Thousands march in Buenos Aires as ex-president Kirchner starts house arrest
Kirchner, a two-term president from 2007-2015, is the country's most prominent politician in recent decades, though her leftist brand of populism sharply divides opinion. She is the nemesis of current libertarian President Javier Milei.
Supporters from her Peronist movement took to the streets with flares, giant posters with her image, and banners saying "Always With Cristina", a reflection of how she retains popular backing with her core supporter base. Kirchner, 72, claims the allegations against her are politically driven.
"It was what they needed to get rid of her, so she wouldn't be in the (election) running. They knew she could beat them," said Laura Abal, 66, a pedicurist who took part in the march, referring to Kirchner's foiled plans to run as a local lawmaker.
Kirchner has some 20% voter support, polls show, though is opposed by many who recall her interventionist policies. She still holds huge sway over the opposition Peronists, Argentina's dominant political bloc in the last half century.
Argentina's Supreme Court last week upheld a 2022 conviction against Kirchner related to a fraud scheme involving public projects in the southern Patagonia region. That also included a lifetime ban from holding public political office.
Some analysts say the detention could, though boost her image by making her a political martyr, adding she could potentially exercise influence from her Buenos Aires apartment where the judge ordered that she serve out her sentence due to her age.
"Can I go out on my balcony or not?" Fernández humorously asked on Wednesday on the social network X, a reference to how she could rouse the crowds in the streets below in potential violation of court orders not to cause disruption.
Presidential spokesman Manuel Adorni on Wednesday avoided crowing over the sentence, though hailed the fact that "justice" had prevailed.
"The arrest of a former president is not pleasant for any democracy, although, of course, it is a source of joy that justice exists and puts some things right," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Supreme Court asked to overturn gay marriage rights
The Supreme Court has been asked to overturn gay marriage a decade after it was legalised. Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk, filed a petition calling on justices to take away the right to marry for same-sex couples, claiming the original ruling was 'egregiously wrong'. Davis, 59, served five days in prison in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licences to David Ermold and David Moore on religious grounds shortly after same-sex marriage was legalised. She was ordered to pay $100,000 to the couple for emotional damages and $260,000 to cover their attorney fees. In a 90-day writ filed last month, Davis appealed the payments, arguing her First Amendment protections to practise her religion freely protected her. She also urged the high court to review its decision in the Obergefell v Hodges case, which extended marriage rights for same-sex couples, describing it as 'legal fiction'. 'The mistake must be corrected,' Liberty Counsel, the nonprofit law firm representing Davis, wrote in the petition. 'If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it. 'Davis was jailed, haled before a jury, and now faces crippling monetary damages based on nothing more than purported emotional distress,' the filing continued. 'Supreme Court unlikely to take up case' The petition is understood to be the first time since 2015 that the Supreme Court has been formally asked to reverse the ruling legalising gay marriage. At the time, Davis was the sole authority in Rowan County in charge of issuing marriage licences on behalf of the government. Lower courts have dismissed her claims, and few legal experts expect the Supreme Court to take up her case. 'Not a single judge on the UD Court of Appeals showed any interest in Davis's rehearing petition, and we are confident the Supreme Court will likewise agree that Davis's arguments do not merit further attention,' an attorney for Mr Ermold and Mr Moore told ABC News. Davis's appeal comes amid a renewed push by conservatives opposed to gay marriage to allow each state to set its policy. So far this year, at least nine states have either introduced legislation aimed at blocking new marriage licences for gay couples or passed resolutions calling on the high court to reverse the same-sex marriage ruling, according to the advocacy group Lambda Legal. The Davis petition argues that the court should treat same-sex marriage in the same way it dealt with the issue of abortion, in its 2022 decision to overturn Roe v Wade. Mat Staver, the founder of Liberty Counsel, said: 'Kim Davis's case underscores why the US Supreme Court should overturn the wrongly decided Obergefell v Hodges opinion because it threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman. 'Obergefell cannot just push the First Amendment aside to punish individuals for their beliefs about marriage,' Mr Staver continued. 'The First Amendment precludes making the choice between your faith and your livelihood. 'The high court now has the opportunity to finally overturn this egregious opinion from 2015.'
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Nicola Sturgeon's legacy may be defined by Isla Bryson
Nicola Sturgeon has said she was 'like a rabbit caught in the headlights' when asked if double rapist Isla Bryson was a woman. In her new book, the former first minister said she was 'completely blindsided' when the case prompted a public outcry. 'I had no advance warning that the case was pending,' she wrote in Frankly. 'To this day, I do not understand how no one in the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) or Scottish government officialdom thought it important to flag it up to me.' Read more from Unspun: Bryson was convicted at the High Court in Glasgow in 2023 of raping one woman in Clydebank in 2016 and another in Glasgow in 2019. He began identifying as a woman only after being charged and has not legally changed gender. Although the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service expected Bryson to be sent to Barlinnie, the SPS initially moved him to the women's prison at Cornton Vale. It was only after a backlash, and Ms Sturgeon's intervention, that Bryson was transferred to HMP Edinburgh. The row came just weeks after MSPs passed the controversial Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Although the Bill never became law, the SPS had for years allowed prisoners to self-identify their gender. Which is why nobody flagged it to the first minister. Despite the Bryson scandal, subsequent policy changes, and the Supreme Court case, the SPS continues to house dangerous, biological men in the women's estate. Its post-Bryson 2023 Policy for the Management of Transgender People in Custody states that a transgender woman 'will not be eligible to be considered for admission or transfer to a women's prison' if convicted of serious offences such as murder, assault, robbery, abduction, rape, and sexual harassment. However, the policy includes an exception: the SPS Risk Management Team can approve transfers if there is 'compelling evidence' the prisoner does not present an unacceptable risk. What is unacceptable risk? Research by the Murray Blackburn Mackenzie (MBM) policy collective found that prisoners currently in the women's estate include Alan Baker (also known as Alex Stewart), convicted of murder in 2013 and held in the female unit at Greenock prison. So too is Richard McCabe, also known as Melissa Young, who was convicted of murder in 2014. While on remand at Cornton Vale, they assaulted a female officer, biting her stomach Peter Laing, who now goes by the name Paris Green, was also convicted of murder and torture in 2013. They were still in the female estate in 2024 and recently charged with assaulting a female guard. Do these prisoners represent acceptable risk? The Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC) helped draft the new SPS policy. MBM has repeatedly called on the SHRC to withdraw its submission. In June 2023, they were told their request was being considered. Despite chasing in August and October 2023, they received no reply. As reported in The Herald, they wrote again in April 2025, following the Supreme Court case, renewing their call. Almost three months later, SHRC executive director Jan Savage responded. Part of the delay, she said, was due to the prison service. On May 22, 2025, the SHRC wrote to the SPS asking how it was monitoring the impact of its policy, whether it had published data, if the policy would be reviewed, and if it collected information on sex and gender. More than two months on, the SPS has yet to reply. When asked, an SPS spokesperson told me: 'We value the important role of the Scottish Human Rights Commission and will respond to their correspondence in due course. 'We have received the Supreme Court's judgement and are actively considering its impact.' With Frankly, Ms Sturgeon attempts to define her legacy. The truth is, the chaos in Scotland's public sector, and Scotland's prisons in particular, could well define it for her.
The Independent
7 hours ago
- The Independent
Drivers warned over car finance scammers after court ruling
Drivers have been warned to watch out for scammers that are seeking to take advantage of the recent landmark ruling on mass instances of car finance mis-selling in the UK. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has told motorists that it will be consulting on a compensation scheme for those who have been affected by the issue, which it says could cost finance lenders up to £18 billion. A Supreme Court ruling earlier in the month found that lenders are not liable for hidden commission payments in car finance schemes. The decision means that many contested claims will not go ahead, but the most serious claims will be eligible for compensation. Many cases in a separate strand of the car finance mis-selling case, which was not part of the Supreme Court ruling, are also set to receive payouts. More details of the FCA-led compensation scheme should arrive in the coming months, with the watchdog confirming that any payments will begin in 2026. A new warning from authority says that anyone who believes they are affected should not share their details with anyone pretending to be linked to a compensation scheme or car finance lender. The FCA says it put out its warning following 'reports of scammers contacting people.' It added: 'These fraudsters are asking individuals for personal information including their name, address, date of birth and bank details. They then falsely claim that these people are owed compensation.' The only action those who have been affected have been advised to take is to complain directly to their provider now. The FCA has shared more information on how to do this. Am I eligible for the car finance compensation scheme? The proposed scheme firstly targets issues arising from Discretionary Commission Arrangements (DCAs), which were outlawed in January 2021 and not involved in the recent Supreme Court case. Individuals who entered into personal contract purchase (PCP) or Hire Purchase (HP) deals before the ban are likely to have been unknowingly subjected to DCAs. However, those with 0 per cent interest rates or very small commissions are unlikely to qualify for compensation under this strand. The newer element of the mis-selling case, relating to the Supreme Court ruling, stems from commissions which the FCA explains were "unfair and therefore unlawful.' Unlike the DCA cases, these require individual assessment, making them harder to define. Factors in the payout may even include how vulnerable a person is, and therefore whether it can be considered more unfair for the commission to have been so high. The FCA estimates that most individuals making claims through the scheme will receive "less than £950 in compensation per agreement". The final cost to the industry will ultimately depend on the final details of the scheme.
