A Serbian court swaps prison for house arrest for 3 out of 6 jailed activists after pressure
BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — An appeals court in Serbia on Tuesday released three out of six political activists from jail following protests and international criticism of the populist government, which has faced monthslong anti-graft demonstrations.
But the court in the northern city of Novi Sad ordered that the three remain under house arrest, pending legal proceedings on suspicion of anti-state activities. The court said that it would issue another ruling at some point about the other three jailed activists.
The six were detained in March after secret recordings of their alleged plotting to take over state institutions was broadcast on pro-government media in Serbia before a major rally in the capital, Belgrade. Hundreds have been protesting for days against their prolonged detention.
Those released from jail include a high school teacher who was transferred to a prison hospital in Belgrade last week after going on a hunger strike.
The huge rally on March 15 in Belgrade was part of protests that started after a concrete canopy collapsed on Nov. 1 at a train station in Novi Sad, killing 16 people. Shaken by the tragedy, populist President Aleksandar Vucic's government has stepped up pressure on those involved while trying to curb the demonstrations.
Lawyers for the jailed activists in Novi Sad say that the accusations against their clients are based on illegal wiretapping, and there's a lack of evidence.
Vucic criticized the ruling in a statement on pro-government Informer television, saying it was the result of pressure from 'the gang' of protesters outside the court. He described the activists as 'terrorists," adding that 'there is not a country in the world' that would release them from jail.
Protesters in Novi Sad said on Tuesday that they would continue with the demonstrations until all six activists are out of prison. Six more activists facing the same charges aren't in the country.
Tuesday's ruling came as U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk arrived in Belgrade.
Last week, Tonino Picula, the European Parliament's envoy for Serbia, described the activists as 'political prisoners," while Civil Rights Defenders group called it 'a clear attempt by the Serbian government to silence dissent.'
Critics have accused Vucic of increasingly authoritarian rule that stifles the media and other democratic freedoms. The president says that he wants Serbia to join the European Union while boosting relations with Russia and China.
Many in Serbia believe that widespread government corruption linked to major infrastructure projects fueled negligence and undermined construction regulations that contributed to the disaster on Nov. 1 at the Novi Sad train station, which triggered the protests.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Springsteen's Berlin concert echoes with history and a stark warning
BERLIN (AP) — Veteran rock star Bruce Springsteen, a high-profile critic of President Donald Trump, slammed the U.S. administration as 'corrupt, incompetent and treasonous' during a concert Wednesday in Berlin. He was addressing tens of thousands of fans at a stadium built for the 1936 Olympic Games that still bears the scars of World War II and contains relics from the country's dark Nazi past. 'Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices, stand with us against authoritarianism, and let freedom reign,' he said. Springsteen, long a political opponent of the president, has made increasingly pointed and contentious public statements in recent concerts. He denounced Trump's politics during a concert last month in Manchester, calling him an 'unfit president' leading a 'rogue government' of people who have 'no concern or idea for what it means to be deeply American.' Springsteen is no stranger to Berlin. In July 1988, he became one of the first Western musicians to perform in East Germany, performing to a ravenous crowd of 160,000 East Germans yearning for American rock 'n' roll and the freedom it represented to the youth living under the crumbling communist regime. An Associated Press news story from that period says 'fireworks steaked through the sky' and hundreds of people in the audience waved handmade American flags as they sang along to 'Born in the USA.' Almost four decades later, Springsteen issued a stark warning: 'The America that I love, the America that I've sung to you about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration."
Hamilton Spectator
32 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Trump's plan to begin ‘phasing out' FEMA after hurricane season burdens states, experts warn
SAN DIEGO (AP) — President Donald Trump's plan to begin 'phasing out' the federal agency that responds to disasters after the 2025 hurricane season is likely to put more responsibilities on states to provide services following increasingly frequent and expensive climate disasters, experts said. 'We want to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level,' Trump said Tuesday in an Oval Office appearance with administration officials about preparations for summer wildfires. Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have repeatedly signaled their desire to overhaul, if not completely eliminate, the 46-year-old Federal Emergency Management Agency. While there has been bipartisan support for reforming the agency, experts say dismantling it completely would leave gaps in crucial services and funding. 'It just causes more concern on how states should be planning for the future if the federal government's not going to be there for them,' said Michael Coen, FEMA chief of staff during the Obama and Biden administrations. Disaster response is already locally led and state-managed, but FEMA supports by coordinating resources from federal agencies, providing direct assistance programs for households and moving money to states for repairing public infrastructure. Trump said Tuesday he wants to 'give out less money,' and to 'give it out directly,' sidestepping FEMA programs. He said he did not know who would distribute the funds, saying they could come 'from the president's office' or DHS. 'I was left with the impression that he doesn't really understand the scale of what FEMA manages on a yearly basis with a budget of over $30 billion,' said Coen. Dismantling FEMA, or even changing how much of the costs it shares with states in the event of a major disaster declaration, would require action from Congress, including amending the 1988 Stafford Act, which outlines FEMA's roles and responsibilities and the cost share between the feds and the states. Declaring fewer major disasters or giving less federal support could put an untenable financial burden on states, said Sara McTarnaghan, principal research associate at the Urban Institute. 'Very few of them would have had enough funds set aside to anticipate the federal government stepping back from its historic role in disaster recovery for major events,' McTarnaghan said. A recent Urban Institute analysis found that between 2008-2024, quadrupling the economic threshold of when major disasters are declared would have shifted $41 billion in public assistance costs alone to state and local governments. 'I think the trade off for states and communities is going to be, do we accept a less full recovery or do states draw on other resources to meet these goals and needs, perhaps at the cost of investments in other kinds of social programs or functions of the state,' said McTarnaghan. Not all states will be able to generate much more revenue, she added. 'The confluence of states that have really high disaster exposure and states that have relatively limited fiscal capacity are overlapping in many ways,' she said. 'That's the case for a lot of states along the Gulf Coast that we're concerned about going into hurricane season but also the case for some Midwestern states that face issues with severe convective storms.' Trump dismissed the idea that states can't handle the bulk of disasters on their own. 'The governor should be able to handle it and frankly if they can't handle the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't be governor,' he said. He suggested that some of the gaps could be filled by more collaboration among states. Noem said FEMA is building communication and mutual aid agreements among states 'to respond to each other so that they can stand on their own two feet.' A national mutual-aid structure called the Emergency Management Assistance Compact already exists, but its operations are typically reimbursed by the federal government, said Coen. 'There's already robust communication between states. The confusion is what they can expect from the federal government.' Regarding the current hurricane season, which began June 1, Noem said FEMA 'stands prepared.' But there have already been changes to how the agency operates. It suspended its door-to-door canvassing program that helped enroll survivors for assistance. More than 2,000 FEMA staff, around one-third of the full-time workforce, have left or been fired since January. After severe weather this spring, some states waited as long as eight weeks for their disaster declaration requests, and several requests are still pending. Trump has not approved any requests for hazard mitigation assistance since February, a typical add-on to individual and public assistance that helps states build back in more resilient ways. A FEMA review council established by Trump and co-chaired by Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will submit suggestions for reforms in the next few months, according to Noem. In its first meeting in May, Noem told the group of governors, emergency managers, and other officials primarily from Republican states that Trump is seeking drastic change. 'I don't want you to go into this thinking we're going to make a little tweak here,' she said. 'No, FEMA should no longer exist as it is.' ___ Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
The Hill
42 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
