Belarusian President crackdown on Alexander Lukashenko on the opposition continues. Maxim Znak has now been detained by masked men wearing plain clothes

Belarus unrest: 'Masked men' seize opposition figure, Maxim Znak detained

A prominent Chinese legal scholar who was detained and then fired after criticising President Xi Jinping hopes to clear his name by overturning a prostitution charge brought against him by police, his lawyer said on Wednesday.

Xu Zhangrun, a former constitutional law professor at the prestigious Tsinghua University, was detained by police in Beijing in early July for nearly a week after being accused of soliciting prostitution while in the southwestern city of Chengdu last December.

Xu engaged rights lawyers Mo Shaoping and his partner Shang Baojun on Tuesday night in an effort to overturn the charge, Mo told Reuters.

"Professor Xu engaged us because he rejects the trumped up prostitution charges meant to smear his name," said Mo.

According to Mo, as evidence of his offence, police from Chengdu's Qingyang district presented a woman who said she had intercourse with Xu. Xu contends that he had never seen her before, Mo said.

Xu and his lawyers are still deciding the exact course of action to take, Mo said. His options are to lodge an appeal to the Chengdu city-level police or sue the district police, Mo said.

Neither Xu nor the Chengdu district police could be immediately reached for comment.

While Xu was being detained, Beijing's Tsinghua University fired him for violating its ethical code. It cited the prostitution case as well as various articles Xu had published since July 2018, in a notice seen by Reuters.

Xu, 57, came to prominence in July 2018 for denouncing the removal of the two-term limit for China's leader.

At the peak of China's coronavirus outbreak in February, Xu wrote an article calling for freedom of speech. In May, he wrote an article accusing Xi of trying to bring the Cultural Revolution back to China.

Under Xi, China has clamped down on dissent and tightened censorship.

A prominent Chinese legal scholar who was detained and then fired after criticising President Xi Jinping hopes to clear his name by overturning a prostitution charge brought against him by police, his lawyer said on Wednesday.

A prominent Chinese legal scholar who was detained and then fired after criticising President Xi Jinping hopes to clear his name by overturning a prostitution charge brought against him by police, his lawyer said on Wednesday. Xu Zhangrun, a former constitutional law professor at the prestigious Tsinghua University, was detained by police in Beijing in early July for nearly a week after being accused of soliciting prostitution while in the southwestern city of Chengdu last December. Xu engaged rights lawyers Mo Shaoping and his partner Shang Baojun on Tuesday night in an effort to overturn the charge, Mo told Reuters. "Professor Xu engaged us because he rejects the trumped up prostitution charges meant to smear his name," said Mo. According to Mo, as evidence of his offence, police from Chengdu's Qingyang district presented a woman who said she had intercourse with Xu. Xu contends that he had never seen her before, Mo said. Xu and his lawyers are still deciding the exact course of action to take, Mo said. His options are to lodge an appeal to the Chengdu city-level police or sue the district police, Mo said. Neither Xu nor the Chengdu district police could be immediately reached for comment. While Xu was being detained, Beijing's Tsinghua University fired him for violating its ethical code. It cited the prostitution case as well as various articles Xu had published since July 2018, in a notice seen by Reuters. Xu, 57, came to prominence in July 2018 for denouncing the removal of the two-term limit for China's leader. At the peak of China's coronavirus outbreak in February, Xu wrote an article calling for freedom of speech. In May, he wrote an article accusing Xi of trying to bring the Cultural Revolution back to China. Under Xi, China has clamped down on dissent and tightened censorship.

Professor who criticised XI Jinping to fight prostitution charges: Lawyer

Julian Assange was stripped naked twice and handcuffed 11 times coming and going from the court, the WikiLeaks founder's lawyer told his US extradition hearing in London on Tuesday.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-war-on-journalists-behind-julian-assanges-extradition-bid-lawyer-282675">Trump's 'war on journalists' behind Julian Assange's extradition bid: Lawyer</a>

Assange faces charges under the US Espionage Act for the 2010 release of a trove of files detailing the realities of US military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/pink-floyd-co-founder-joins-assange-supporters-in-london-protest-march-282259">Pink Floyd co-founder joins Assange supporters in London protest march</a>

"Yesterday, Mr Assange was handcuffed 11 times, stripped naked twice at Belmarsh and put in five separate holding cells," his lawyer Edward Fitzgerald said on Tuesday.

He warned that Assange's treatment could "impinge on these proceedings" and asked judge Vanessa Baraitser to give "an indication to prison authorities" that the regime should be relaxed.

<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="http://13.235.153.162/videos/doctors-warning-julian-assange-could-die-in-uk-jail-281295/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Baraitser said it was a matter for prison officials, saying she did not have the authority to instruct them on how to treat detainees.

She added that she would expect Assange to be treated fairly and like anyone else.

The 48-year-old Australian is being held at the high-security Belmarsh prison in southeast London during the extradition process.

His full extradition hearing, which opened on Monday, is taking place at the court buildings next to the jail.

Assange wore a grey blazer and a sweater over a collared shirt in court.

<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="http://13.235.153.162/videos/did-donald-trump-offered-to-pardon-julian-assange-281984/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He occasionally spoke to his lawyers through the gaps in the glass panels of the dock.

Assange spent much of the past decade holed up in Ecuador's London embassy to avoid separate legal proceedings in Sweden, but Washington is now seeking his transfer to stand trial.

WikiLeaks initially worked with a string of high-profile newspapers to publish details from the leaked State Department and Pentagon files, which caused a sensation -- and outrage in Washington.

On Monday, a lawyer for the United States accused him of risking the lives of intelligence sources by publishing classified US government documents.

Fitzgerald has argued that the US charges are "politically motivated".

Assange could be jailed for 175 years if convicted on all 17 Espionage Act charges and one count of computer hacking that he faces.

The hearings will last all week then reconvene in May

Julian Assange was stripped naked twice and handcuffed 11 times coming and going from the court, the WikiLeaks founder's lawyer told his US extradition hearing in London on Tuesday.

Julian Assange was stripped naked twice and handcuffed 11 times coming and going from the court, the WikiLeaks founder's lawyer told his US extradition hearing in London on Tuesday. Also read: Trump's 'war on journalists' behind Julian Assange's extradition bid: Lawyer Assange faces charges under the US Espionage Act for the 2010 release of a trove of files detailing the realities of US military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Also read: Pink Floyd co-founder joins Assange supporters in London protest march "Yesterday, Mr Assange was handcuffed 11 times, stripped naked twice at Belmarsh and put in five separate holding cells," his lawyer Edward Fitzgerald said on Tuesday. He warned that Assange's treatment could "impinge on these proceedings" and asked judge Vanessa Baraitser to give "an indication to prison authorities" that the regime should be relaxed. × Baraitser said it was a matter for prison officials, saying she did not have the authority to instruct them on how to treat detainees. She added that she would expect Assange to be treated fairly and like anyone else. The 48-year-old Australian is being held at the high-security Belmarsh prison in southeast London during the extradition process. His full extradition hearing, which opened on Monday, is taking place at the court buildings next to the jail. Assange wore a grey blazer and a sweater over a collared shirt in court. × He occasionally spoke to his lawyers through the gaps in the glass panels of the dock. Assange spent much of the past decade holed up in Ecuador's London embassy to avoid separate legal proceedings in Sweden, but Washington is now seeking his transfer to stand trial. WikiLeaks initially worked with a string of high-profile newspapers to publish details from the leaked State Department and Pentagon files, which caused a sensation -- and outrage in Washington. On Monday, a lawyer for the United States accused him of risking the lives of intelligence sources by publishing classified US government documents. Fitzgerald has argued that the US charges are "politically motivated". Assange could be jailed for 175 years if convicted on all 17 Espionage Act charges and one count of computer hacking that he faces. The hearings will last all week then reconvene in May

Lawyer to court: Julian Assange stripped naked and handcuffed

Former Union Law Minister and veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passed away at his residence in Delhi on Sunday morning.&nbsp;

Jethmalani was 95 years old.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passes away at his residence in Delhi. He was 95 years old. (file pic) <a href="https://t.co/Utai8qxxh4">pic.twitter.com/Utai8qxxh4</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170540822938304512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He was keeping unwell for long.&nbsp;

Born on 14 September 1923 in Shikarpur in present-day Pakistan, Jethmalani has served a Union Minister apart from practicing as a lawyer.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
PM Narendra Modi: I consider myself fortunate to have got numerous opportunities to interact with <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RamJethmalani?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RamJethmalani</a>. In these sad moments, my condolences to his family, friends and many admirers. He may not be here but his pioneering work will live on! Om Shanti. <a href="https://t.co/cQ5OXrz4OE">https://t.co/cQ5OXrz4OE</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170556107280003073?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He was appointed Union Law Minister as well as held the portfolio of Urban Development Ministry.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
President Kovind: Saddened by passing of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RamJethmalani?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RamJethmalani</a>, former Union Minister &amp; a veteran lawyer. He was known to express his views on public issues with his characteristic eloquence. The nation has lost a distinguished jurist, a person of great erudition &amp; intellect. (file pic) <a href="https://t.co/0zqb8CsSC5">pic.twitter.com/0zqb8CsSC5</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170559578196475904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Later in his career, he was chosen as the chairman of the Bar Council of India and was elected the president of the Supreme Court of India in 2010.&nbsp;

He earned his LL.B.degree at the age of 17.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Union Home Minister Amit Shah: Deeply pained to know about the passing away of India’s veteran lawyer and former Union Minister <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RamJethmalani?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RamJethmalani</a> ji. In him we have not only lost a distinguished lawyer but also a great human who was full of life. (file pic) <a href="https://t.co/o94GELYtPg">pic.twitter.com/o94GELYtPg</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170549775520763904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Jethmalani has held some controversial and number of high-profile defence cases to his credit as a lawyer. Some of them include the Rajiv Gandhi assassination, Indira Gandhi assassination among many others. His recent case was in defence of Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in the defamation case filed by former Finance Minister late Arun Jaitley.&nbsp;

Jethmalani was appointed as the Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha - once from Rajasthan and from Bihar in the year 2016.

He announced his retirement from the judicial profession in September 2017.

Former Union Law Minister and veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passed away at his residence in Delhi on Sunday morning. Jethmalani was 95 years old. Veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passes away at his residence in Delhi.

Former Union Law Minister and veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passed away at his residence in Delhi on Sunday morning. Jethmalani was 95 years old. Veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani passes away at his residence in Delhi. He was 95 years old. (file pic) pic.twitter.com/Utai8qxxh4 — ANI (@ANI) September 8, 2019 × He was keeping unwell for long. Born on 14 September 1923 in Shikarpur in present-day Pakistan, Jethmalani has served a Union Minister apart from practicing as a lawyer. PM Narendra Modi: I consider myself fortunate to have got numerous opportunities to interact with #RamJethmalani. In these sad moments, my condolences to his family, friends and many admirers. He may not be here but his pioneering work will live on! Om Shanti. https://t.co/cQ5OXrz4OE — ANI (@ANI) September 8, 2019 × He was appointed Union Law Minister as well as held the portfolio of Urban Development Ministry. President Kovind: Saddened by passing of #RamJethmalani, former Union Minister & a veteran lawyer. He was known to express his views on public issues with his characteristic eloquence. The nation has lost a distinguished jurist, a person of great erudition & intellect. (file pic) pic.twitter.com/0zqb8CsSC5 — ANI (@ANI) September 8, 2019 × Later in his career, he was chosen as the chairman of the Bar Council of India and was elected the president of the Supreme Court of India in 2010. He earned his LL.B.degree at the age of 17. Union Home Minister Amit Shah: Deeply pained to know about the passing away of India’s veteran lawyer and former Union Minister #RamJethmalani ji. In him we have not only lost a distinguished lawyer but also a great human who was full of life. (file pic) pic.twitter.com/o94GELYtPg — ANI (@ANI) September 8, 2019 × Jethmalani has held some controversial and number of high-profile defence cases to his credit as a lawyer. Some of them include the Rajiv Gandhi assassination, Indira Gandhi assassination among many others. His recent case was in defence of Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in the defamation case filed by former Finance Minister late Arun Jaitley. Jethmalani was appointed as the Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha - once from Rajasthan and from Bihar in the year 2016. He announced his retirement from the judicial profession in September 2017.

Veteran lawyer, former law minister Ram Jethmalani passes away at 95

Expressing concern over the incidents of judiciary stepping into the executive domain, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on Thursday sought the creation of an "in-house corrective mechanism" for judicial accountability.

"I am seeing a new trend happening. Some judges, two days before their retirement, give judgement of the questionable legal validity and sit on television for three days to justify it. I don`t think it is fair. The way PIL has been detained in some states, it seems as if they are parallel to the state government`s governance," he said speaking at the Independence Day celebrations organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).

Calling in-house a corrective mechanism, the Law Minister said that the role of the judiciary today has become a matter of trust for the country.&nbsp;

"It is equally important that in-house corrective mechanism must exist with the Supreme Court at the apex to ensure discipline, propriety and in some way judicial accountability," he added.

Prasad highlighted that several crores of rupees were allocated for the judicial infrastructure in the last five years of the Modi government.

"As far as the government is concerned, our job is to provide infrastructure. The government, centre or state should have no business in interfering as far as the adjudication process of the judiciary is concerned. That`s entirely the domain of the judiciary. We need to respect that," he said.

Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, who was also present there on the occasion, in a veiled attack at some judges said that the judiciary has witnessed a surge in instances of "indecorous acts".

"Indian judiciary has, since some time past, witnessed an unprecedented rise in instances of indecorous acts which don`t align with the charter of our institution. Such instances of inappropriate behaviour have raised their ugly head in all courts, including the Supreme Court," he said.

Calling for urgent steps to end immoral behaviour, Gogoi said that stakeholders must quickly identify, isolate such animals and put them to quarantine.

"Graceful, pleasing and pleasant discourses and deliberations are increasingly being replaced by loud and motivated conduct. It is important that stakeholders quickly identify and isolate such animals and put them to quarantine," he added.

"It is time for all of us to introspect and redraw the lines that ought to bind each of the stakeholders to ensure that decorum and dignity of this great institution is not lost so that the meritorious enjoy space and are able to contribute to the good of the institution and steer it to new standards of excellence," CJI Gogoi said.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Expressing concern over the incidents of judiciary stepping into the executive domain, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on Thursday sought the creation of an "in-house corrective mechanism" for judicial accountability.

Expressing concern over the incidents of judiciary stepping into the executive domain, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on Thursday sought the creation of an "in-house corrective mechanism" for judicial accountability. "I am seeing a new trend happening. Some judges, two days before their retirement, give judgement of the questionable legal validity and sit on television for three days to justify it. I don`t think it is fair. The way PIL has been detained in some states, it seems as if they are parallel to the state government`s governance," he said speaking at the Independence Day celebrations organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA). Calling in-house a corrective mechanism, the Law Minister said that the role of the judiciary today has become a matter of trust for the country. "It is equally important that in-house corrective mechanism must exist with the Supreme Court at the apex to ensure discipline, propriety and in some way judicial accountability," he added. Prasad highlighted that several crores of rupees were allocated for the judicial infrastructure in the last five years of the Modi government. "As far as the government is concerned, our job is to provide infrastructure. The government, centre or state should have no business in interfering as far as the adjudication process of the judiciary is concerned. That`s entirely the domain of the judiciary. We need to respect that," he said. Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, who was also present there on the occasion, in a veiled attack at some judges said that the judiciary has witnessed a surge in instances of "indecorous acts". "Indian judiciary has, since some time past, witnessed an unprecedented rise in instances of indecorous acts which don`t align with the charter of our institution. Such instances of inappropriate behaviour have raised their ugly head in all courts, including the Supreme Court," he said. Calling for urgent steps to end immoral behaviour, Gogoi said that stakeholders must quickly identify, isolate such animals and put them to quarantine. "Graceful, pleasing and pleasant discourses and deliberations are increasingly being replaced by loud and motivated conduct. It is important that stakeholders quickly identify and isolate such animals and put them to quarantine," he added. "It is time for all of us to introspect and redraw the lines that ought to bind each of the stakeholders to ensure that decorum and dignity of this great institution is not lost so that the meritorious enjoy space and are able to contribute to the good of the institution and steer it to new standards of excellence," CJI Gogoi said.

Ravi Shankar Prasad seeks in-house corrective mechanism for judicial accountability

Singer R Kelly remained in detention over sexual abuse charges Sunday, his lawyer said, having still not posted bail.

A Chicago judge<a href="http://www.wionews.com/entertainment/r-kelly-facing-sex-abuse-charges-gets-1-million-bail-199240"> set bail at $1 million</a> at a hearing Saturday -- of which 10 per cent needs to be paid, in this case, $100,000.

But local media reported that Kelly had failed to do so, and remained in detention.

"Correct," Steve Greenberg, the musician's lawyer, responded to an AFP question over whether his client was still jailed. R&nbsp;Kelly has already spent two nights in detention.

Greenberg explained Saturday that his client was not as rich as his fame would suggest.

"This is someone who should be wealthy at this stage of his career, and through mismanagement, through hangers-on and bad contracts and bad deals and bad leases like he had in his studio, he really doesn't have any money at this point," Greenberg said.

R. Kelly was jailed on Friday on charges of sexually abusing four victims, including three minors, between 1998 and 2010.

Singer R Kelly remained in detention over sexual abuse charges Sunday, his lawyer said, having still not posted bail. A Chicago judge set bail at $1 million at a hearing Saturday -- of which 10 per cent needs to be paid, in this case, $100,000.

Singer R Kelly remained in detention over sexual abuse charges Sunday, his lawyer said, having still not posted bail. A Chicago judge set bail at $1 million at a hearing Saturday -- of which 10 per cent needs to be paid, in this case, $100,000. But local media reported that Kelly had failed to do so, and remained in detention. "Correct," Steve Greenberg, the musician's lawyer, responded to an AFP question over whether his client was still jailed. R Kelly has already spent two nights in detention. Greenberg explained Saturday that his client was not as rich as his fame would suggest. "This is someone who should be wealthy at this stage of his career, and through mismanagement, through hangers-on and bad contracts and bad deals and bad leases like he had in his studio, he really doesn't have any money at this point," Greenberg said. R. Kelly was jailed on Friday on charges of sexually abusing four victims, including three minors, between 1998 and 2010.

R Kelly has not posted bail, still jailed: Lawyer

Pakistan's Supreme Court will on Tuesday begin a review of its own acquittal of a Christian woman charged with blasphemy, a verdict that sparked days of Islamist protests and threats and chaos across the country.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-asia-bibis-lawyer-returns-to-pakistan-to-aid-in-appeal-193043">Asia Bibi</a>, who spent eight years on death row, has been in hiding since the Supreme Court freed her in October, with religious hardliners calling for her death and putting pressure on the government to prevent her from leaving the country.

Most reviews of Supreme Court verdicts are dismissed immediately, but the politically sensitive nature of the case has added an extra layer of uncertainty.

A three-judge panel, including the new Supreme Court Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, is due to hear the case.

Bibi's lawyer, Saif-ul-Malook, who fled to Europe due to fears for his safety last year, told Reuters he expected the case to be dismissed.

"They have filed the petition on flimsy grounds. They haven't attempted to counter her release on constitutional grounds," said Malook, who returned to Pakistan this week and will represent Bibi in court.

"God willing, she will have the decision in her favour tomorrow. She will be a free person to go anywhere she wants to."

Bibi is widely expected to seek asylum abroad due to safety concerns, with Canada among the favourites to accept her. In November, Canadian Premier Justin Trudeau said his country was in talks with Pakistan about helping Bibi.

Bibi, a farm worker, was condemned in 2010 over allegations that she made derogatory remarks about Islam after neighbours working in the fields with her objected to her drinking water from their glass because she was not Muslim. She has always denied committing blasphemy.

Leaders of the ultra-Islamist Tehreek-e-Labaik (TLP) group blocked main roads in Pakistan's biggest cities for three days after Bibi's acquittal, calling for the murder of the Supreme Court judges who freed her and urging their cooks and servants to kill them.

The TLP called off the protests after striking a deal with the government that would see authorities seek to put Bibi on an "exit control list" barring her from leaving the country. The government later cracked down on TLP members, detaining more than 3,000 activists and pressing terrorism charges against the group's leaders.

Bibi's case has outraged Christians worldwide and reignited a debate about Pakistan's draconian blasphemy law, which critics say is often abused and unfairly targets ethnic minorities.

"No one should be able to intimidate the Supreme Court into reversing a long-overdue ruling. Asia Bibi has been found to be innocent," said Omar Waraich, deputy South Asia director for Amnesty International.

"She should now finally be free to be reunited with her family and leave the country if she chooses."

Pakistan's Supreme Court will on Tuesday begin a review of its own acquittal of a Christian woman charged with blasphemy, a verdict that sparked days of Islamist protests and threats and chaos across the country.

Pakistan's Supreme Court will on Tuesday begin a review of its own acquittal of a Christian woman charged with blasphemy, a verdict that sparked days of Islamist protests and threats and chaos across the country. Asia Bibi, who spent eight years on death row, has been in hiding since the Supreme Court freed her in October, with religious hardliners calling for her death and putting pressure on the government to prevent her from leaving the country. Most reviews of Supreme Court verdicts are dismissed immediately, but the politically sensitive nature of the case has added an extra layer of uncertainty. A three-judge panel, including the new Supreme Court Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, is due to hear the case. Bibi's lawyer, Saif-ul-Malook, who fled to Europe due to fears for his safety last year, told Reuters he expected the case to be dismissed. "They have filed the petition on flimsy grounds. They haven't attempted to counter her release on constitutional grounds," said Malook, who returned to Pakistan this week and will represent Bibi in court. "God willing, she will have the decision in her favour tomorrow. She will be a free person to go anywhere she wants to." Bibi is widely expected to seek asylum abroad due to safety concerns, with Canada among the favourites to accept her. In November, Canadian Premier Justin Trudeau said his country was in talks with Pakistan about helping Bibi. Bibi, a farm worker, was condemned in 2010 over allegations that she made derogatory remarks about Islam after neighbours working in the fields with her objected to her drinking water from their glass because she was not Muslim. She has always denied committing blasphemy. Leaders of the ultra-Islamist Tehreek-e-Labaik (TLP) group blocked main roads in Pakistan's biggest cities for three days after Bibi's acquittal, calling for the murder of the Supreme Court judges who freed her and urging their cooks and servants to kill them. The TLP called off the protests after striking a deal with the government that would see authorities seek to put Bibi on an "exit control list" barring her from leaving the country. The government later cracked down on TLP members, detaining more than 3,000 activists and pressing terrorism charges against the group's leaders. Bibi's case has outraged Christians worldwide and reignited a debate about Pakistan's draconian blasphemy law, which critics say is often abused and unfairly targets ethnic minorities. "No one should be able to intimidate the Supreme Court into reversing a long-overdue ruling. Asia Bibi has been found to be innocent," said Omar Waraich, deputy South Asia director for Amnesty International. "She should now finally be free to be reunited with her family and leave the country if she chooses."

Pakistan Supreme Court to review Asia Bibi's blasphemy acquittal

A prominent French<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/hundreds-gather-in-paris-for-11th-weekend-of-yellow-vest-protests-192979"> anti-government "yellow vest" activist</a>, badly injured in the eye at a protest, was struck with one of the controversial rubber bullets used by police, his lawyer said Sunday.

Jerome Rodrigues' lawyer fears he will be "handicapped for life" after he was injured in clashes with police in Paris on Saturday during an 11th straight weekend of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/number-of-yellow-vest-protesters-surges-to-84000-but-violence-down-189927">protests against President Emmanuel Macron.</a>

Rodrigues was placed in an artificial coma overnight after the incident at the Bastille monument in central Paris.&nbsp;

"He is in shock. He will be handicapped for life. It is a tragedy for him and his family," lawyer Philippe de Veulle told BFM television, adding that he was lodging a complaint against police.

The bearded Rodrigues, who has become a well-known figure in the "yellow vest" movement with 50,000 followers on Facebook, was live-streaming the protest on the website when he was hit.

De Veulle said Rodrigues was struck with a "flashball", referring to the 40-mm (1.6-inch) rubber projectiles used by French riot police.

The devices have become deeply controversial in France since the protests began in November, blamed for dozens of serious injuries.

On Saturday, police using the bullets were for the first time deployed wearing body cams in a bid to increase transparency.

Rodrigues, speaking to LCI television from hospital, said he was also hit by a sting ball grenade, another controversial riot control device.

"Everything happened very quickly. They threw a grenade at me and I took a (rubber) bullet. I was attacked twice — a grenade to the foot, and the bullet," Rodrigues said.

He accused police of carrying out "all the violence the rules allow".

Witnesses picked up the projectile that struck Rodrigues and police are set to investigate the circumstances of the incident.

Originally sparked by rises in fuel taxes, the "yellow vest" protests quickly snowballed into a widespread revolt over accusations that Macron, an ex-banker, is out of touch with rural and small-town France.

Named after the emblematic luminous road safety vests worn by protesters, the demonstrations have drawn tens of thousands of people to the streets.

But their numbers have eased in recent weeks after Macron announced a series of policy climbdowns and launched a two-month consultation to allow people to vent their anger.

The interior ministry estimated that 69,000 turned out across France on Saturday, compared with 84,000 a week earlier.

A prominent French anti-government "yellow vest" activist, badly injured in the eye at a protest, was struck with one of the controversial rubber bullets used by police, his lawyer said Sunday.

A prominent French anti-government "yellow vest" activist, badly injured in the eye at a protest, was struck with one of the controversial rubber bullets used by police, his lawyer said Sunday. Jerome Rodrigues' lawyer fears he will be "handicapped for life" after he was injured in clashes with police in Paris on Saturday during an 11th straight weekend of protests against President Emmanuel Macron. Rodrigues was placed in an artificial coma overnight after the incident at the Bastille monument in central Paris. "He is in shock. He will be handicapped for life. It is a tragedy for him and his family," lawyer Philippe de Veulle told BFM television, adding that he was lodging a complaint against police. The bearded Rodrigues, who has become a well-known figure in the "yellow vest" movement with 50,000 followers on Facebook, was live-streaming the protest on the website when he was hit. De Veulle said Rodrigues was struck with a "flashball", referring to the 40-mm (1.6-inch) rubber projectiles used by French riot police. The devices have become deeply controversial in France since the protests began in November, blamed for dozens of serious injuries. On Saturday, police using the bullets were for the first time deployed wearing body cams in a bid to increase transparency. Rodrigues, speaking to LCI television from hospital, said he was also hit by a sting ball grenade, another controversial riot control device. "Everything happened very quickly. They threw a grenade at me and I took a (rubber) bullet. I was attacked twice — a grenade to the foot, and the bullet," Rodrigues said. He accused police of carrying out "all the violence the rules allow". Witnesses picked up the projectile that struck Rodrigues and police are set to investigate the circumstances of the incident. Originally sparked by rises in fuel taxes, the "yellow vest" protests quickly snowballed into a widespread revolt over accusations that Macron, an ex-banker, is out of touch with rural and small-town France. Named after the emblematic luminous road safety vests worn by protesters, the demonstrations have drawn tens of thousands of people to the streets. But their numbers have eased in recent weeks after Macron announced a series of policy climbdowns and launched a two-month consultation to allow people to vent their anger. The interior ministry estimated that 69,000 turned out across France on Saturday, compared with 84,000 a week earlier.

Yellow vest activist handicapped for life after getting hit by rubber bullet: Lawyer

Myanmar's High Court has allowed an appeal to proceed in the case of two Reuters reporters jailed for seven years on charges of breaking the country's Official Secrets Act, defence lawyers said on Tuesday.

The appeal against the conviction, filed earlier this month, cited evidence of a police set-up and lack of proof of a crime. The lawyers did not specify when the Yangon-based court made its decision and there was no formal announcement from the court. Reuters was unable to contact the court outside office hours.

"It is confirmed that the case has been accepted," said lawyer L. Khun Ring Pan, a member of the defence team. "We hope that the High Court will finally provide justice for Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo and declare them innocent."

Wa Lone, 32, and Kyaw Soe Oo, 28, were found guilty in September after a trial at a Yangon district court in a landmark case that has raised questions about Myanmar's progress towards democracy and sparked an outcry from diplomats and human rights advocates.

Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi said in September that the jailing of the reporters had nothing to do with freedom of expression. In comments made the week after their conviction, she said they had been sentenced for handling official secrets and "were not jailed because they were journalists".

Government spokesman Zaw Htay was not reachable for comment on Tuesday.

When lodging the appeal in early November, Reuters Editor-in-Chief Stephen J. Adler said: "The trial court'sruling was wrong.

"In condemning them as spies, it ignored compelling evidence of a police set-up, serious due process violations, and the prosecution's failure to prove any of the key elements of the crime."

Adler also said the court shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the Reuters reporters, and called on Myanmar to "uphold its stated dedication to rule of law, freedom of the press, and democracy by ordering the release of our colleagues".

In the next step of the appeal process, an appellate judge will take written and oral arguments from prosecution and defence lawyers before handing down a decision.

Before their arrest, the reporters had been working on a Reuters investigation into the killing of 10 Rohingya Muslim men and boys by security forces and local Buddhists in western Myanmar's Rakhine state during an army crackdown that began in August last year. The operation sent more than 700,000 people fleeing to Bangladesh.

During eight months of hearings, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo testified that two policemen they had not met before handed them papers rolled up in a newspaper during a meeting at a Yangon restaurant on December&nbsp;12. Almost immediately afterwards, they said, they were bundled into a car by plainclothes officers.

Myanmar's High Court has allowed an appeal to proceed in the case of two Reuters reporters jailed for seven years on charges of breaking the country's Official Secrets Act, defence lawyers said on Tuesday.

Myanmar's High Court has allowed an appeal to proceed in the case of two Reuters reporters jailed for seven years on charges of breaking the country's Official Secrets Act, defence lawyers said on Tuesday. The appeal against the conviction, filed earlier this month, cited evidence of a police set-up and lack of proof of a crime. The lawyers did not specify when the Yangon-based court made its decision and there was no formal announcement from the court. Reuters was unable to contact the court outside office hours. "It is confirmed that the case has been accepted," said lawyer L. Khun Ring Pan, a member of the defence team. "We hope that the High Court will finally provide justice for Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo and declare them innocent." Wa Lone, 32, and Kyaw Soe Oo, 28, were found guilty in September after a trial at a Yangon district court in a landmark case that has raised questions about Myanmar's progress towards democracy and sparked an outcry from diplomats and human rights advocates. Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi said in September that the jailing of the reporters had nothing to do with freedom of expression. In comments made the week after their conviction, she said they had been sentenced for handling official secrets and "were not jailed because they were journalists". Government spokesman Zaw Htay was not reachable for comment on Tuesday. When lodging the appeal in early November, Reuters Editor-in-Chief Stephen J. Adler said: "The trial court'sruling was wrong. "In condemning them as spies, it ignored compelling evidence of a police set-up, serious due process violations, and the prosecution's failure to prove any of the key elements of the crime." Adler also said the court shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the Reuters reporters, and called on Myanmar to "uphold its stated dedication to rule of law, freedom of the press, and democracy by ordering the release of our colleagues". In the next step of the appeal process, an appellate judge will take written and oral arguments from prosecution and defence lawyers before handing down a decision. Before their arrest, the reporters had been working on a Reuters investigation into the killing of 10 Rohingya Muslim men and boys by security forces and local Buddhists in western Myanmar's Rakhine state during an army crackdown that began in August last year. The operation sent more than 700,000 people fleeing to Bangladesh. During eight months of hearings, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo testified that two policemen they had not met before handed them papers rolled up in a newspaper during a meeting at a Yangon restaurant on December 12. Almost immediately afterwards, they said, they were bundled into a car by plainclothes officers.

Myanmar court allows jailed Reuters reporters' appeal to proceed: Lawyer

The United Nations on Tuesday denied that it had forced the Pakistani lawyer of a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy to leave the country.

Saif-ul-Malook fled to the Netherlands from Pakistan after violence erupted over the Pakistani Supreme Court's decision to overturn the conviction of Asia Bibi who was on death row.

"The UN in Pakistan extended its assistance to Mr. Malook at his request and did not force him to leave the country against his wishes, nor can the UN force someone to leave Pakistan against his or her will," said UN spokesperson Eri Kaneko.

At a news conference in The Hague on Monday, the lawyer said he was "put on a plane against my wishes" even though he had refused to leave the country without ensuring that his client was out of prison.

Malook said he contacted a UN official in Islamabad after the outbreak of clashes.

"And then they (the UN) and the European nation ambassadors in Islamabad, they kept me for three days and then put me on a plane against my wishes," he said.

Asia Bibi spent nearly a decade on death row after being accused of blasphemy following a dispute with fellow villagers over drinking from the same bowl of water. The charge is an inflammatory one in Muslim-majority Pakistan.

But she remains in Pakistan after Prime Minister Imran Khan struck a deal with the Islamist hardliners behind the protests to bar her from leaving until a final court appeal is heard.

The lawyer had previously told AFP before his departure on Saturday that he was leaving because "in the current scenario, it's not possible for me to live in Pakistan".&nbsp;

The United Nations on Tuesday denied that it had forced the Pakistani lawyer of a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy to leave the country. Saif-ul-Malook fled to the Netherlands from Pakistan after violence erupted over the Pakistani Supreme Court's decision to overturn the conviction of Asia Bibi who was on death row.

The United Nations on Tuesday denied that it had forced the Pakistani lawyer of a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy to leave the country. Saif-ul-Malook fled to the Netherlands from Pakistan after violence erupted over the Pakistani Supreme Court's decision to overturn the conviction of Asia Bibi who was on death row. "The UN in Pakistan extended its assistance to Mr. Malook at his request and did not force him to leave the country against his wishes, nor can the UN force someone to leave Pakistan against his or her will," said UN spokesperson Eri Kaneko. At a news conference in The Hague on Monday, the lawyer said he was "put on a plane against my wishes" even though he had refused to leave the country without ensuring that his client was out of prison. Malook said he contacted a UN official in Islamabad after the outbreak of clashes. "And then they (the UN) and the European nation ambassadors in Islamabad, they kept me for three days and then put me on a plane against my wishes," he said. Asia Bibi spent nearly a decade on death row after being accused of blasphemy following a dispute with fellow villagers over drinking from the same bowl of water. The charge is an inflammatory one in Muslim-majority Pakistan. But she remains in Pakistan after Prime Minister Imran Khan struck a deal with the Islamist hardliners behind the protests to bar her from leaving until a final court appeal is heard. The lawyer had previously told AFP before his departure on Saturday that he was leaving because "in the current scenario, it's not possible for me to live in Pakistan".

UN denies forcing Asia Bibi's lawyer to leave for Netherlands

The Pakistani lawyer who saved a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy from death row said Monday that the UN and EU made him leave the country "against my wishes" because his life was at risk.

Saif-ul-Malook, who has <a href="http://www.wionews.com/pakistan/asia-bibis-lawyer-flees-to-the-netherlands-facing-threat-to-life-in-pakistan-175708">fled to the Netherlands</a>, said he contacted a United Nations official in Islamabad after Islamist violence erupted following the Pakistani Supreme Court's acquittal of Asia Bibi on Wednesday.

"And then they (the UN) and the European nation ambassadors in Islamabad, they kept me for three days and then put me on a plane against my wishes," the lawyer told a press conference in The Hague.

"I pressed them that I would not leave the country unless I get Asia out of the prison... I am not happy to be here without her but, but everybody said that you are the prime target at the moment and the whole world is taking care of Asia Bibi.

"They were of the view that I was the prime target to be killed, and that my life was in imminent danger. For three days they did not let me open the door, one day I called the French ambassador and said I do not want to be here."&nbsp;

The lawyer had previously told AFP before his departure on Saturday that he was leaving because "in the current scenario, it's not possible for me to live in Pakistan".

Saif-ul-Malook arrived in The Hague at the weekend after a short stopover in Rome, with the help of the HVC Foundation, a Dutch group that focuses on the human rights of Christian minorities.

Asia Bibi spent nearly a decade on death row after being accused of blasphemy after a dispute with fellow villagers. The charge is an inflammatory one in Muslim-majority Pakistan.

But she remains in Pakistan after Prime Minister Imran Khan struck a deal with with the Islamist hardliners behind the protests.

Saif-ul-Malook dismissed the deal as a "face-saving" exercise for the hardliners from the Tehreek-e-Labaik party and insisted that Asia Bibi would "100 per cent" be freed soon.

"This compromise is nothing but a piece of paper that can be thrown in the dustbin," he said.

It was not clear whether Bibi had had any firm offers of asylum if she does leave Pakistan, added the lawyer, who said he was "legally authorised" to choose a country for her.

The lawyer said a UN official in Pakistan told him "we are taking care of her" but that "when I said which country, they said we can't say.

"I asked the French ambassador 'would your country be willing to offer asylum to Asia Bibi. He said if you request us legally, I said 'OK I request her'."&nbsp;

The Pakistani lawyer who saved a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy from death row said Monday that the UN and EU made him leave the country "against my wishes" because his life was at risk.

The Pakistani lawyer who saved a Christian woman convicted of blasphemy from death row said Monday that the UN and EU made him leave the country "against my wishes" because his life was at risk. Saif-ul-Malook, who has fled to the Netherlands, said he contacted a United Nations official in Islamabad after Islamist violence erupted following the Pakistani Supreme Court's acquittal of Asia Bibi on Wednesday. "And then they (the UN) and the European nation ambassadors in Islamabad, they kept me for three days and then put me on a plane against my wishes," the lawyer told a press conference in The Hague. "I pressed them that I would not leave the country unless I get Asia out of the prison... I am not happy to be here without her but, but everybody said that you are the prime target at the moment and the whole world is taking care of Asia Bibi. "They were of the view that I was the prime target to be killed, and that my life was in imminent danger. For three days they did not let me open the door, one day I called the French ambassador and said I do not want to be here." The lawyer had previously told AFP before his departure on Saturday that he was leaving because "in the current scenario, it's not possible for me to live in Pakistan". Saif-ul-Malook arrived in The Hague at the weekend after a short stopover in Rome, with the help of the HVC Foundation, a Dutch group that focuses on the human rights of Christian minorities. Asia Bibi spent nearly a decade on death row after being accused of blasphemy after a dispute with fellow villagers. The charge is an inflammatory one in Muslim-majority Pakistan. But she remains in Pakistan after Prime Minister Imran Khan struck a deal with with the Islamist hardliners behind the protests. Saif-ul-Malook dismissed the deal as a "face-saving" exercise for the hardliners from the Tehreek-e-Labaik party and insisted that Asia Bibi would "100 per cent" be freed soon. "This compromise is nothing but a piece of paper that can be thrown in the dustbin," he said. It was not clear whether Bibi had had any firm offers of asylum if she does leave Pakistan, added the lawyer, who said he was "legally authorised" to choose a country for her. The lawyer said a UN official in Pakistan told him "we are taking care of her" but that "when I said which country, they said we can't say. "I asked the French ambassador 'would your country be willing to offer asylum to Asia Bibi. He said if you request us legally, I said 'OK I request her'."

Not happy to be here without Asia Bibi, her lawyer says in the Netherlands

A former Pakistan judge named Sikandar Hayat was on Saturday found to have 2,200 cars registered under his name, news agency DAWN reported.&nbsp;

The 82-year-old former judge received a chalaan a few days back for a car he did not own. According to his legal counsel, Hayat only owns one car.&nbsp;

2,224 cars were registered in the name of my client," the counsel said, as quoted by ANI.&nbsp;

Upon contacting the Punjab Excise and Taxation Department, it emerged that an eye-watering 2,224 vehicles had been registered in Hayat's name.

After hearing the lawyer, the top court sought a reply from the secretary and director of the Punjab excise department within a week.

A former Pakistan judge named Sikandar Hayat was on Saturday found to have 2,200 cars registered under his name, news agency DAWN reported. The 82-year-old former judge received a chalaan a few days back for a car he did not own.

A former Pakistan judge named Sikandar Hayat was on Saturday found to have 2,200 cars registered under his name, news agency DAWN reported. The 82-year-old former judge received a chalaan a few days back for a car he did not own. According to his legal counsel, Hayat only owns one car. 2,224 cars were registered in the name of my client," the counsel said, as quoted by ANI. Upon contacting the Punjab Excise and Taxation Department, it emerged that an eye-watering 2,224 vehicles had been registered in Hayat's name. After hearing the lawyer, the top court sought a reply from the secretary and director of the Punjab excise department within a week.

Over 2,200 cars registered in name of former Pak judge

Harvard University <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-govt-accuses-harvard-of-discriminating-against-asian-applicants-162591">discriminates against Asian-American applicants</a> in order to illegally limit how many it admits, a lawyer for a group suing the school said on Monday at the start of a closely watched trial.

The non-jury trial before U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston pits the Ivy League school against Students for Fair Admissions, whose 2014 lawsuit challenges the use of race as a factor in college admissions decisions.

SFFA, which is headed by anti-affirmative action activist Edward Blum, claims that Harvard illegally engages in "racial balancing" that artificially limits the number of Asian-American students at the elite school.

Even statistics showed Asian-Americans applicants outperformed other racial groups on academic measures, yet that was not necessarily borne out on Harvard's campus, Adam Mortara, a lawyer for SFFA, said in his opening statement.

Harvard pushes down the scores Asian-Americans receive on "personal" rating that measures an applicant's subjective likability, grit and positivity and improperly allows race to play a factor in those scores, Mortara said.

"There's no other possible explanation," he said.

Harvard was expected to deliver its own opening statement later on Monday. It denies discriminating against Asian-Americans, saying their rates of admission have grown significantly since 2010.

The lawsuit, backed by the Trump administration, could eventually reach the Supreme Court, giving the newly cemented five-member conservative majority a chance to bar the use of affirmative action to help minority applicants get into college.

Conservatives argue that affirmative action, which aims to offset historic patterns of racial discrimination, hurts white people and Asian-Americans, who outperform other minority groups on academic measures.

SFFA alleges that despite strong scores on a variety of academic and extracurricular measures, Asian-American applicants received the lowest score of any group on a subjective "personal" rating assigned by Harvard admissions officials.

Asian-Americans, who represent about 6 percent of the U.S. population, comprise 23 percent of Harvard's current freshman class.

Harvard also notes that the Supreme Court has previously held that colleges have an interest in enrolling diverse groups of students and may consider race as one factor among many when reviewing applications.

The U.S. Justice Department, which launched a related probe of Harvard after Republican President Donald Trump's election, has backed SFFA's case, saying that Harvard has not seriously considered alternative, race-neutral approaches to admissions.

The Justice Department last month launched a similar investigation into whether Yale University also discriminates against Asian-Americans, an allegation it denies. 
&nbsp;

Harvard University discriminates against Asian-American applicants in order to illegally limit how many it admits, a lawyer for a group suing the school said on Monday at the start of a closely watched trial.

Harvard University discriminates against Asian-American applicants in order to illegally limit how many it admits, a lawyer for a group suing the school said on Monday at the start of a closely watched trial. The non-jury trial before U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston pits the Ivy League school against Students for Fair Admissions, whose 2014 lawsuit challenges the use of race as a factor in college admissions decisions. SFFA, which is headed by anti-affirmative action activist Edward Blum, claims that Harvard illegally engages in "racial balancing" that artificially limits the number of Asian-American students at the elite school. Even statistics showed Asian-Americans applicants outperformed other racial groups on academic measures, yet that was not necessarily borne out on Harvard's campus, Adam Mortara, a lawyer for SFFA, said in his opening statement. Harvard pushes down the scores Asian-Americans receive on "personal" rating that measures an applicant's subjective likability, grit and positivity and improperly allows race to play a factor in those scores, Mortara said. "There's no other possible explanation," he said. Harvard was expected to deliver its own opening statement later on Monday. It denies discriminating against Asian-Americans, saying their rates of admission have grown significantly since 2010. The lawsuit, backed by the Trump administration, could eventually reach the Supreme Court, giving the newly cemented five-member conservative majority a chance to bar the use of affirmative action to help minority applicants get into college. Conservatives argue that affirmative action, which aims to offset historic patterns of racial discrimination, hurts white people and Asian-Americans, who outperform other minority groups on academic measures. SFFA alleges that despite strong scores on a variety of academic and extracurricular measures, Asian-American applicants received the lowest score of any group on a subjective "personal" rating assigned by Harvard admissions officials. Asian-Americans, who represent about 6 percent of the U.S. population, comprise 23 percent of Harvard's current freshman class. Harvard also notes that the Supreme Court has previously held that colleges have an interest in enrolling diverse groups of students and may consider race as one factor among many when reviewing applications. The U.S. Justice Department, which launched a related probe of Harvard after Republican President Donald Trump's election, has backed SFFA's case, saying that Harvard has not seriously considered alternative, race-neutral approaches to admissions. The Justice Department last month launched a similar investigation into whether Yale University also discriminates against Asian-Americans, an allegation it denies.

'Harvard discriminates against Asian-Americans'

The Supreme Court's judgement which on Thursday scrapped the penal provision on adultery received kudos from leading women advocates who dubbed it as a "strong" and "progressive" decision on gender equality.

Senior advocate Rebecca John and lawyers Aishwarya Bhati and Menaka Guruswamy, termed as correct the apex court's observation that the adultery law dented the individuality of women and treated them as "chattel of husbands".

While John said Section 497 (adultery) of the Indian Penal Code should have been struck down 50 years ago, Bhati opined that the verdict will go a long way in ensuring that women's rights are "strongly and robustly embedded" in the system and cannot be taken away.

Guruswamy termed the verdict as a good decision on gender equality and said that "it makes perfect sense as clearly the Supreme Court is saying that men and women within marriage are equal".

John said: "It should never have been a part of modern India's penal code because it was an extremely archaic patriarchal law. Too late but a welcome move." 
Bhati said the law was "one of those colonial baggages that we had to let go of as it was from an era where women were treated as chattel of men and wife was the property of the husband".

The apex court's five-judge Constitution bench was unanimous in striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offence of adultery and holding it as manifestly arbitrary, archaic law which is violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women.

The Supreme Court's judgement which on Thursday scrapped the penal provision on adultery received kudos from leading women advocates who dubbed it as a "strong" and "progressive" decision on gender equality.

The Supreme Court's judgement which on Thursday scrapped the penal provision on adultery received kudos from leading women advocates who dubbed it as a "strong" and "progressive" decision on gender equality. Senior advocate Rebecca John and lawyers Aishwarya Bhati and Menaka Guruswamy, termed as correct the apex court's observation that the adultery law dented the individuality of women and treated them as "chattel of husbands". While John said Section 497 (adultery) of the Indian Penal Code should have been struck down 50 years ago, Bhati opined that the verdict will go a long way in ensuring that women's rights are "strongly and robustly embedded" in the system and cannot be taken away. Guruswamy termed the verdict as a good decision on gender equality and said that "it makes perfect sense as clearly the Supreme Court is saying that men and women within marriage are equal". John said: "It should never have been a part of modern India's penal code because it was an extremely archaic patriarchal law. Too late but a welcome move." Bhati said the law was "one of those colonial baggages that we had to let go of as it was from an era where women were treated as chattel of men and wife was the property of the husband". The apex court's five-judge Constitution bench was unanimous in striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offence of adultery and holding it as manifestly arbitrary, archaic law which is violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women.

SC's adultery verdict strong, progressive on gender equality, say women lawyers

US President Donald Trump said on Friday that he is contemplating pardoning boxing great Muhammad Ali, whose refusal of military service during the Vietnam War made him a champion of the US civil rights and anti-war movements.

However, soon after Ali's family lawyer issued a prompt response from the late heavyweight champion's estate: thanks but no thanks.

"We appreciate President Trump's sentiment, but a pardon is unnecessary. The US&nbsp;Supreme Court overturned the conviction of Muhammad Ali in a unanimous decision in 1971. There is no conviction from which a pardon is needed," said Ron Tweel, a lawyer for the boxer's estate and his widow, Lonnie.

Tweel, reached by telephone at his home in Virginia, said the White House had not contacted him or Lonnie Ali about a potential pardon. He said he had been in contact with the widow after Trump's comments and they decided to issue a statement on behalf of the family.

"We heard what he was contemplating and it needed a response," he said.

Ali, who died in 2016, was convicted of draft evasion in 1967 and sentenced to five years in prison, but the conviction was overturned on appeal by the US Supreme Court in 1971.

"I'm thinking about Muhammad Ali. I'm thinking about that seriously. And some others and some folks who have sentences that aren't fair," Trump told reporters at the White House before heading to Canada for the G7 summit.

Trump described Ali as "not very popular" at the time due to his denial of no responsibility for any mistransmission of, orinterference with, this communication service in the military during the Vietnam War.

But while controversial, Ali's resistance on grounds of conscience made him a hero to many during a highly polarized period marked by struggles over racial inequality and rising opposition to the US role in the Vietnam War.

A charismatic fighter who won his first world heavyweight title in 1964, Ali was banned from boxing for three years as a result of his conviction but went on to reclaim the championship in a stellar career that lived up to his boast of being "the Greatest."

Trump said many of the 3,000 people he was considering for pardons were treated unfairly or given unfairly long sentences. Trump was speaking to reporters on the White House lawn on a wide range of topics before he departed for a Group of Seven summit in Canada, where other G7 leaders are set to clash with him over trade.

Trump said many of the 3,000 people he was considering for pardons were treated unfairly or given unfairly long sentences

US President Donald Trump said on Friday that he is contemplating pardoning boxing great Muhammad Ali, whose refusal of military service during the Vietnam War made him a champion of the US civil rights and anti-war movements. However, soon after Ali's family lawyer issued a prompt response from the late heavyweight champion's estate: thanks but no thanks. "We appreciate President Trump's sentiment, but a pardon is unnecessary. The US Supreme Court overturned the conviction of Muhammad Ali in a unanimous decision in 1971. There is no conviction from which a pardon is needed," said Ron Tweel, a lawyer for the boxer's estate and his widow, Lonnie. Tweel, reached by telephone at his home in Virginia, said the White House had not contacted him or Lonnie Ali about a potential pardon. He said he had been in contact with the widow after Trump's comments and they decided to issue a statement on behalf of the family. "We heard what he was contemplating and it needed a response," he said. Ali, who died in 2016, was convicted of draft evasion in 1967 and sentenced to five years in prison, but the conviction was overturned on appeal by the US Supreme Court in 1971. "I'm thinking about Muhammad Ali. I'm thinking about that seriously. And some others and some folks who have sentences that aren't fair," Trump told reporters at the White House before heading to Canada for the G7 summit. Trump described Ali as "not very popular" at the time due to his denial of no responsibility for any mistransmission of, orinterference with, this communication service in the military during the Vietnam War. But while controversial, Ali's resistance on grounds of conscience made him a hero to many during a highly polarized period marked by struggles over racial inequality and rising opposition to the US role in the Vietnam War. A charismatic fighter who won his first world heavyweight title in 1964, Ali was banned from boxing for three years as a result of his conviction but went on to reclaim the championship in a stellar career that lived up to his boast of being "the Greatest." Trump said many of the 3,000 people he was considering for pardons were treated unfairly or given unfairly long sentences. Trump was speaking to reporters on the White House lawn on a wide range of topics before he departed for a Group of Seven summit in Canada, where other G7 leaders are set to clash with him over trade.

Trump considers pardoning Muhammad Ali, his lawyer replies 'no thank you'

A Manhattan-based lawyer has been receiving flak for talking disrespectfully to the staff&nbsp;of a restaurant. According to reports, the man hurled racially-charged rant on Spanish speaking staff of Manhattan's Fresh Kitchen restaurants on Tuesday.

The video of the incident has gone viral and shows the man threatening the staff and shouting at them for speaking in Spanish. "The clients of your staff are speaking Spanish to customers when they should be speaking English," the man said in the video.&nbsp;

"I pay for their welfare, I pay for their ability to be here. The least they could do is speak English," the man shouted and threatened to deport the cafe workers.&nbsp;

The man, identified as Aaron Schlossberg, is known to have been involved in another confrontation previously. A video from 2016 confirms the same where Schlossberg could be seen calling another man an "ugly foreigner".

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
“Tough guy” racist, Aaron Schlossberg running scared in NYC today ? 
 
He also got evicted from his office space ??‍♂️<a href="https://t.co/jEDjHYNEiO">pic.twitter.com/jEDjHYNEiO</a>
— UnsilentMajority ? (@The_UnSilent_) <a href="https://twitter.com/The_UnSilent_/status/997268960264556544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Meanwhile, social media had a field day trolling Schlossberg after videos emerged showing him running away from reporters in New York City.&nbsp;

The man, identified as Aaron Schlossberg, is known to have been involved in another confrontation previously

A Manhattan-based lawyer has been receiving flak for talking disrespectfully to the staff of a restaurant. According to reports, the man hurled racially-charged rant on Spanish speaking staff of Manhattan's Fresh Kitchen restaurants on Tuesday. The video of the incident has gone viral and shows the man threatening the staff and shouting at them for speaking in Spanish. "The clients of your staff are speaking Spanish to customers when they should be speaking English," the man said in the video. "I pay for their welfare, I pay for their ability to be here. The least they could do is speak English," the man shouted and threatened to deport the cafe workers. The man, identified as Aaron Schlossberg, is known to have been involved in another confrontation previously. A video from 2016 confirms the same where Schlossberg could be seen calling another man an "ugly foreigner". “Tough guy” racist, Aaron Schlossberg running scared in NYC today ? He also got evicted from his office space ??‍♂️pic.twitter.com/jEDjHYNEiO — UnsilentMajority ? (@The_UnSilent_) May 18, 2018 × Meanwhile, social media had a field day trolling Schlossberg after videos emerged showing him running away from reporters in New York City.

Watch: New York lawyer threatens to deport cafe workers for speaking Spanish

Michael Avenatti, adult actress Stormy Daniels' lawyer, on Tuesday, claimed that US President Donald Trump's attorney Michael Cohen, who had also paid Daniels US $130,000 to keep quiet about her encounter with Trump, has received US $500,000 from a Russian billionaire in months after the 2016 US elections.&nbsp

In a tweet and report released on Tuesday, Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti said a company controlled by Viktor Vekselberg, a businessman with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, sent the payment to Cohen. The payments were allegedly made between January and August 2017.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
After significant investigation, we have discovered that Mr. Trump’s atty Mr. Cohen received approximately $500,000 in the mos. after the election from a company controlled by a Russian Oligarc with close ties to Mr. Putin. These monies may have reimbursed the $130k payment.
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/993959992762994688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

An attorney for the Renova affiliate, Columbus Nova, said it hired Cohen as a business consultant and that Vekselberg had no involvement in the payments. Columbus Nova is an U.S. investment arm of Renova Group, a conglomerate controlled by Vekselberg. Both Vekselberg and Renova were hit last month by U.S. sanctions for suspected meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and other alleged "malign activity."

AT&T, the telecoms corporation, confirmed it had made payments to Cohen’s firm during 2017 for “insights into understanding the new administration”.

"Essential Consultants was one of several firms we engaged in early 2017 to provide insights into understanding the new administration. They did no legal or lobbying work for us, and the contract ended in December 2017," AT&T said in a statement.

Avenatti also said he discovered four payments of just under $100,000 each by drugmaker Novartis to Essential Consultants, the same company used by Cohen to make payments to Daniels. Novartis, a Swiss-based pharmaceuticals firm, did not dispute that it paid Cohen. 
&nbsp

In a tweet and report released on Tuesday, Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti said a company controlled by Viktor Vekselberg, a businessman with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, sent the payment to Cohen

Michael Avenatti, adult actress Stormy Daniels' lawyer, on Tuesday, claimed that US President Donald Trump's attorney Michael Cohen, who had also paid Daniels US $130,000 to keep quiet about her encounter with Trump, has received US $500,000 from a Russian billionaire in months after the 2016 US elections. In a tweet and report released on Tuesday, Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti said a company controlled by Viktor Vekselberg, a businessman with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, sent the payment to Cohen. The payments were allegedly made between January and August 2017. After significant investigation, we have discovered that Mr. Trump’s atty Mr. Cohen received approximately $500,000 in the mos. after the election from a company controlled by a Russian Oligarc with close ties to Mr. Putin. These monies may have reimbursed the $130k payment. — Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) May 8, 2018 × An attorney for the Renova affiliate, Columbus Nova, said it hired Cohen as a business consultant and that Vekselberg had no involvement in the payments. Columbus Nova is an U.S. investment arm of Renova Group, a conglomerate controlled by Vekselberg. Both Vekselberg and Renova were hit last month by U.S. sanctions for suspected meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and other alleged "malign activity." AT&T, the telecoms corporation, confirmed it had made payments to Cohen’s firm during 2017 for “insights into understanding the new administration”. "Essential Consultants was one of several firms we engaged in early 2017 to provide insights into understanding the new administration. They did no legal or lobbying work for us, and the contract ended in December 2017," AT&T said in a statement. Avenatti also said he discovered four payments of just under $100,000 each by drugmaker Novartis to Essential Consultants, the same company used by Cohen to make payments to Daniels. Novartis, a Swiss-based pharmaceuticals firm, did not dispute that it paid Cohen.

Stormy Daniels' lawyer alleges big payment to Trump attorney Cohen from Russian oligarch

The US&nbsppresident’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, on Sunday claimed that Trump would have definitely had Michael Cohen make payments to more women if he had to, as the Trump-Stormy Daniels scandal heats up.&nbsp

"I have no knowledge of that. But I would think if it was necessary, yes." Giuliani told ABC's "This Week", when asked about Cohen making payments to other women, The Hill reported.

Daniels’ lawyer said Giuliani and Trump had “lost track of the truth” and were undermining their own attempted “coverup”. He had added that there could be many other woemn with similar issues to his client.&nbsp

Giuliani, who recently joined Trump's team of lawyers in the Mueller probe over the alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election appeared in several interviews to clarify his comments on reimbursement.

On Thursday, in an exclusive interview with Fox News's Sean Hannity, Giuliani said that the payment was "perfectly legal" and was not "campaign money".

Asked whether the US President was aware of the payment, Giuliani underscored that "he did not know the specifics of it in his knowledge".

Also watch:&nbsp<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-knew-about-the-payment-to-stormy-daniels-trumps-lawyer-134579">Trump knew about the payment to Stormy Daniels: Trump's lawyer</a>

On Thursday, Trump went on a Twitter rant after Guiliani &nbspsaid on Wednesday that <a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/stormy-daniels-case-trump-repays-michael-cohen-says-rudy-giuliani--134389">Trump had reimbursed Cohen</a> the $130,000 that was given to Daniels to buy her silence about an alleged affair with the president, saying that his lawyer Michael Cohen did not use presidential campaign funds to pay Stormy Daniels as part of a contract he said was aimed at stopping the adult-film star from making "false and extortionist accusations" about an affair.

"Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll (sic) in this transaction," Trump wrote in one of a series of posts on Twitter early on Thursday.

Last week, Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, who publicly claimed a 2006 sexual encounter with President Trump, filed a fresh defamation suit against him. The lawsuit said that she suffered damages in excess of USD 75,000.

Daniels has been locked in a legal battle with President Trump, seeking to invalidate a nondisclosure agreement she and Cohen had signed more than a decade ago.

In her previous lawsuit, the adult star is asking whether the hush agreement was legal and is looking at whether President Trump consented to it.

The adult star revealed that the deal was not valid because the US President "never signed it himself".&nbsp

Giuliani, who recently joined Trump's team of lawyers in the Mueller probe over the alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election appeared in several interviews to clarify his comments on reimbursement

The US&nbsppresident’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, on Sunday claimed that Trump would have definitely had Michael Cohen make payments to more women if he had to, as the Trump-Stormy Daniels scandal heats up. "I have no knowledge of that. But I would think if it was necessary, yes." Giuliani told ABC's "This Week", when asked about Cohen making payments to other women, The Hill reported. Daniels’ lawyer said Giuliani and Trump had “lost track of the truth” and were undermining their own attempted “coverup”. He had added that there could be many other woemn with similar issues to his client. Giuliani, who recently joined Trump's team of lawyers in the Mueller probe over the alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election appeared in several interviews to clarify his comments on reimbursement. On Thursday, in an exclusive interview with Fox News's Sean Hannity, Giuliani said that the payment was "perfectly legal" and was not "campaign money". Asked whether the US President was aware of the payment, Giuliani underscored that "he did not know the specifics of it in his knowledge". Also watch: Trump knew about the payment to Stormy Daniels: Trump's lawyer On Thursday, Trump went on a Twitter rant after Guiliani &nbspsaid on Wednesday that Trump had reimbursed Cohen the $130,000 that was given to Daniels to buy her silence about an alleged affair with the president, saying that his lawyer Michael Cohen did not use presidential campaign funds to pay Stormy Daniels as part of a contract he said was aimed at stopping the adult-film star from making "false and extortionist accusations" about an affair. "Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll (sic) in this transaction," Trump wrote in one of a series of posts on Twitter early on Thursday. Last week, Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, who publicly claimed a 2006 sexual encounter with President Trump, filed a fresh defamation suit against him. The lawsuit said that she suffered damages in excess of USD 75,000. Daniels has been locked in a legal battle with President Trump, seeking to invalidate a nondisclosure agreement she and Cohen had signed more than a decade ago. In her previous lawsuit, the adult star is asking whether the hush agreement was legal and is looking at whether President Trump consented to it. The adult star revealed that the deal was not valid because the US President "never signed it himself".

Trump would have had Cohen pay other women if necessary: Lawyer Rudy Giuliani

"Do you have any relative who has been raped", an annoyed Supreme Court asked a lawyer on Friday.

The apex court bench was annoyed as it asked the advocate, who had alleged that FIRs were not lodged by the police in rape cases involving powerful people like ministers, MPs or MLAs, what his locus standi was vis-a-vis the Unnao rape case, news agency PTI reported.

It questioned the locus of the advocate in filing the PIL, wondering how public interest litigation can be filed in criminal cases.

A bench of Justices S A Bobde and L Nageswara Rao asked advocate ML Sharma how he was aggrieved with the Unnao rape case and how was he connected to the case.

"The Allahabad High Court has already passed some orders in the case. Mr Sharma you are not an aggrieved person in the case. There cannot be a PIL in a criminal case," the bench observed.

Sharma reportedly alleged that in several rape cases involving former ministers or MLAs, no FIR was&nbsplodged by the police, wherever powerful people were involved.

"Who are you in these rapes cases? Don't be generic. Is any relative of a victim of rape before us for a&nbspremedy? Do you have any relative who has been raped," Justice Bobde asked the lawyer.

An uneasy calm prevailed among the lawyers in the courtroom after the bench's remarks.

When Sharma persisted with his arguments, the bench dismissed his petition saying it cannot be entertained.&nbsp

The apex court had on April 11 agreed to hear a plea for a CBI probe into the Unnao gangrape case allegedly involving a BJP lawmaker from Uttar Pradesh.

Sharma's plea has also alleged that the rape victim's father was tortured and killed in the police custody at the behest of the "ruling party" in the state. He also sought the court's direction for a CBI probe into a case of kidnapping and rape of a minor girl last July allegedly involving a BJP legislator.

Alleging that the complaint had not named the legislator "under political pressure" and the state police would not carry out a "fair investigation under compulsion", it said the matter should be handed over to the CBI for independent investigation.

The public interest petition had also sought protection and compensation to the victims' kin, as was provided in the Nirbhaya gangrape case.&nbsp

The apex court bench was annoyed as it asked the advocate, who had alleged that FIRs were not lodged by the police in rape cases involving powerful people like ministers, MPs or MLAs, what his locus standi was vis-a-vis the Unnao rape case

"Do you have any relative who has been raped", an annoyed Supreme Court asked a lawyer on Friday. The apex court bench was annoyed as it asked the advocate, who had alleged that FIRs were not lodged by the police in rape cases involving powerful people like ministers, MPs or MLAs, what his locus standi was vis-a-vis the Unnao rape case, news agency PTI reported. It questioned the locus of the advocate in filing the PIL, wondering how public interest litigation can be filed in criminal cases. A bench of Justices S A Bobde and L Nageswara Rao asked advocate ML Sharma how he was aggrieved with the Unnao rape case and how was he connected to the case. "The Allahabad High Court has already passed some orders in the case. Mr Sharma you are not an aggrieved person in the case. There cannot be a PIL in a criminal case," the bench observed. Sharma reportedly alleged that in several rape cases involving former ministers or MLAs, no FIR was&nbsplodged by the police, wherever powerful people were involved. "Who are you in these rapes cases? Don't be generic. Is any relative of a victim of rape before us for a&nbspremedy? Do you have any relative who has been raped," Justice Bobde asked the lawyer. An uneasy calm prevailed among the lawyers in the courtroom after the bench's remarks. When Sharma persisted with his arguments, the bench dismissed his petition saying it cannot be entertained. The apex court had on April 11 agreed to hear a plea for a CBI probe into the Unnao gangrape case allegedly involving a BJP lawmaker from Uttar Pradesh. Sharma's plea has also alleged that the rape victim's father was tortured and killed in the police custody at the behest of the "ruling party" in the state. He also sought the court's direction for a CBI probe into a case of kidnapping and rape of a minor girl last July allegedly involving a BJP legislator. Alleging that the complaint had not named the legislator "under political pressure" and the state police would not carry out a "fair investigation under compulsion", it said the matter should be handed over to the CBI for independent investigation. The public interest petition had also sought protection and compensation to the victims' kin, as was provided in the Nirbhaya gangrape case.

Do you have any relative who has been raped, SC asks lawyer

Bangladesh's police today recovered the bloodstained body of a prominent Hindu lawyer who went missing on Friday and arrested four persons, including his wife, suspecting their link to the murder.

Ratish Chandra Bhowmik, who fought the state's case in high-profile murder trials against Islamist extremists, went missing after he left his home in northwestern Rangpur district on Friday morning.

When the 58-year-old lawyer did not return home and his mobile phone was found switched off, his family reported about his disappearance to police and the Hindu community leaders.

"Their confessional statements led us to the dead body from an under construction building near Bhowmik's own house," said Benazir Ahmed, Director General of police anti-crime Rapid Action Battalion.

He added that the lawyer's wife, a school teacher, and one of her arrested colleagues were directly involved in the murder pointing figure to their extramarital relations.

Police earlier launched a massive campaign amid huge protests to trace out Bhowmik suspecting militant links to his disappearance on early Friday as he fought major murder trials against them as a key prosecution lawyer.

Police said the mobile phone records gave them the clue to the murder leading to his wife's arrest.

Bhowmik's disappearance came two weeks after seven operatives of outlawed Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) were sentenced to death for murdering the caretaker of a Sufi shrine in November 2015.

Earlier, he appeared as a key prosecutor against five JMB extremists, who too were sentenced to death for the murder of Japanese farmer Hoshi Kunio in the same year.

Bhowmik was also a crucial witness to the trial of senior Jamaate-Islami leader ATM Azharul Islam who was eventually sentenced to death by a special tribunal for committing crimes against humanity siding with the Pakistani troops during Bangladesh's 1971 Liberation War.

According to the police, Bhowmik had earlier refused the offer of an armed escort during the high-profile trials.

Bangladesh has been waging a campaign against JMB and other homegrown militant outfits after a re-grouped faction of JMB called Neo-JMB, stormed a Dhaka cafe in 2016 and massacred 23 people, mostly foreigners.

Ratish Chandra Bhowmik, who fought the state's case in high-profile murder trials against Islamist extremists, went missing on Friday

Bangladesh's police today recovered the bloodstained body of a prominent Hindu lawyer who went missing on Friday and arrested four persons, including his wife, suspecting their link to the murder. Ratish Chandra Bhowmik, who fought the state's case in high-profile murder trials against Islamist extremists, went missing after he left his home in northwestern Rangpur district on Friday morning. When the 58-year-old lawyer did not return home and his mobile phone was found switched off, his family reported about his disappearance to police and the Hindu community leaders. "Their confessional statements led us to the dead body from an under construction building near Bhowmik's own house," said Benazir Ahmed, Director General of police anti-crime Rapid Action Battalion. He added that the lawyer's wife, a school teacher, and one of her arrested colleagues were directly involved in the murder pointing figure to their extramarital relations. Police earlier launched a massive campaign amid huge protests to trace out Bhowmik suspecting militant links to his disappearance on early Friday as he fought major murder trials against them as a key prosecution lawyer. Police said the mobile phone records gave them the clue to the murder leading to his wife's arrest. Bhowmik's disappearance came two weeks after seven operatives of outlawed Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) were sentenced to death for murdering the caretaker of a Sufi shrine in November 2015. Earlier, he appeared as a key prosecutor against five JMB extremists, who too were sentenced to death for the murder of Japanese farmer Hoshi Kunio in the same year. Bhowmik was also a crucial witness to the trial of senior Jamaate-Islami leader ATM Azharul Islam who was eventually sentenced to death by a special tribunal for committing crimes against humanity siding with the Pakistani troops during Bangladesh's 1971 Liberation War. According to the police, Bhowmik had earlier refused the offer of an armed escort during the high-profile trials. Bangladesh has been waging a campaign against JMB and other homegrown militant outfits after a re-grouped faction of JMB called Neo-JMB, stormed a Dhaka cafe in 2016 and massacred 23 people, mostly foreigners.

Bangladesh: Missing lawyer's body found; wife arrested

United States President Donald Trump and his attorney Michael Cohen have filed court papers on Monday asking a federal judge to demand porn star Stormy Daniels to raise her disputes through private arbitration.

Stormy Daniels who's legal name is Stephanie Clifford, sued <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/stormy-daniels-claims-absolutely-inaccurate-says-white-house-126494">Trump</a> last month over the 'hush agreement', which she had signed in October 2016 - right before the presidential elections - for which she was paid US$ 130,000 to keep quiet aout their alleged affair.&nbsp;

Cohen's own attorney, Brent Blakely, argued in Monday's filing that the agreement includes a provision that any disputes about it be settled through arbitration, as opposed to open court.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/stormy-daniels-claims-absolutely-inaccurate-says-white-house-126494">Stormy Daniels' claims absolutely 'inaccurate', says White House</a>

Meanwhile, Daniels’ lawyer, Michael Avenatti, insisted that the matter should be settled in open court.

"This is a democracy and this matter should be decided in an open court of law owned by the people," Avenatti added.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
We will vigorously oppose the just-filed motion by DJT and MC to have this case decided in a private arbitration, in a private conf room, hidden from the American public. This is a democracy and this matter should be decided in an open court of law owned by the people. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/sunlight?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#sunlight</a>
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/980943798682370048?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
And the Declaration Mr. Cohen just filed is more interesting for what it DOES NOT state - it does not state that he never discussed the agreement with DJT, that DJT did not know about the agreement, or that DJT did not ultimately pay the $130k (all issues DJT is also silent on).
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/980948969260920832?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Trump and his lawyers have been <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/stormy-daniels-row-white-house-defends-trumps-silence-126679">trying to avoid any comments </a>over this matter, particularly since she said in February that she believed that Cohen had violated the agreement and that she, as a result, was no longer bound by it. Cohen secretly obtained a restraining order late that month to prevent her from speaking.

Moreover, On Monday, America Media Inc. replied to a lawsuit by former Playboy model <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/former-playboy-model-karen-mcdougal-sues-to-break-silence-on-alleged-trump-affair-36563">Karen McDougal</a>, who had reportedly claimed that she had an affair with Trump.&nbsp;

McDougal alleged in her lawsuit that the company, which publishes The National Enquirer, misled her when it made a $150,000 deal to squelch her story, buying the exclusive rights to it during the campaign but never publishing anything.

The company said in a statement Monday that it hoped McDougal would stay on as “a valued contributor” and that it still sought “an amicable resolution” with her.

McDougal's lawyer, Peter K. Stris, wrote on Twitter, “The tabloid went to great lengths to silence her and others, and they are now attempting to silence her again with the absurd claim that their own free speech was violated.” 
&nbsp;

Cohen's own attorney, Brent Blakely, argued in Monday's filing that the agreement includes a provision that any disputes about it be settled through arbitration, as opposed to open court

United States President Donald Trump and his attorney Michael Cohen have filed court papers on Monday asking a federal judge to demand porn star Stormy Daniels to raise her disputes through private arbitration. Stormy Daniels who's legal name is Stephanie Clifford, sued Trump last month over the 'hush agreement', which she had signed in October 2016 - right before the presidential elections - for which she was paid US$ 130,000 to keep quiet aout their alleged affair. Cohen's own attorney, Brent Blakely, argued in Monday's filing that the agreement includes a provision that any disputes about it be settled through arbitration, as opposed to open court. Also read: Stormy Daniels' claims absolutely 'inaccurate', says White House Meanwhile, Daniels’ lawyer, Michael Avenatti, insisted that the matter should be settled in open court. "This is a democracy and this matter should be decided in an open court of law owned by the people," Avenatti added. We will vigorously oppose the just-filed motion by DJT and MC to have this case decided in a private arbitration, in a private conf room, hidden from the American public. This is a democracy and this matter should be decided in an open court of law owned by the people. #sunlight — Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) April 2, 2018 × And the Declaration Mr. Cohen just filed is more interesting for what it DOES NOT state - it does not state that he never discussed the agreement with DJT, that DJT did not know about the agreement, or that DJT did not ultimately pay the $130k (all issues DJT is also silent on). — Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) April 2, 2018 × Trump and his lawyers have been trying to avoid any comments over this matter, particularly since she said in February that she believed that Cohen had violated the agreement and that she, as a result, was no longer bound by it. Cohen secretly obtained a restraining order late that month to prevent her from speaking. Moreover, On Monday, America Media Inc. replied to a lawsuit by former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who had reportedly claimed that she had an affair with Trump. McDougal alleged in her lawsuit that the company, which publishes The National Enquirer, misled her when it made a $150,000 deal to squelch her story, buying the exclusive rights to it during the campaign but never publishing anything. The company said in a statement Monday that it hoped McDougal would stay on as “a valued contributor” and that it still sought “an amicable resolution” with her. McDougal's lawyer, Peter K. Stris, wrote on Twitter, “The tabloid went to great lengths to silence her and others, and they are now attempting to silence her again with the absurd claim that their own free speech was violated.”

Stormy Daniels' case should be settled privately: Trump lawyer

Pornstar Stormy Daniels&#39; lawyer admitted that she had a&nbsp;sexual relationship with US President Donald Trump. In a television interview, Michael Avenatti confirmed the same also stating that he was not aware of the $130,000 payoff to buy her silence.

Avenatti was previously unavailable for comments on the matter.&nbsp;

While Daniels denied the alleged affair with the President previously, Trump continued to rubbish the allegations. <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-won-stormy-daniels-legal-case-in-arbitration-white-house-35023">The US President won the lawsuit on Wednesday</a>, a day after Daniels sued seeking to invalidate a &quot;hush agreement&quot; she signed with Trump&#39;s lawyer.

Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, said in the lawsuit that Trump never signed the nondisclosure agreement, designed to keep her quiet about an &quot;intimate relationship&quot; she said she had with him over a decade ago.

Trump&#39;s failure to sign renders the pact invalid, the lawsuit said.

According to the lawsuit, Clifford and Trump had an intimate relationship that began in the summer of 2006, not long after Trump&#39;s wife Melania gave birth to their son Barron and lasted well into 2007.

The White House has had denied all reports linking the US President and Daniels.&nbsp;

(With inputs from Reuters)&nbsp;

Avenatti was previously unavailable for comments on the matter

Pornstar Stormy Daniels' lawyer admitted that she had a sexual relationship with US President Donald Trump. In a television interview, Michael Avenatti confirmed the same also stating that he was not aware of the $130,000 payoff to buy her silence. Avenatti was previously unavailable for comments on the matter. While Daniels denied the alleged affair with the President previously, Trump continued to rubbish the allegations. The US President won the lawsuit on Wednesday, a day after Daniels sued seeking to invalidate a "hush agreement" she signed with Trump's lawyer. Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, said in the lawsuit that Trump never signed the nondisclosure agreement, designed to keep her quiet about an "intimate relationship" she said she had with him over a decade ago. Trump's failure to sign renders the pact invalid, the lawsuit said. According to the lawsuit, Clifford and Trump had an intimate relationship that began in the summer of 2006, not long after Trump's wife Melania gave birth to their son Barron and lasted well into 2007. The White House has had denied all reports linking the US President and Daniels. (With inputs from Reuters)

Pornstar Stormy Daniels' lawyer confirms her affair with Donald Trump

A lawyer from president Donald Trumps office allegedly paid $130,000 dollars to a former adult-actress a month before the 2016 elections, for her to keep mum about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump.&nbsp;

Michael Cohen, who has been with the Trump organisation for almost 10 years arranged the money for the actress, Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels, in October 2016.

As per reports, Trump and Clifford had the encounter in Lake Tahoe, California, in 2006, a year after he married his third wife, Melania.&nbsp;

Clifford was 27 at the time and had come to represent the adult film studio Wicked, which made her films. She also got a picture clicked with Trump which had surfaced the net.&nbsp;

However, Clifford has recently denied the allegations of any sexual relationship with Trump.&nbsp;

&quot;I recently became aware that certain news outlets are alleging that I had a sexual and/or romantic affair with Donald Trump many, many, many years ago. I am stating with complete clarity that this is absolutely false&quot;, she said. &quot;My involvement with Donald Trump was limited to a few public appearances and nothing more.&quot;

Clifford wrote in the letter that when she met Trump, he was &quot;gracious, professional and a complete gentleman to me and EVERYONE in my presence.&quot;

&quot;Rumours that I have received hush money from Donald Trump are completely false&quot;, the letter further read. &quot;If indeed I did have a relationship with Donald Trump, trust me, you wouldn&#39;t be reading about it in the news, you would be reading about it in my book. But the fact of the matter is, these stories are not true.&quot;

Meanwhile, Cohen also denied the reports, saying, &quot;These rumours have circulated time and again since 2011&quot;. &quot;President Trump once again vehemently denies any such occurrence as has Ms Daniels&quot;.

Reports said that Clifford, a native of Louisiana, considered running against then-US Senator David Vitter in 2010 but decided against it.

Clifford, who has appeared in more than 150 adult films before&nbsp;she met Trump in 2006.

However, Stephanie Clifford has recently denied the allegations of any sexual relationship with Trump

A lawyer from president Donald Trumps office allegedly paid $130,000 dollars to a former adult-actress a month before the 2016 elections, for her to keep mum about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump. Michael Cohen, who has been with the Trump organisation for almost 10 years arranged the money for the actress, Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels, in October 2016. As per reports, Trump and Clifford had the encounter in Lake Tahoe, California, in 2006, a year after he married his third wife, Melania. Clifford was 27 at the time and had come to represent the adult film studio Wicked, which made her films. She also got a picture clicked with Trump which had surfaced the net. However, Clifford has recently denied the allegations of any sexual relationship with Trump. "I recently became aware that certain news outlets are alleging that I had a sexual and/or romantic affair with Donald Trump many, many, many years ago. I am stating with complete clarity that this is absolutely false", she said. "My involvement with Donald Trump was limited to a few public appearances and nothing more." Clifford wrote in the letter that when she met Trump, he was "gracious, professional and a complete gentleman to me and EVERYONE in my presence." "Rumours that I have received hush money from Donald Trump are completely false", the letter further read. "If indeed I did have a relationship with Donald Trump, trust me, you wouldn't be reading about it in the news, you would be reading about it in my book. But the fact of the matter is, these stories are not true." Meanwhile, Cohen also denied the reports, saying, "These rumours have circulated time and again since 2011". "President Trump once again vehemently denies any such occurrence as has Ms Daniels". Reports said that Clifford, a native of Louisiana, considered running against then-US Senator David Vitter in 2010 but decided against it. Clifford, who has appeared in more than 150 adult films before she met Trump in 2006.

Trump's lawyer paid $130K to pornstar for silence over Trump encounter: Reports

A Chinese human rights activist was on Friday given a three-year suspended prison sentence for subversion, state media said, the fourth such case this week as authorities crack down on dissent. 
 
Christian activist Gou Hongguo had gone abroad to be trained in &quot;subverting state power&quot;, the Second Intermediate People&#39;s Court in the northern city of Tianjin said Friday on a verified social media account. He also sought to turn public opinion against the government and attempted to overthrow the socialist system, among a litany of other offences, it said. 
 
He was given three years in prison, suspended for three years, the official Xinhua news agency said, adding that he had pleaded guilty and said he would not appeal. 
 
The sentence is relatively light by the standards of dissident trials in China, where the courts are controlled by the ruling Communist party. Gou, who had protested against forced evictions, was one of more than 200 activists and lawyers involved in cases the Communist party considers sensitive who were detained in the so-called &quot;709 crackdown&quot;, named for its main date in July 2015. 
 
Gou&#39;s trial was the fourth at the Tianjin court this week&nbsp;and followed that of high-profile rights lawyer Zhou Shifeng,&nbsp;whose Fengrui law firm, known for taking on cases of dissident scholars, victims of sexual abuse and members of banned religious groups has been at the centre of the 709 crackdown. 
 
Zhou was on Thursday given seven years in prison for subversion. Activist Zhai Yanmin was on Tuesday handed a three-year suspended sentence for crimes that included waving banners and shouting slogans, while Hu Shigen, a Christian campaigner who was a member of the same underground church as Gou, was jailed for seven and a half years on Wednesday. 
 
Campaign groups have condemned the trials, and US State Department spokesman Mark Turner said the charges were &quot;vague and apparently politically motivated&quot;. 
 
&quot;It&rsquo;s troubling that Chinese authorities denied these defendants access to their chosen counsel and family members as well,&quot; he said. &quot;We urge China to release all the lawyers and activists who were detained on July 9th, 2015, and remove restrictions on their freedom of movement and professional activities.&quot; 
 
Authorities insist the Tianjin trials are open, with the court stating that about 40 people including politicians, legal scholars, and &ldquo;civilian representatives from all walks of life&rdquo;, as well as mainland and foreign media outlets, were present at Gou&#39;s proceedings. But family members of those detained, particularly their wives, complain of being constantly surveilled and forcibly being kept away from the court or barred from seeking further information. 
 
Gou&#39;s wife Fan Lili went to the courthouse earlier this week, falling to the ground outside the building weeping, saying she had not been informed of her husband&#39;s trial date and had not been allowed in. Watched by scores of police and plainclothes officers, she reportedly pleaded for him to come home and meet his 16-month-old son for the first time. 
 
(AFP)

Campaign groups condemned the trials. US State Department spokesman Mark Turner said they were 'vague and apparently politically motivated'

A Chinese human rights activist was on Friday given a three-year suspended prison sentence for subversion, state media said, the fourth such case this week as authorities crack down on dissent. Christian activist Gou Hongguo had gone abroad to be trained in "subverting state power", the Second Intermediate People's Court in the northern city of Tianjin said Friday on a verified social media account. He also sought to turn public opinion against the government and attempted to overthrow the socialist system, among a litany of other offences, it said. He was given three years in prison, suspended for three years, the official Xinhua news agency said, adding that he had pleaded guilty and said he would not appeal. The sentence is relatively light by the standards of dissident trials in China, where the courts are controlled by the ruling Communist party. Gou, who had protested against forced evictions, was one of more than 200 activists and lawyers involved in cases the Communist party considers sensitive who were detained in the so-called "709 crackdown", named for its main date in July 2015. Gou's trial was the fourth at the Tianjin court this week and followed that of high-profile rights lawyer Zhou Shifeng, whose Fengrui law firm, known for taking on cases of dissident scholars, victims of sexual abuse and members of banned religious groups has been at the centre of the 709 crackdown. Zhou was on Thursday given seven years in prison for subversion. Activist Zhai Yanmin was on Tuesday handed a three-year suspended sentence for crimes that included waving banners and shouting slogans, while Hu Shigen, a Christian campaigner who was a member of the same underground church as Gou, was jailed for seven and a half years on Wednesday. Campaign groups have condemned the trials, and US State Department spokesman Mark Turner said the charges were "vague and apparently politically motivated". "It’s troubling that Chinese authorities denied these defendants access to their chosen counsel and family members as well," he said. "We urge China to release all the lawyers and activists who were detained on July 9th, 2015, and remove restrictions on their freedom of movement and professional activities." Authorities insist the Tianjin trials are open, with the court stating that about 40 people including politicians, legal scholars, and “civilian representatives from all walks of life”, as well as mainland and foreign media outlets, were present at Gou's proceedings. But family members of those detained, particularly their wives, complain of being constantly surveilled and forcibly being kept away from the court or barred from seeking further information. Gou's wife Fan Lili went to the courthouse earlier this week, falling to the ground outside the building weeping, saying she had not been informed of her husband's trial date and had not been allowed in. Watched by scores of police and plainclothes officers, she reportedly pleaded for him to come home and meet his 16-month-old son for the first time. (AFP)

China puts activist on trial, 4th case in 4 days

lawyer

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