realise they are pregnant. Why? because religious leaders and states think they have the right over a woman's body.

Gravitas Plus: Why are women being denied the Right to abortion?

The Biden administration announced on Tuesday it would repeal the changes made by the Trump administration to an important law made to stop banks from discriminating against racial minorities and the poor. &nbsp;

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, one of the nation's bank regulators, said it plans to reconsider the regulations it wrote in 2020 governing a law known as the Community Reinvestment Act. The Civil Rights Era law requires banks to document how well they are lending to the communities that surround their branches, in an effort to make sure that banks are not just lending to the wealthy or to white customers. &nbsp;

The OCC said it plans to start from scratch, and told banks to effectively ignore the 2020 changes while the agency rewrites the regulations. &nbsp;

Trump's Comptroller of the Currency, Joseph Otting, had made revising the Community Reinvestment Act a cornerstone of his tenure. The law is widely respected by the industry and activists alike, but both sides have agreed for years that law was out of date. Many banks now operate entirely online, ATMs are ubiquitous, and it was increasingly more difficult to define what a ‘community' was in order to comply with the law. &nbsp;

But the changes the OCC made last year were considered too broad for many activists and for Congressional Democrats, who oversee banks on the Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee.&nbsp;

For example, banks would have been given credit under the law for issuing credit cards and personal loans something banks were already doing, particularly the largest institutions. &nbsp;

The regulations would have also given banks credit, under certain circumstances, for loans they make to build or improve facilities such as sports stadiums and hospitals.&nbsp;

The argument from activists was that the changes would have made it easier for many banks to pass their CRA exams, and would disincentivise them from opening branches or approving mortgages in low income neighbourhoods.&nbsp;

"CRA was, and still is, a civil rights bill," said Black Rep Gregory Meeks, D-New York, last year at a Congressional committee to review Otting's changes. "Your proposal would undermine that."&nbsp;

The changes proposed by Otting were so drastic that the other two bank regulators that have authority under the law, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, refused to sign on. This left banks wondering, which regulator to follow when it came to compliance. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The Biden administration announced on Tuesday it would repeal the changes made by the Trump administration to an important law made to stop banks from discriminating against racial minorities and the poor.

The Biden administration announced on Tuesday it would repeal the changes made by the Trump administration to an important law made to stop banks from discriminating against racial minorities and the poor. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, one of the nation's bank regulators, said it plans to reconsider the regulations it wrote in 2020 governing a law known as the Community Reinvestment Act. The Civil Rights Era law requires banks to document how well they are lending to the communities that surround their branches, in an effort to make sure that banks are not just lending to the wealthy or to white customers. The OCC said it plans to start from scratch, and told banks to effectively ignore the 2020 changes while the agency rewrites the regulations. Trump's Comptroller of the Currency, Joseph Otting, had made revising the Community Reinvestment Act a cornerstone of his tenure. The law is widely respected by the industry and activists alike, but both sides have agreed for years that law was out of date. Many banks now operate entirely online, ATMs are ubiquitous, and it was increasingly more difficult to define what a ‘community' was in order to comply with the law. But the changes the OCC made last year were considered too broad for many activists and for Congressional Democrats, who oversee banks on the Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee. For example, banks would have been given credit under the law for issuing credit cards and personal loans something banks were already doing, particularly the largest institutions. The regulations would have also given banks credit, under certain circumstances, for loans they make to build or improve facilities such as sports stadiums and hospitals. The argument from activists was that the changes would have made it easier for many banks to pass their CRA exams, and would disincentivise them from opening branches or approving mortgages in low income neighbourhoods. "CRA was, and still is, a civil rights bill," said Black Rep Gregory Meeks, D-New York, last year at a Congressional committee to review Otting's changes. "Your proposal would undermine that." The changes proposed by Otting were so drastic that the other two bank regulators that have authority under the law, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, refused to sign on. This left banks wondering, which regulator to follow when it came to compliance.

Biden reverses Trump changes to law that prevented racial discrimination by banks 

Britain said on Wednesday a planned new law would see social media companies fined up to 10% of turnover or 18 million pounds ($25 million) if they failed to stamp out online abuses, such as racist hate crimes, while senior managers could also face criminal action.&nbsp;

The Online Safety Bill also seeks to strengthen the right to freedom of expression, and ensure democratic political debate and journalistic content is protected, the government said.&nbsp;

"It's time for tech companies to be held to account and to protect the British people from harm. If they fail to do so, they will face penalties," interior minister Priti Patel said.&nbsp;

Tech firms have been accused of doing far too little to address online abuse, with soccer clubs and other sporting authorities boycotting the world's biggest social media platforms last month to highlight the growing problem.&nbsp;

The bill will place a duty of care on social media firms and websites to ensure they take swift action to remove illegal content, such as hate crimes, harassment and threats directed at individuals, including abuse which falls below the criminal threshold.&nbsp;

There will also be a requirement to remove and limit the spread of terrorist material, suicide content and child sexual abuse, which they would need to report to the authorities.&nbsp;

Those companies, which fail to do so, face hefty fines from regulator Ofcom, which can also block access to their sites.&nbsp;

"The draft Bill contains reserved powers for Ofcom to pursue criminal action against named senior managers whose companies do not comply with Ofcom's requests for information," the government said. "These will be introduced if tech companies fail to live up to their new responsibilities."&nbsp;

The proposed law will also require companies to safeguard freedom of expression, and reinstate material unfairly removed.&nbsp;

It will also forbid tech firms from discriminating against particular political viewpoints, and Ofcom will hold them to account for the arbitrary removal of journalistic content, the government added. &nbsp;

Britain said on Wednesday a planned new law would see social media companies fined up to 10% of turnover or 18 million pounds ($25 million) if they failed to stamp out online abuses, such as racist hate crimes, while senior managers could also face criminal action.

Britain said on Wednesday a planned new law would see social media companies fined up to 10% of turnover or 18 million pounds ($25 million) if they failed to stamp out online abuses, such as racist hate crimes, while senior managers could also face criminal action. The Online Safety Bill also seeks to strengthen the right to freedom of expression, and ensure democratic political debate and journalistic content is protected, the government said. "It's time for tech companies to be held to account and to protect the British people from harm. If they fail to do so, they will face penalties," interior minister Priti Patel said. Tech firms have been accused of doing far too little to address online abuse, with soccer clubs and other sporting authorities boycotting the world's biggest social media platforms last month to highlight the growing problem. The bill will place a duty of care on social media firms and websites to ensure they take swift action to remove illegal content, such as hate crimes, harassment and threats directed at individuals, including abuse which falls below the criminal threshold. There will also be a requirement to remove and limit the spread of terrorist material, suicide content and child sexual abuse, which they would need to report to the authorities. Those companies, which fail to do so, face hefty fines from regulator Ofcom, which can also block access to their sites. "The draft Bill contains reserved powers for Ofcom to pursue criminal action against named senior managers whose companies do not comply with Ofcom's requests for information," the government said. "These will be introduced if tech companies fail to live up to their new responsibilities." The proposed law will also require companies to safeguard freedom of expression, and reinstate material unfairly removed. It will also forbid tech firms from discriminating against particular political viewpoints, and Ofcom will hold them to account for the arbitrary removal of journalistic content, the government added.

UK unveils law to fine social media firms which fail to remove online abuse 

China has rolled out a new anti-espionage regulation, under which the national security authority will draw up lists of companies and organisations that are susceptible to foreign infiltration and require security measures to deal with the threats.&nbsp;

Since 'foreign spies, intelligence agencies and other hostile forces' have intensified their infiltration and intelligence theft against China through more diverse methods and in broader fields, the regulation clarifies 'what, who and how' to guard against foreign espionage, officials from the national security authority said on Monday.&nbsp;

"The regulation is of great significance to improve the legal system in protecting national security by specifying the responsibilities that companies and institutions must bear. It places emphasis on companies and institutions taking precautionary measures against foreign espionage," Li Wei, an expert on national security and anti-terrorism at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times.&nbsp;

According to the new regulation, companies, organisations or social groups on the list shoulder the responsibility to roll out detailed measures against foreign espionage, including arranging their working staff to sign letters of commitment before taking up posts, reporting their activities related to national security, giving education to personnel ahead of their departures abroad, and interviewing personnel after their return to China.&nbsp;

"Staff going on business trips to foreign countries, such as countries of the Five Eyes alliance - the US, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand - have been told to strictly report their travel destinations, agendas, and meetings with foreign personnel, and they must get approval from their direct superiors before the applications are reviewed by the headquarters," a staff member in charge of foreign affairs at the headquarters of a central state-owned enterprise in Beijing told the daily.&nbsp;

In particular, electrical devices including mobile phones, laptops and USB drives, which usually contain sensitive information, are key objects for intelligence agencies, he said.&nbsp;

Companies are required that their staff involved in sensitive fields or those holding important files to leave their electrical devices at home and bring new ones abroad.&nbsp;

Any companies or institutions within the scope of national defence, diplomacy, economy, finance and high-tech industry should be considered as key fields in terms of possible foreign infiltration, according to Li.&nbsp;

"Cases of Chinese people working in various industries who were wooed by money or intimidated to engage in espionage activities and became pawns of foreign spy intelligence agencies are numerous. Taking preventive measures and avoiding similar incidents that endanger national security is crucial to protecting national security," Li said.&nbsp;

The new law has been introduced amid increasing friction between the US and China. The two countries are currently at loggerheads over a host of issues as the Biden administration continues the tough China policy initiated by the previous Trump administration targeting Beijing on Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan.&nbsp;

President Joe Biden has beefed-up the US-China policy by uniting America's allies like the UK, the European Union and Japan.&nbsp;

He also held the first quadrilateral summit of the emerging Quad grouping of the US, Australia, Japan and India.&nbsp;

The US, the European Union, the UK and Canada have imposed coordinated sanctions on China over alleged human rights violations against the Uygur Muslims in Xinjiang which Beijing has denied.&nbsp;

These countries have also taken a united position on China, firming up its control over Hong Kong with its new national security law, subduing the massive pro-democracy agitation in the former British colony. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

China has rolled out a new anti-espionage regulation, under which the national security authority will draw up lists of companies and organisations that are susceptible to foreign infiltration and require security measures to deal with the threats.

China has rolled out a new anti-espionage regulation, under which the national security authority will draw up lists of companies and organisations that are susceptible to foreign infiltration and require security measures to deal with the threats. Since 'foreign spies, intelligence agencies and other hostile forces' have intensified their infiltration and intelligence theft against China through more diverse methods and in broader fields, the regulation clarifies 'what, who and how' to guard against foreign espionage, officials from the national security authority said on Monday. "The regulation is of great significance to improve the legal system in protecting national security by specifying the responsibilities that companies and institutions must bear. It places emphasis on companies and institutions taking precautionary measures against foreign espionage," Li Wei, an expert on national security and anti-terrorism at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times. According to the new regulation, companies, organisations or social groups on the list shoulder the responsibility to roll out detailed measures against foreign espionage, including arranging their working staff to sign letters of commitment before taking up posts, reporting their activities related to national security, giving education to personnel ahead of their departures abroad, and interviewing personnel after their return to China. "Staff going on business trips to foreign countries, such as countries of the Five Eyes alliance - the US, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand - have been told to strictly report their travel destinations, agendas, and meetings with foreign personnel, and they must get approval from their direct superiors before the applications are reviewed by the headquarters," a staff member in charge of foreign affairs at the headquarters of a central state-owned enterprise in Beijing told the daily. In particular, electrical devices including mobile phones, laptops and USB drives, which usually contain sensitive information, are key objects for intelligence agencies, he said. Companies are required that their staff involved in sensitive fields or those holding important files to leave their electrical devices at home and bring new ones abroad. Any companies or institutions within the scope of national defence, diplomacy, economy, finance and high-tech industry should be considered as key fields in terms of possible foreign infiltration, according to Li. "Cases of Chinese people working in various industries who were wooed by money or intimidated to engage in espionage activities and became pawns of foreign spy intelligence agencies are numerous. Taking preventive measures and avoiding similar incidents that endanger national security is crucial to protecting national security," Li said. The new law has been introduced amid increasing friction between the US and China. The two countries are currently at loggerheads over a host of issues as the Biden administration continues the tough China policy initiated by the previous Trump administration targeting Beijing on Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan. President Joe Biden has beefed-up the US-China policy by uniting America's allies like the UK, the European Union and Japan. He also held the first quadrilateral summit of the emerging Quad grouping of the US, Australia, Japan and India. The US, the European Union, the UK and Canada have imposed coordinated sanctions on China over alleged human rights violations against the Uygur Muslims in Xinjiang which Beijing has denied. These countries have also taken a united position on China, firming up its control over Hong Kong with its new national security law, subduing the massive pro-democracy agitation in the former British colony. (With inputs from agencies)

China adopts new anti-espionage law to avert 'foreign infiltration' in key firms

German parliament's upper house on Thursday approved the Infection Protection Act that has given rise to a controversy. The last hurdle before the passage of the law is the president's signature.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's government had asked parliament for temporary powers to enforce a nationwide coronavirus lockdown after several regions failed to impose agreed curbs to bring a third wave of the pandemic under control.

As per the draft law presented to the cabinet, a compulsory national "emergency-brake" will be introduced if the number of new infections per 100,000 residents in a district or city exceeds 100 for three consecutive days within a week.

The measures include curfews between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m., as well as limiting private gatherings to one household plus one other person.

No shops barring the essential ones will remain open. Opening of cultural and recreational facilities such as theatres, museums and zoos will be prohibited.

Schools will have to return to distance learning if the virus incidence rises above 165 per 100,000 for three consecutive days.

The change to the law will apply until June 30.

Police clashed with protesters in Berlin on Wednesday as they tried to disperse a rally against the coronavirus lockdown while parliament debated the law to give the national government more powers to fight a third wave of the pandemic.

Germany reported a rise of 24,884 coronavirus cases on Wednesday, bringing the total to nearly 3.19 million. Some 80,634 people have died and doctors have warned that unless action is taken, intensive-care units may struggle to cope.

(With inputs from agencies)

German parliament's upper house on Thursday approved the Infection Protection Act that has given rise to a controversy. The last hurdle before the passage of the law is the president's signature.

German parliament's upper house on Thursday approved the Infection Protection Act that has given rise to a controversy. The last hurdle before the passage of the law is the president's signature. Chancellor Angela Merkel's government had asked parliament for temporary powers to enforce a nationwide coronavirus lockdown after several regions failed to impose agreed curbs to bring a third wave of the pandemic under control. As per the draft law presented to the cabinet, a compulsory national "emergency-brake" will be introduced if the number of new infections per 100,000 residents in a district or city exceeds 100 for three consecutive days within a week. The measures include curfews between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m., as well as limiting private gatherings to one household plus one other person. No shops barring the essential ones will remain open. Opening of cultural and recreational facilities such as theatres, museums and zoos will be prohibited. Schools will have to return to distance learning if the virus incidence rises above 165 per 100,000 for three consecutive days. The change to the law will apply until June 30. Police clashed with protesters in Berlin on Wednesday as they tried to disperse a rally against the coronavirus lockdown while parliament debated the law to give the national government more powers to fight a third wave of the pandemic. Germany reported a rise of 24,884 coronavirus cases on Wednesday, bringing the total to nearly 3.19 million. Some 80,634 people have died and doctors have warned that unless action is taken, intensive-care units may struggle to cope. (With inputs from agencies)

COVID-19: German parliament's upper house approves law to give government emergency powers

Police clashed with thousands of protesters in Berlin on Wednesday as the German parliament passed an amendment to give Angela Merkel's government power to impose tougher anti-coronavirus measures.&nbsp;

With Germany buckling under a third wave of the pandemic, the new law allowing for nationwide curbs including school closures and night curfews aims to end a political tug-of-war between the federal government and the 16 regional states over virus restrictions. &nbsp;

Around 8,000 protesters gathered in the German capital as the amendment was debated in the Bundestag lower house of parliament, with more than 2,000 police officers deployed to the scene.&nbsp;

Demonstrators were carrying placards with slogans such as "Merkel &amp; Co = high treason" and chanting "Wir sind das Volk" ("We are the people") -- a common refrain in the run-up to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.&nbsp;

Police said some 150 people were detained for throwing bottles, attacking officers and failing to comply with rules on mask wearing and distancing. Three officers were injured.&nbsp;

Tear gas was fired as police attempted to drag protesters from the streets, according to an AFP video journalist at the scene.&nbsp;

Dubbed the "emergency brake", the amended law prescribes tough measures including sweeping shutdowns and overnight curfews in regions with incidence rates of more than 100 new infections per 100,000 people over the last seven days.&nbsp;

It will also force schools to revert to virtual teaching in areas where the incidence rate exceeds 165.&nbsp;

Only one state had an incidence rate below 100 on Wednesday, while seven topped 165, including the two most populous of Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia.&nbsp;

Police clashed with thousands of protesters in Berlin on Wednesday as the German parliament passed an amendment to give Angela Merkel's government power to impose tougher anti-coronavirus measures.

Police clashed with thousands of protesters in Berlin on Wednesday as the German parliament passed an amendment to give Angela Merkel's government power to impose tougher anti-coronavirus measures. With Germany buckling under a third wave of the pandemic, the new law allowing for nationwide curbs including school closures and night curfews aims to end a political tug-of-war between the federal government and the 16 regional states over virus restrictions. Around 8,000 protesters gathered in the German capital as the amendment was debated in the Bundestag lower house of parliament, with more than 2,000 police officers deployed to the scene. Demonstrators were carrying placards with slogans such as "Merkel & Co = high treason" and chanting "Wir sind das Volk" ("We are the people") -- a common refrain in the run-up to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Police said some 150 people were detained for throwing bottles, attacking officers and failing to comply with rules on mask wearing and distancing. Three officers were injured. Tear gas was fired as police attempted to drag protesters from the streets, according to an AFP video journalist at the scene. Dubbed the "emergency brake", the amended law prescribes tough measures including sweeping shutdowns and overnight curfews in regions with incidence rates of more than 100 new infections per 100,000 people over the last seven days. It will also force schools to revert to virtual teaching in areas where the incidence rate exceeds 165. Only one state had an incidence rate below 100 on Wednesday, while seven topped 165, including the two most populous of Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia.

Police clash with protesters as Germany passes virus law 

Pakistan is turning out to be an experiment gone wrong. We bring to you five stories that serve as testimony to this claim:&nbsp;

1.&nbsp; A former Pakistani lawmaker has been acquitted in a hit-and-run case. Abdul Majeed Khan Achakzai is a member of the Milli Awam Party. He has also been an influential member of the Balochistan Provincial Assembly. In 2017, CCTV footage of this lawmaker running over a traffic police warden emerged

This happened in Quetta, and the warden died on the spot. The police registered a case of manslaughter against the lawmaker. He later confessed to his crime on live television.

Three years on, and Majeed Achakzai has been given a clean chit. The court says there's not enough evidence but the victim's family is planning to challenge this verdict.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-how-pakistan-is-perpetually-failing-as-a-country-326108/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

2. A Pakistani journalist was recently shot dead in Turbat, a city in Balochistan. The journalist's name was Shaheena Shaheen, and she was 25. She had just started her career at Pakistan's state-owned broadcaster, PTV.

Shaheen was killed outside her residence by unidentified suspects. The local police says that her killing was the result of troubled marriage.

Shaheen is said to have been a victim of domestic violence, and police are on the hunt for her husband, who was allegedly present at the crime scene.

3. Sajid Gondal, a top official at Pakistan's Security Exchange Commission in Islamabad is still missing. His disappearance is being linked to a recent corruption scam involving a military general.

Imran Khan's key aide, Asim Saleem Bajwa is being accused of shady financial dealings. Sajid went missing just days after the details came out. His family claims no government officials have approached them regarding the case.

Sajid Gondal has four kids, and his wife says she is done lying to her kids about their father's whereabouts.

4. A Christian man has been sentenced to death by the Lahore High Court for sending 'blasphemous text messages' to somebody in 2013. Blasphemy is increasingly becoming a pretext for crimes against minorities in Pakistan.

5. An FIR as been registered against a 3-year-old in Pakistan's Punjab province, whose father is a Shia Muslim.

He has charged with acting as a patron to his father during a religious gathering. Since the beginning of the month of Muharram, there has been an increase in hate campaigns against the Shias in Pakistan.

A number of Shia families are being targeted for their practices during this month. Now, a child has been charged with disrupting public order, while terrorists in Pakistan enjoy state protection and roam freely.

Pakistan is turning out to be an experiment gone wrong. We bring to you five stories that serve as testimony to this claim: 1. A former Pakistani lawmaker has been acquitted in a hit-and-run case.

Pakistan is turning out to be an experiment gone wrong. We bring to you five stories that serve as testimony to this claim: 1. A former Pakistani lawmaker has been acquitted in a hit-and-run case. Abdul Majeed Khan Achakzai is a member of the Milli Awam Party. He has also been an influential member of the Balochistan Provincial Assembly. In 2017, CCTV footage of this lawmaker running over a traffic police warden emerged This happened in Quetta, and the warden died on the spot. The police registered a case of manslaughter against the lawmaker. He later confessed to his crime on live television. Three years on, and Majeed Achakzai has been given a clean chit. The court says there's not enough evidence but the victim's family is planning to challenge this verdict. × 2. A Pakistani journalist was recently shot dead in Turbat, a city in Balochistan. The journalist's name was Shaheena Shaheen, and she was 25. She had just started her career at Pakistan's state-owned broadcaster, PTV. Shaheen was killed outside her residence by unidentified suspects. The local police says that her killing was the result of troubled marriage. Shaheen is said to have been a victim of domestic violence, and police are on the hunt for her husband, who was allegedly present at the crime scene. 3. Sajid Gondal, a top official at Pakistan's Security Exchange Commission in Islamabad is still missing. His disappearance is being linked to a recent corruption scam involving a military general. Imran Khan's key aide, Asim Saleem Bajwa is being accused of shady financial dealings. Sajid went missing just days after the details came out. His family claims no government officials have approached them regarding the case. Sajid Gondal has four kids, and his wife says she is done lying to her kids about their father's whereabouts. 4. A Christian man has been sentenced to death by the Lahore High Court for sending 'blasphemous text messages' to somebody in 2013. Blasphemy is increasingly becoming a pretext for crimes against minorities in Pakistan. 5. An FIR as been registered against a 3-year-old in Pakistan's Punjab province, whose father is a Shia Muslim. He has charged with acting as a patron to his father during a religious gathering. Since the beginning of the month of Muharram, there has been an increase in hate campaigns against the Shias in Pakistan. A number of Shia families are being targeted for their practices during this month. Now, a child has been charged with disrupting public order, while terrorists in Pakistan enjoy state protection and roam freely.

Five stories from South Asia's failed experiment, Pakistan

A group of hackers may be selling your data!

Recently, a group has targeted data of big companies like the online dating application Zoosk, a US newspaper Star Tribune, and a food delivery service called Chef.

All this data amounts to records of over 73 million people and is being sold on the Dark Web for $18,000.

The hack also targets companies like Chatbooks, SocialShare, Minted, online publication Chronicle of Higher Education, magazine like GGuMim and Minfdul, ZDNet reported.

Each of the database is sold separately. Almost 73.2 million users' data is at risk of being compromised.

The group in question goes by the name ShinyHunters. They were earlier responsible for hacking into the database of GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft. Over 1,200 databases were stolen.

The group had also hacked into the user data of 90 million people through Tokopedia, which is Indonesia’s largest online stores. This data was later sold.

Additionally, information of 22 million user users on Unacademy was reportedly sold by the group on the Dark Web.

Capitalising on pandemic panic

The world is currently experiencing the biggest pandemic of the last few decades: No major countries have been spared by the fury of COVID-19, which only takes a sneeze to catch on to potential carriers!

Amidst the chaos and a crumbling healthcare infrastructure, protective gear like masks and gloves are increasingly running out.

The notorious corner of the internet: what is called the “dark web”, which can be accessed only using certain browsers is famous for selling arms and drugs. The dark web hosts multiple shopping websites that deliver all these goods to your doorstep.

However, the murky side of the internet is now selling face masks in the times of a pandemic.

What’s interesting is that while the rates of masks in the physical world as well as on the safer side of the internet have shot up due to overwhelming demand, the price of the same commodities on the dark web is much lesser. This could be as alarming as comforting, for people may be selling counterfeit or ineffective products.

Additionally, you could get caught in a legal crossfire as most of these web portals sell goods that remain largely illegal. Besides drugs, exotic animals, and banned visual material like underage pornography is openly sold across the web.

Many sellers could simply be hackers looking for a way into your system. By impersonating health officials and agencies, they may attack your computer/phone and steal access to your private information without you even realising it!

A group of hackers may be selling your data! Recently, a group has targeted data of big companies like the online dating application Zoosk, a US newspaper Star Tribune, and a food delivery service called Chef.

A group of hackers may be selling your data! Recently, a group has targeted data of big companies like the online dating application Zoosk, a US newspaper Star Tribune, and a food delivery service called Chef. All this data amounts to records of over 73 million people and is being sold on the Dark Web for $18,000. The hack also targets companies like Chatbooks, SocialShare, Minted, online publication Chronicle of Higher Education, magazine like GGuMim and Minfdul, ZDNet reported. Each of the database is sold separately. Almost 73.2 million users' data is at risk of being compromised. The group in question goes by the name ShinyHunters. They were earlier responsible for hacking into the database of GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft. Over 1,200 databases were stolen. The group had also hacked into the user data of 90 million people through Tokopedia, which is Indonesia’s largest online stores. This data was later sold. Additionally, information of 22 million user users on Unacademy was reportedly sold by the group on the Dark Web. Capitalising on pandemic panic The world is currently experiencing the biggest pandemic of the last few decades: No major countries have been spared by the fury of COVID-19, which only takes a sneeze to catch on to potential carriers! Amidst the chaos and a crumbling healthcare infrastructure, protective gear like masks and gloves are increasingly running out. The notorious corner of the internet: what is called the “dark web”, which can be accessed only using certain browsers is famous for selling arms and drugs. The dark web hosts multiple shopping websites that deliver all these goods to your doorstep. However, the murky side of the internet is now selling face masks in the times of a pandemic. What’s interesting is that while the rates of masks in the physical world as well as on the safer side of the internet have shot up due to overwhelming demand, the price of the same commodities on the dark web is much lesser. This could be as alarming as comforting, for people may be selling counterfeit or ineffective products. Additionally, you could get caught in a legal crossfire as most of these web portals sell goods that remain largely illegal. Besides drugs, exotic animals, and banned visual material like underage pornography is openly sold across the web. Many sellers could simply be hackers looking for a way into your system. By impersonating health officials and agencies, they may attack your computer/phone and steal access to your private information without you even realising it!

Hackers are selling stolen user databases of over 73 million people on the dark web

The government on Wednesday said that there are over 2.4 lakh pending cases in courts related to rape and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act across the country till December last year.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/government-strengthens-pocso-act-approves-death-penalty-for-aggravated-sexual-assault-against-minors-187017">Government strengthens POCSO Act, approves death penalty for aggravated sexual assault against minors</a>

According to a written reply in Lok Sabha by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Uttar Pradesh tops the list of states with 66,994 pending rape cases followed by Maharashtra with 21,691 and 20,511 in West Bengal.

"As per information received from High Courts, the status of pending cases related to rape and POCSO Act, as on December 31, 2019, is 2,44,001," Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad informed the Lower House in response to a query by Janata Dal (United) leader Rajiv Ranjan (Lalan) Singh.

OPINION:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/india-rape-crisis-are-we-part-of-the-problem-267388">India rape crisis: Are we part of the problem?</a>

In furtherance to, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, a scheme was finalized for setting up of 1,023 Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) across the country for expeditious trial and disposal of pending cases related to Rape and Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in a time-bound manner under Centrally-Sponsored Scheme.

So far, the Central's share of funds amounting to Rs 99.43 crore has been released during 2019-20 to 27 States/UTs which have so far consented to set up of 649 number of FTSCs.

"As per information received from High Courts, 195 FTSCs have already been set up till January 31, 2020," the Ministry said. Surprisingly, not even a single FTSCs have been set up in states like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and West Bengal where the maximum number of rape cases are pending.

According to proposed FTSCs, the&nbsp;maximum number of 218 courts will be in Uttar Pradesh, 138 in Maharashtra and 123 in West Bengal.

Andhra Pradesh will have 18, Telangana 36, Andaman and Nicobar Island 01, Arunachal Pradesh 03, Assam 27, Bihar 54, Chandigarh 01, Chhattisgarh 15, Goa 02, Gujrat 35, Haryana 16, Himachal Pradesh 06, Jammu &amp; Kashmir 04, Jharkhand 22, Karnataka 31, Kerala 56, Madhya Pradesh 67, Manipur 02, Meghalaya 05, Mizoram 03, Nagaland 01, NCT of Delhi 16, Odisha 45, Punjab 12, Rajasthan 45, Tamil Nadu 14, Tripura 03 and Uttarakhand 04 FTSCs.

In its reply, the minister said as per the scheme of FTSCs, each such Court is expected to dispose of 165 cases in a year for which States/UTs governments have been kept informed.

Among 195 Fast Track Special Courts functional and established for Women and Girl children under the Scheme of FTSCs till January 2020, 56 are in Madhya Pradesh, 15 are in Chhattisgarh, 16 in Delhi, three in Tripura, 22 in Jharkhand, 26 in Rajasthan, nine in Telangana, 34 in Gujarat and 14 in Tamil Nadu.

The government on Wednesday said that there are over 2.4 lakh pending cases in courts related to rape and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act across the country till December last year.

The government on Wednesday said that there are over 2.4 lakh pending cases in courts related to rape and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act across the country till December last year. Also read: Government strengthens POCSO Act, approves death penalty for aggravated sexual assault against minors According to a written reply in Lok Sabha by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Uttar Pradesh tops the list of states with 66,994 pending rape cases followed by Maharashtra with 21,691 and 20,511 in West Bengal. "As per information received from High Courts, the status of pending cases related to rape and POCSO Act, as on December 31, 2019, is 2,44,001," Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad informed the Lower House in response to a query by Janata Dal (United) leader Rajiv Ranjan (Lalan) Singh. OPINION: India rape crisis: Are we part of the problem? In furtherance to, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, a scheme was finalized for setting up of 1,023 Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) across the country for expeditious trial and disposal of pending cases related to Rape and Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in a time-bound manner under Centrally-Sponsored Scheme. So far, the Central's share of funds amounting to Rs 99.43 crore has been released during 2019-20 to 27 States/UTs which have so far consented to set up of 649 number of FTSCs. "As per information received from High Courts, 195 FTSCs have already been set up till January 31, 2020," the Ministry said. Surprisingly, not even a single FTSCs have been set up in states like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and West Bengal where the maximum number of rape cases are pending. According to proposed FTSCs, the maximum number of 218 courts will be in Uttar Pradesh, 138 in Maharashtra and 123 in West Bengal. Andhra Pradesh will have 18, Telangana 36, Andaman and Nicobar Island 01, Arunachal Pradesh 03, Assam 27, Bihar 54, Chandigarh 01, Chhattisgarh 15, Goa 02, Gujrat 35, Haryana 16, Himachal Pradesh 06, Jammu & Kashmir 04, Jharkhand 22, Karnataka 31, Kerala 56, Madhya Pradesh 67, Manipur 02, Meghalaya 05, Mizoram 03, Nagaland 01, NCT of Delhi 16, Odisha 45, Punjab 12, Rajasthan 45, Tamil Nadu 14, Tripura 03 and Uttarakhand 04 FTSCs. In its reply, the minister said as per the scheme of FTSCs, each such Court is expected to dispose of 165 cases in a year for which States/UTs governments have been kept informed. Among 195 Fast Track Special Courts functional and established for Women and Girl children under the Scheme of FTSCs till January 2020, 56 are in Madhya Pradesh, 15 are in Chhattisgarh, 16 in Delhi, three in Tripura, 22 in Jharkhand, 26 in Rajasthan, nine in Telangana, 34 in Gujarat and 14 in Tamil Nadu.

Over 2.4 lakh cases relating to rape and POCSO pending in courts across country, says Government

The legal team of United States President Donald Trump yesterday rejected the impeachment hearings against their client. In the six-page document, his lawyers refer to the House of Representatives' impeachment efforts as a ''dangerous attack'' on Americans and their intrinsic right to vote.

Trump was recently impeached on account of&nbsp;two articles: ''abuse of power'' and the ''obstruction of Congress'', which was approved by the Democratic-led House last year.

The trial against Trump will begin on Tuesday in the Senate, which is mostly under the control of Republicans.

<h6><img alt="trump" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="16734523-9fc5-43a9-9b9d-11aa985d4ad9" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design_44.jpg" /> 
Image: Screenshot from the statement of Trump's legal team | Reuters 
&nbsp;</h6>

Trump has repeatedly denied any involvement in the wrongdoings he's been accused of. He refers to the impeachment drive as an effort to undo his presidential victory.

In the Senate, Trump is expected not to get impeached, for no Republican senators yet have voiced support for the same.

The White House counsel is led by Pat Cipollone, who will get the support of Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow. Ken Starr, the star-lawyer involved in Bill Clinton's impeachment in the 1990s has also joined the team. Celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz is also in Trump's dream-team.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/impeachment-dream-team-meet-us-president-trumps-star-studded-legal-team-274978">Impeachment dream team: Meet US President Trump's star-studded legal team</a>

In their response, Cipollone and Sekulow referred to the articles of impeachment as ''a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president''.

Further, in the six-page document, the team called the impeachment hearings "a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election".

Watch:&nbsp;Senate begins trial on Donald Trump's impeachment

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/senate-begins-trial-on-donald-trumps-impeachment-274877/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Trump is facing impeachment on the charges of abusing office especially in relation to the Ukraine scandal. He was accused of coercing Ukrainian authorities into investigating Joe Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate. He allegedly withheld aid worth $400 million to Ukraine. &nbsp;

Ukrainian counterpart President Volodymyr Zelensky has also denied the claims.

<h6><img alt="trump" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="77351d0c-8a38-4cd5-a98b-c33b5031ddee" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%282%29_41.jpg" /> 
Image:&nbsp;US President Donald Trump, First Lady Melania Trump and son Barron Trump make their way to board Marine One from the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC on January 17, 2020 | AFP 
&nbsp;</h6>

"The articles of impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face. They fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever," the defence team said.

On the other hand, the House managers, ie, the prosecutors called Trump's conduct ''the worst nightmare'' of those who framed the US constitution.

''President Trump abused the power of his office to solicit foreign interference in our elections for his own personal political gain, thereby jeopardizing our national security, the integrity of our elections, and our democracy'', the managers said in a statement.

(With inputs from AFP and Reuters)

The legal team of United States President Donald Trump yesterday rejected the impeachment hearings against their client. In the six-page document, his lawyers refer to the House of Representatives' impeachment efforts as a ''dangerous attack'' on Americans and their intrinsic right to vote.

The legal team of United States President Donald Trump yesterday rejected the impeachment hearings against their client. In the six-page document, his lawyers refer to the House of Representatives' impeachment efforts as a ''dangerous attack'' on Americans and their intrinsic right to vote. Trump was recently impeached on account of two articles: ''abuse of power'' and the ''obstruction of Congress'', which was approved by the Democratic-led House last year. The trial against Trump will begin on Tuesday in the Senate, which is mostly under the control of Republicans. Image: Screenshot from the statement of Trump's legal team | Reuters Trump has repeatedly denied any involvement in the wrongdoings he's been accused of. He refers to the impeachment drive as an effort to undo his presidential victory. In the Senate, Trump is expected not to get impeached, for no Republican senators yet have voiced support for the same. The White House counsel is led by Pat Cipollone, who will get the support of Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow. Ken Starr, the star-lawyer involved in Bill Clinton's impeachment in the 1990s has also joined the team. Celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz is also in Trump's dream-team. Also read: Impeachment dream team: Meet US President Trump's star-studded legal team In their response, Cipollone and Sekulow referred to the articles of impeachment as ''a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president''. Further, in the six-page document, the team called the impeachment hearings "a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election". Watch: Senate begins trial on Donald Trump's impeachment Trump is facing impeachment on the charges of abusing office especially in relation to the Ukraine scandal. He was accused of coercing Ukrainian authorities into investigating Joe Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate. He allegedly withheld aid worth $400 million to Ukraine. Ukrainian counterpart President Volodymyr Zelensky has also denied the claims. Image: US President Donald Trump, First Lady Melania Trump and son Barron Trump make their way to board Marine One from the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC on January 17, 2020 | AFP "The articles of impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face. They fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever," the defence team said. On the other hand, the House managers, ie, the prosecutors called Trump's conduct ''the worst nightmare'' of those who framed the US constitution. ''President Trump abused the power of his office to solicit foreign interference in our elections for his own personal political gain, thereby jeopardizing our national security, the integrity of our elections, and our democracy'', the managers said in a statement. (With inputs from AFP and Reuters)

'Brazen and unlawful': Donald Trump's legal team rejects impeachment charges

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