https://arab.news/vt9xu
GUWAHATI, India: An avalanche killed at least seven tourists in India’s Himalayan state of Sikkim near a mountain pass to the Chinese region of Tibet, with several more people feared trapped, the Indian army said.
The army said five to six vehicles carrying up to 30 tourists to the strategically located Nathu La pass between Sikkim and Tibet were feared to have been stuck under the snow when the avalanche hit.
“We are yet to ascertain how many people are still trapped. 17 people have been rescued, out of which 8 are very critical and have been moved to a hospital,” senior police official Tenzing Loden Lepcha told Reuters on phone.
The incident took place at 11:30 a.m. (0600 GMT), the army statement said. Rescue officials earlier said they feared at least 70 people were under the snow at the site, some 40 km (25 miles) from the state capital Gangtok.
Rescue operations were ongoing, Loden Lepcha said, adding that when the avalanche hit, people were taking photographs near a stream. Rescue workers dug with shovels near a waterfall, images released by India’s ministry of defense showed.
Yellow heavy machinery worked to clear the churned up snow left by the avalanche, the images showed.
An additional 350 stranded tourists and 80 vehicles were rescued after the snow was cleared from the road, the army statement said.
Thousands of tourists flock to Sikkim every year, also known as the “Land of Mystic Splendour,” located below Mount Khangchendzonga, also known as Kanchenjunga, the third highest mountain in the world.
Nathu La serves as a route for the Kailash Mansarovar pilgrimage to Mount Kailash in China, considered one of the holiest pilgrimages in Hinduism.
The 3,500 km (2,100 miles) Himalayan border between India and China has been disputed since the 1950s. Both countries have raced to improve roads and railways in remote regions in recent years.
Avalanches and flash flooding in the Himalayas are common during summer and monsoon months, as snow melt and heavy rains combine.
In June 2013, record monsoon rains in the northern Himalayan state of Uttarakhand caused devastating floods that claimed close to 6,000 lives, one of the worst natural disasters to strike in the country.
UNITED NATIONS, United States: The Taliban have extended a ban on women working for NGOs to the United Nations’ mission throughout the country, a UN spokesman announced Tuesday, calling such an order “unacceptable.”
The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) had said earlier in the day that UN women employees had been blocked from work in eastern Nangarhar province.
“UNAMA received word of an order by the de facto authorities that bans female national staff members of the United Nations from working,” spokesman for the secretary-general, Stephane Dujarric, told reporters, adding that the UN had heard “from various conduits that this applies to the whole country.”
The UN had so far been exempt from a December Taliban order for all foreign and domestic NGOs to stop women personnel working across the crisis-stricken nation.
Dujarric said no written order had yet been received, but that the UN was to hold meetings with the Taliban on Wednesday in Kabul to “seek some clarity.”
For UN chief Antonio Guterres, Dujarric said, “any such ban would be unacceptable and frankly, inconceivable.”
“This is the latest in a disturbing trend undermining the ability of aid organizations to reach those most in need,” he added.
“Female staff members are essential for the United Nations to deliver lifesaving assistance,” he said, noting that the UN is working to reach 23 million people with humanitarian aid in the country.
The UN employs around 400 Afghan women — the bulk of the some 600 female staff members working in Afghanistan, according to UN figures. There are about 3,300 Afghans in total in the 3,900-strong UN workforce in the country.
“It’s very difficult to imagine how we deliver humanitarian aid without our female staff,” Dujarric said, noting that “obviously, given the society and the culture, you need women to deliver aid to women.”
Women workers are vital for on-the-ground aid operations in Afghanistan, particularly in identifying other women in need.
After the ban announced last year, several NGOs suspended their entire operations in protest, piling further misery on Afghanistan’s 38 million citizens, half of whom are facing hunger, according to aid agencies.
Days of discussions had led to an agreement that women working in the health aid sector would be exempt from the decree, and UN staff, including those in the aid sector, were never beholden to the ban.
Last month, however, UNAMA chief Roza Otunbayeva told the UN Security Council she feared the Taliban government could extend the ban imposed on women working for NGOs to the UN’s women staff.
The agency earlier on Tuesday expressed “serious concern that female national UN staff have been prevented from reporting to work in Nangarhar province,” in a tweet.
“We remind de facto authorities that United Nations entities cannot operate and deliver life-saving assistance without female staff,” it added.
Following the UNAMA tweet, Taliban government spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told AFP he was seeking information on the matter in Nangarhar.
Since surging back to power in August 2021 after the withdrawal of US and NATO troops, the Taliban government has imposed an austere interpretation of Islam.
Authorities have barred teenage girls from secondary school, women have been pushed out of many government jobs, prevented from traveling without a male relative and ordered to cover up outside of the home, ideally with a burqa.
Women have also been banned from universities and not allowed to enter parks or gardens.
UN special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan Richard Bennett said in a recent speech in Geneva that the Taliban authorities’ policy “may amount to the crime of gender persecution.”
CHICAGO: Iraqi attorney Alina Habba has been on the front lines of the legal battles surrounding Donald Trump over the past two years, as one of the former president’s most tenacious defenders.
A managing partner of New York law firm Habba Madaio and Associates, she is married to attorney Matthew Eyet, who manages his own law firm in New Jersey. Habba and her two siblings were born in Summit, New Jersey, to Chaldean Catholic parents who fled Iraq in the early 1980s to escape the religious persecution of Christians. Her father, Saad F. Habba, is a gastroenterologist.
Trump was indicted last week by a grand jury in Manhattan on more than 30 counts related to allegations he paid “hush money” to adult movie star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from disclosing details of their relationship. Trump turned himself in to authorities in Manhattan on Tuesday and later appeared before Judge Juan Merchan, entering a plea of not guilty to all charges.
Habba, 39, has been one of Trump’s most vocal defenders and it has put her in the legal cross hairs. She was lead attorney on a legal team that was sanctioned, along with Trump, on Jan. 19 in Florida by US District Court Judge Donald Middlebrook, who ruled the lawyers and their client were jointly liable for $937,989 in damages over a lawsuit they filed accusing 31 defendants of “trying to destroy” Trump’s life and “rigging the 2016 election in favor of Hillary Clinton.”
The judge dismissed their case, saying it had “fatal substantive defects,” and accused the lawyers of ignoring his order not to advance the allegations that had been rejected.
On Tuesday, Trump became the first former president to be charged with a crime. His indictment came after a grand jury considered evidence presented by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. The charges relate to payments allegedly made to Daniels on Trump’s behalf to prevent her speaking publicly about their relationship. Trump denies any wrongdoing.
Asked recently if she believes her client can get a fair trial in New York, Habba said: “No, no, I think it’s very difficult. I’d like to have faith in this state but I’ve been practicing for him now for a couple years and gone to court in New York for a few years, and I can tell you it’s not the same as representing anybody else.”
Habba’s legal expertise covers many types of cases, including corporate litigation and formation, commercial real estate, family law, the financial services industry and construction-related matters.
Before entering private practice, she was a law clerk for Eugene J. Codey, Jr., the presiding judge of the Civil Superior Court in Essex County, New Jersey.
In September 2021, Habba represented Trump in a $100 million lawsuit filed by the former president against his niece, Mary Trump, and The New York Times Company, accusing them of “an insidious plot” and conspiracy to publish information about his tax records. Mary Trump in turn filed a lawsuit against her uncle claiming she had been defrauded of her inheritance but a judge dismissed the case.
Although she is not lead counsel in the case surrounding Trump’s indictment on Tuesday, she has spearheaded investigations designed to clear his name and dismiss many of the lawsuits brought against him in recent years.
Celebrity gossip website TMZ reported this week that Habba found herself at the center of a social media storm of criticism when she compared Trump’s legal problems to those of African American rappers Tupac Shakur and Notorious B.I.G., and said his arrest would serve only boost his popularity, a view that many conservative commentators embrace.
Habba also represents Trump in a defamation lawsuit brought against him by E. Jean Carroll, a former Elle magazine columnist who accused the former president of sexually assaulting her in New York in the mid-1990s. Trump has repeatedly denied the allegation. He was deposed in October last year by attorneys representing Carroll.
In addition, Habba was among the legal team that advised Trump during a federal investigation into allegations he mishandled classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. His home was raided by FBI agents and boxes of documents allegedly containing classified and secret documents were removed.
NEW YORK: Former President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty in a history-making moment on Tuesday to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, as prosecutors accused him of orchestrating payments to two women before the 2016 US election to suppress publication of their sexual encounters with him.
Prosecutors in Manhattan allege that Trump — the first sitting or former US president to face criminal charges — falsified business records to conceal a violation of election laws during his successful 2016 campaign.
The two women were adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal.
Wearing a dark blue suit and red tie, Trump sat, subdued, with his hands folded at the defense table as he entered his plea flanked by his lawyers.
“Not guilty,” Trump, 76, said when asked how he pleaded.
The front-runner in the race for the Republican nomination in 2024, Trump responded with answers like “yes” when the judge asked him if he understood a right. At one point, the judge put his hand to his ear as if to prompt an answer.
Prosecutor Chris Conroy said: “The defendant Donald J. Trump falsified New York business records in order to conceal an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 presidential election and other violations of election laws.”
While falsifying business records in New York on its own is a misdemeanor punishable by no more than one year in prison, it is elevated to a felony punishable by up to four years when done to advance or conceal another crime, such as election law violations.
Prosecutors during the arraignment said Trump made a series of threatening social media posts, including one threatening “death and destruction” if he was charged. The judge asked the parties to “please refrain from making statements that are likely to incite violence or civil unrest.”
Trump said nothing as he entered the courtroom or when he left roughly an hour later.
Afterwards, he flew home to Florida where his office said he would deliver remarks at 8:15 p.m. on Tuesday (0015 GMT on Wednesday).
Earlier in the day, Trump posted on social media: “Heading to Lower Manhattan, the Courthouse. Seems so SURREAL — WOW, they are going to ARREST ME. Can’t believe this is happening in America.”
JUDGE SETS DEC. 4 HEARING
Justice Juan Merchan set the next hearing for Dec. 4. Legal experts said a trial may not even get under way for a year, and indictment or even a conviction will not legally prevent Trump from running for president.
“We’re going to fight it hard,” Todd Blanche, a lawyer for Trump, told reporters after the arraignment, adding that Trump was frustrated, upset and angry about the charges.
“But I’ll tell you what — he’s motivated. And it’s not going to stop him. And it’s not going to slow him down. And it’s exactly what he expected,” Blanche added.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat who pursued the case and has been accused by Trump and other Republicans of targeting him for political reasons, defended the charges.
“We today uphold our solemn responsibility to ensure that everyone stands equal before the law. No amount of money and no amount of power changes that enduring American principle,” Bragg told a news conference.
The Manhattan grand jury convened by Bragg that indicted Trump heard evidence about a $130,000 payment made to Daniels in the waning days of the 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels has said she was paid to keep silent about a sexual encounter she had with Trump at a Lake Tahoe hotel in 2006.
The former publisher of the National Enquirer, David Pecker, offered to look out for negative stories during Trump’s presidential campaign, prosecutors said. American Media Inc, its parent company, paid McDougal $150,000 to buy the rights to her story but then kept it secret. It also paid a former Trump Tower doorman $30,000 to buy the rights to an untrue story about a child Trump had allegedly fathered out of wedlock.
Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen has said he coordinated with Trump on payments to Daniels and McDougal. Trump has denied having had sexual relationships with either woman, but has acknowledged reimbursing Cohen for his payment to Daniels.
Trump’s reimbursement checks to a lawyer for the suppression payments falsely stated that the money was for a “retainer agreement,” prosecutors said. The indictment accused Trump of falsifying his real estate company’s books with intent to defraud.
One element of the charges is a method known as “catch and kill” used by some media outlets to bury damaging information about a third party — in this case allegedly to benefit Trump. Bragg’s office did not charge Trump with violating election laws.
“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about — 34 false statements made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg said.
On a cool and sunny early spring day in the most-populous US city, Trump supporters and detractors before the arraignment were separated by barricades set up by police to try to keep order, though there were some confrontations.
“Let’s keep it civil, folks,” a police officer told them.
UNITED NATIONS: Britain has blocked the UN webcast of an informal Security Council meeting on Wednesday after Russia signaled its commissioner for children’s rights — who the International Criminal Court wants to arrest on war crimes charges — would speak, diplomats said.
Russia has told council members in a note, seen by Reuters on Tuesday, that the discussion about Ukraine will focus on “evacuating children from conflict zone” and signaled that the commissioner, Maria Lvova-Belova, will address the meeting.
Such meetings are held at UN headquarters, but not in the Security Council chamber, and briefings can be done virtually. All 15 council members have to agree to allow it to be webcast by the United Nations.
Britain blocked the webcast because Russia would not confirm who would brief, diplomats said on Tuesday. Russia’s Deputy UN Ambassador Dmitry Polyanskiy confirmed Britain’s move on Twitter.
“Russia will from now on block UN webcasts of all similar meetings citing ‘UK censorship clause’,” Polyanskiy wrote.
Russia has not yet confirmed who will speak at the briefing.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) last month issued an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin and Lvova-Belova, accusing them of illegally deporting hundreds of children from Ukraine and the unlawful transfer of people to Russia from Ukraine since Moscow invaded on Feb. 24, 2022.
Moscow has not concealed a program under which it has brought thousands of Ukrainian children to Russia but presents it as a humanitarian campaign to protect orphans and children abandoned in the war zone.
Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told reporters last month that the informal meeting of Security Council members to be held on Wednesday had been planned long before the ICC announcement and it was not intended to be a rebuttal of the charges against Putin and Lvova-Belova.
Diplomats have said it is rare for a UN webcast to be blocked. However, last month China blocked the UN webcast of a US-convened informal Security Council meeting on human rights abuses in North Korea.
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a decision by the election regulator to postpone polls in Pakistan’s most populous Punjab province was unconstitutional and announced elections on May 14 — a verdict likely to worsen a row between the higher judiciary and the federal government which wants provincial and national polls held simultaneously.
The landmark ruling comes after days of hearings in the Supreme Court on a petition filed by ex-premier Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party over the Election Commission of Pakistan’s decision last month to postpone elections in Punjab from April 30 to Oct 8.
“Neither the Constitution nor the law empowers the Commission to extend the date of elections beyond the 90 days period as provided in Article 224 (2) of the Constitution,” the six-page judgment said, declaring the election regulator’s decision “unconstitutional.”
“The polling day perforce must be shifted, and moved forward from 30.04.2023 to 14.05.2023.”
Speaking to reporters, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said he felt “pain and regret” at the decision by the three-judge bench.
“This will make the political crisis that we see today deeper and more serious,” he added.
The law minister said there was a perception of division within the country’s judiciary.
“To eliminate this perception, as the head of the institution, the chief justice should have taken this important constitutional and legal issue to a larger bench,” Tarar said, urging the chief justice to call a full court meeting to discuss the issue to avoid Pakistan descending into “chaos.”
Provincial assemblies in the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces were dissolved in January by Khan and his allies in a bid to force early general elections, since Pakistan historically holds the provincial and national elections together. According to Pakistan’s constitution, elections must be held within 90 days of the dissolution of a legislative assembly.
After weeks of delays and political wrangling on the issue, the Supreme Court in a three-to-two verdict on March 1 ordered the ECP to fulfil its constitutional obligation and announce an election schedule for Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The ECP subsequently said the vote in Punjab would be held on April 30 but later said it was impossible to hold it in April due to security and financial concerns. It announced Oct. 8 as the new poll date in Punjab.
Khan’s PTI party then approached the Supreme Court, which has since been debating whether the ECP’s postponement decision was legal.
At Tuesday’s hearing, the court ruled that the election commission’s order to postpone polls had wasted 13 days, directing the federal government to release the required election funds of Rs21 billion ($73 million) to the ECP by April 10 and make security arrangements for election duty.
“Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the Federal Government must make available all necessary personnel, whether from the Armed Forces, Rangers, Frontier Constabulary and all other forces under the direct, indirect or ultimate command and control of the said Government, as are required by the Commission for security and other purposes related to the general elections,” the judgment said.
“In this regard, the Federal Government must forthwith, and not later than 17.04.2023, provide a plan acceptable to the Commission.”
As per the court order, the election commission is bound to issue a final list of candidates on April 19 and allot election symbols to all candidates on April 20.
During previous hearings in the case, the election commission had assured the court it would hold the elections if it was provided with the required funds and security for election duty.
Khan’s party has welcomed the judgment, calling it “historic and constitutional” and urging all other political parties to create a “conducive environment” for peaceful polls in Punjab.
“It is a clear, historic and constitutional judgment,” PTI lawyer Ali Zafar told reporters after the court released its judgment. “The constitutional supremacy stands proven today through this verdict.”
Senior PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi called the verdict a “watershed moment” in Pakistan’s political history.
“A clear line has been drawn (to differentiate) between democratic powers, constitutional powers and unconstitutional powers,” Qureshi told reporters outside the court, commenting on the verdict.
The PTI leader urged the party’s followers and leaders to start preparing for elections: “Prepare yourself to be the next government of Pakistan and the next government of Punjab, god willing.”
The verdict in the election delay case comes as, separately, Pakistan’s parliament has passed a new law to curtail the powers of the Supreme Court’s chief justice amid a row between the higher judiciary and the government on the holding of snap polls in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
The government says it is economically not viable to hold the snap elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa first and then have another general election this year in October.
The Supreme Court last month ordered the snap polls to be held in the two provinces within 90 days of the dissolution of the two local governments, which falls by April 30.