El Salvador president threatens to send imprisoned gangsters to Paris Fashion Week
El Salvador's president said he would send inmates of the country's notorious mega-prison to France in the wake of a Paris Fashion Week show critiquing the government's treatment of the prisoners.
Nayib Bukele criticised a collection debuted by Willy Chavarria, a Mexican-American designer, featuring models wearing outfits resembling inmate uniforms at El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center (Cecot).
The maximum-security prison was opened in 2023 on the orders of Mr Bukele as part of his war against organised crime, but human rights groups have raised concerns about poor conditions and a lack of due process.
Responding to a message online saying Mr Chavarria's show was a tribute to Cecot prisoners, the El Salvador president wrote: 'We're ready to ship them all to Paris whenever we get the green light from the French government.'
Mr Bukele's press team said the president's response showed his 'firm stance against the attempt to glorify criminality'.
Mr Chavarria's Paris Fashion Week show opened with 35 men walking down the runway wearing white T-shirts and shorts that had been made in partnership with the American Civil Liberties Union.
The models then dropped into kneeling positions with their heads bowed, recalling images which emerged from El Salvador in the months after the government adopted a harsher approach to gangs.
Others wore T-shirts emblazoned with the word 'America' upside-down, which fashion critics speculated was a commentary on Mr Chavarria's belief the country is moving backwards.
The designer also sent invitations for his Spring 2026 show in the form of replica immigration summons, with the documents certifying readers' 'right to exist', before asking them to attend for a 'presentation of humanity'.
Tens of thousands of suspected gang members have been rounded up and incarcerated in El Salvador since a state of emergency was declared in March 2022 following a spike in murders and violent crimes.
Hailing the success of the crackdown, the country's government reported that the homicide rate fell by nearly 70 per cent in 2023.
However, concerns have been raised about conditions inside Cecot, as well as the possibility that some of those imprisoned may be innocent of gang involvement.
Human Rights Watch claimed inmates were denied communication with relatives or lawyers, with reports claiming prisoners only leave their cells for 30 minutes a day.
Alongside roughly 15,000 domestic prisoners, Cecot also holds more than 200 Venezuelans deported from the United States, accused of being members of the Tren de Aragua criminal gang.
The Trump administration paid Mr Bukele's government millions of dollars to lock up the migrants, claiming they were criminals and gang members.
Donald Trump invoked little-used wartime legislation in March to fly the migrants to El Salvador without court hearings.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
19 minutes ago
- Forbes
Secretary Rubio – It's Not Too Late To Prioritize Human Rights
HONG KONG - JUNE 04: Participants take part at the candlelight vigil as they hold candles at ... More Victoria Park on June 4, 2015 in Causeway Bay, Hong Kong. Hong Kong residents held a candlelight vigil as it marks 26th anniversary of 1989 student-led Tiananmen Square protest. (Photo by) Pending the legal fall-out, last week marked a turning point in U.S. foreign policy away from safeguarding and defending human rights. As part of a planned reorganization, approximately 80 percent of employees in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor at the U.S. Department of State are expected to be put on administrative leave and democracy and human rights organizations in the U.S. and around the globe began receiving notifications that all but two previously awarded grants for this year have been cancelled. These drastic cuts, if carried out, lack strategy and foresight, and contrary to public messaging, the vast majority of these programs have nothing to do with any 'woke' agenda. Instead, many of these programs are designed to protect fundamental freedoms. These cuts would put America on its back foot as it faces challenges from rights-violating countries like China, North Korea, Russia, and Iran. Many Americans want to eliminate wasteful spending. But a mandate to cut waste is not a directive to compromise national security. Ordinary Americans deserve to know that the types of programs being cut weaken America and undermine our ability to counter emboldened adversaries. I have just returned from a trip to South Korea where I met with incredible leaders in civil society devoted to defending human rights in North Korea and holding the Kim regime accountable. Many of the grants fund cost-effective and life-saving information access efforts that educate ordinary North Koreans on the goodness of the U.S. and the truth about the outside world. North Koreans who have left North Korea universally acknowledge that access to information was what motivated them to escape in the first place. The U.S. has already degraded critical information access efforts conducted by Radio Free Asia which ended radio broadcasts into North Korea at the end of April. That information void is being backfilled by the Chinese Communist Party and flooding North Korea with pro-China information through other means. Other grants fund research on the Kim regime's forced labor programs. Forced labor serves as a critical funding source that lines the private coffers of the regime and may even be used for the regime's development of weapons — including weapons that can be used to strike the continental U.S. In other words, these grants advanced U.S. national security. Without essential support, many of these organizations will not exist by the end of the year. Similarly, some of the most important human rights organizations countering the malign influence of the CCP will also be severely hit. Bethany Allen at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute covered this topic in great detail when 'stop work orders' were issued and grants were temporarily suspended earlier this year, warning that many groups may face extinction if cuts proceed. Suffice it to say that some of the most important organizations advocating for basic freedoms for Hong Kongers, Uyghurs, Tibetans, and others persecuted by the CCP will be diminished in capacity if not outright shuttered if things proceed as planned. Among other valuable reasons, these groups are often a critical source of information to the U.S. government and civil society about the CCP. Losing access to these resources at the same time the U.S. is increasing efforts to counter the CCP is counter-productive and potentially crippling to U.S. foreign policy. It's fair to ask why these organizations do not have more diversified funding streams. But to put it simply, the private sector has too often found funding for human rights programs to be at odds with its financial interests and desire for market access, particularly when it comes to China. And that's where the US has historically come in. The US is the only country in the globe with the technical skills and capacity, historical involvement, and funding to support human rights efforts at scale. This is to say nothing of the loss of institutional capacity. Many of the State Department staff who may be cut have saved innumerable lives. They have burned the midnight oil to secure the release of political prisoners, rescued and provided safe haven to political dissidents in closed societies, all while advancing U.S. interests. These individuals deserve promotions and to be honored for their public service, not put on leave and removed from careers devoted to the American people and advancing the cause of freedom. If cuts to these critical programs in Asia are any indicator, these measures will not just hamstring global civil society efforts to safeguard and defend human rights, they may downright end them, at least as we know them. Apart from a swift change in course, generations of people around the globe will feel the reverberations and impacts of these decisions for years to come. So what can be done? First, Secretary Rubio has the authority to change course at any time. His congressional legacy of advancing human rights and freedom hangs in the balance and that legacy risks being permanently tarnished. The Trump administration's own legacy of advancing human rights through its promotion of religious freedom in the first term similarly hangs in the balance. At minimum, grant funding for 2025 should be restored as organizations were counting on these budgets to continue their operations through the end of the year. Critical staff at DRL should also be retained. Some programs at DRL, no doubt, can and should be cut strategically, but dropping nearly all pre-existing human rights programming is like cutting off a limb and expecting US foreign policy to be able to function. Second, Congress must act. As a conservative administration, a decision to pivot away from Reagan's peace through strength policy paradigm which recognizes the essential values of possessing both a strong national defense as well as a strong arsenal of tools to defend human rights, merits serious questioning. The legacy and success of peace through strength stands on its own and a pivot from those successful policies requires justification. Furthermore, Congress has historically led on human rights and that means that many programs administered by DRL are congressionally mandated and appropriated. Congress must stand its ground in ensuring the continuation of those programs and work tirelessly to appropriate funding next year to try to at least mitigate some of the damage from proposed cuts. Finally, individuals and the private sector must step up to fill in the void. Now, not next year, is the time to give generously to support civil society organizations in need. Their continued existence may depend on it. I have faith in the resilience of civil society's ability to weather this storm. But leaving so many groups in the lurch without funding and technical support from the U.S. is incredibly consequential. As Ronald Reagan aptly said, 'Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.' May that not happen on our watch.
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Nonprofits Lose Legal Bid to Halt U.K. Exports of Fighter Jet Parts to Israel
A group of nonprofits have lost a legal battle to prevent Britain exporting fighter jet parts to Israel, after judges on Monday said the issue should be decided by the government rather than the courts. Britain partly suspended arms sales to Israel in September last year, with the government halting 30 of 350 active licenses, after a review found the weapons and equipment 'might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law.' But it maintained licenses for items the British government said were not being used in the Gaza war, as well as for components for a multinational program to produce and maintain F-35 combat aircraft used by Israel and other nations. The government said that program was 'integral to international security.' Al-Haq, a Palestinian rights group based in the West Bank, and the London-based Global Legal Action Network, which campaigns on human rights and environmental issues, filed a legal challenge against the continued export of F-35 parts. They were supported by Amnesty International, Oxfam and Human Rights Watch. During a four-day hearing at the High Court of England and Wales last month, lawyers representing the charities argued that the supply of F-35 components to Israel breached Britain's duty to ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions, to prevent genocide, and to stop the sale of arms that could be used to attack civilians. But the High Court, in its judgment on Monday, said it did not have the power to rule on whether Israel's conduct in Gaza amounted to genocide or war crimes, and that decisions on whether to continue involvement in the F-35 program were for government ministers. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Chrisleys reveal prison conditions, future plans after controversial Trump pardon
In one of their first interview since being released from federal prison, reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley spoke out about their experience behind bars and their controversial presidential pardon. The former "Chrisley Knows Best" stars were freed about one month ago after serving just over two years of their sentences for bank fraud, wire fraud and tax evasion. They were originally sentenced to 12 and seven years respectively, but received a pardon from President Donald Trump in May. "You don't realize how much your freedom means to you until you don't have it," Todd Chrisley told ABC News' Juju Chang. ABC News Studios' "IMPACT x Nightline: The Chrisleys: Life After Lockup" is streaming on Hulu. The couple revealed that their first post-prison meals were from Pizza Hut and Zaxby's. As for the first shower back in their own home? "It was almost like your first sexual encounter," Todd joked. The couple described difficult conditions in prison, with Todd reporting issues of black mold and asbestos at his facility in Florida. Julie, who was held in Kentucky, said she developed health problems including asthma. "I could see my health deteriorating," Julie told ABC News. The Federal Bureau of Prisons responded to the Chrisleys' claims about prison conditions, stating they operate "facilities that are safe, secure, and humane" with regulated temperatures and nutritionally adequate meals. MORE: 'Still don't believe it's real': Savannah Chrisley reacts to parents being pardoned by Trump Their daughter Savannah Chrisley, 26, emerged as their strongest advocate, campaigning for their release while also becoming legal guardian to her younger brother Grayson and niece Chloe. "I forced myself into rooms I was never invited into. I educated myself," Savannah told ABC News of her efforts to secure her parents' freedom. The pardon came after Savannah, a vocal Trump supporter, spoke at the 2024 Republican National Convention. She received a personal call from the president informing her of his decision to pardon her parents. Critics questioned whether the Chrisleys deserved the pardon, noting that both a jury convicted them and an appeals court upheld the conviction. Todd defended their pardon, questioning the makeup of their jury and comparing their case to other presidential pardons. MORE: Trump's flurry of pardons include some to campaign contributors Despite their time in prison, the Chrisleys said they remain unapologetic about their lifestyle. "I don't have an apology to give you or anyone else over the money that I've made," Todd said. The couple said they're now focused on prison reform, inspired by the people they encountered while incarcerated. "I have met some amazing women. I've met some women that I will be friends with till the day that I die," Julie said. "Chrisley Knows Best" aired on USA Network from 2014 to 2023, filming mostly in Georgia and Tennessee. The family plans to return to television with a new show on the Lifetime network. Todd and Julie said they are considering relocating to Charleston, South Carolina, where they hope to convert a mansion into a hotel -- with cameras rolling. "I've always told my children that it doesn't matter what someone else's opinion is of you unless it causes you to question who you are at your core," Todd said. "No one's opinion of me has ever caused me to question who I am at the core, so I don't worry about someone else's opinion." ABC News' Karin Weinberg, Anthony McMahon and Deborah Kim contributed to this report.
