UK summons Iranian ambassador after Iranians charged under security law
LONDON (Reuters) -Britain has summoned Iranian Ambassador Seyed Ali Mousavi in response to three Iranian nationals being charged in the country under the UK's National Security Act, the government said on Monday.
The three men, accused of plotting violence, appeared in court in London on Saturday following a major counter-terrorism investigation by British police.
"The UK Government is clear that protecting national security remains our top priority and Iran must be held accountable for its actions," the government said in a statement.
(Reporting by Sarah Young; Writing by Muvija M; Editing by Sachin Ravikumar)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
23 minutes ago
- The Star
HK to tighten national security scrutiny of restaurants
AUTHORITIES will toughen screening of catering premises for potential violations of national security, which civil servants should accord top priority in deciding on licence approvals, the city's leader said. Critics see the move as targeting the territory's many businesses, including cafes and restaurants, that have previously displayed posters, symbols or images expressing solidarity with its embattled pro-democracy movement. Such businesses, widely called the 'yellow economic circle', have faced growing pressure from authorities, such as tax inspectors, at a time when they are reeling from a broader economic and retail downturn. 'Food and environmental hygiene officers ... should place national security as the most important consideration and make appropriate assessments,' John Lee told reporters. He called the move 'appropriate and necessary', saying that all civil servants were expected to rate security as the highest priority under the national security law. The city's food and hygiene department would follow the law in considering new licences and renewing existing ones, he added. In recent years, authorities in the Asian financial hub have made use of sweeping national security laws imposed after mass anti-government protests in 2019 to systematically crack down on many of its liberal pockets. In May, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department sent letters to thousands of food and entertainment premises, obliging them to accept new terms related to national security. In one document seen by Reuters, the government told business owners to ensure no activity in which they were engaged or involved in 'may constitute or cause the occurrence of an offence endangering national security'. The former British colony's crackdown on dissent, from arresting democratic activists to shuttering liberal media and civil society groups, has drawn criticism from countries such as Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States. — Reuters
The Star
33 minutes ago
- The Star
Trump can abolish national monuments, US Justice Department says
FILE PHOTO: A vehicle rides on a highway past a pair of buttes known as the Bears Ears in Bears Ears National Monument outside Blanding, Utah, U.S., October 22, 2023. REUTERS/Jim Urquhart/File Photo (Reuters) -President Donald Trump has the power to abolish two national monuments in California established by his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden, as well as any others created by past presidents, according to a newly released legal opinion from a key adviser within the U.S. Department of Justice. The May 27 document, which was released on Tuesday, reversed a 1938 legal opinion and sets the stage for the Republican president to eliminate federal protections for potentially millions of acres of land previously designated as national monuments. National monuments are created by presidents in recognition of a site's cultural, historical or scientific importance, while national parks are created by Congress largely to protect outstanding scenic features or natural phenomena. Lanora Pettit, who heads the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, was asked by the White House to provide a new opinion as Trump considered whether to reverse Biden's decision in January in his final days in office to designate two California sites that hold significance to Native American tribes as national monuments. The Chuckwalla National Monument preserves more than 624,000 acres just south of Joshua Tree National Park. The Sattitla Highlands National Monument protects 224,000 acres where the dormant Medicine Lake volcano carved craters and lava tubes. Biden had relied on the Antiquities Act of 1906, a law that has been invoked by numerous presidents to designate over 100 national monuments. A 1938 opinion by Attorney General Homer Cummings, who served under Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt, has been long cited as constraining the ability of presidents to undo past designations. But in a 50-page legal opinion, Pettit concluded that the Antiquities Act gives presidents not only the power to establish national monuments on federal lands but also to determine that they never were or no longer are deserving of those protections. The White House has also asked Pettit to consider whether the Justice Department should disavow Cummings' prior opinion. She said it should, writing that the law's silence about whether a president could revoke a predecessor's designation of a monument should be understood as meaning he has such authority. "Thus, for the Antiquities Act, the power to declare carries with it the power to revoke," Pettit wrote. The legal opinion did note that since the earliest days of the Antiquities Act, presidents have 'from time to time diminished' the land set aside to protect monuments. Trump, in his first term, had reduced the size of the Bears Ears National Monument by 85% and the Grand Staircase-Escalante monument by half, both in Utah. Biden restored both monuments to their former size. But no president has abolished a national monument. It was unclear if and when Trump would revoke the monument status for the two California sites or any other monuments. Asked about the new legal opinion, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields in a statement cited the need to "liberate our federal lands and waters to oil, gas, coal, geothermal, and mineral leasing." (Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Leigh Jones and Leslie Adler)
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
US military bases to restore names changed after racial justice protests, Trump says
U.S. President Donald Trump prepares to deliver remarks during a visit to Fort Bragg to mark the U.S. Army anniversary, in North Carolina, U.S., June 10, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein FORT BRAGG, North Carolina (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday the military would rename bases which were changed after racial justice protests in 2023, including reverting to Fort Lee originally named after Civil War-era Confederate commander Robert E. Lee. Under the Trump administration, the Pentagon has already renamed Fort Moore back to its original name of Fort Benning and Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been able to sidestep a Congressional provision that banned bases having Confederate names by renaming bases after people with the same names as the Confederate officials. "We are also going to be restoring the names to Fort Pickett, Fort Hood, Fort Gordon, Fort Rucker, Fort Polk, Fort AP Hill and Fort Robert E. Lee," Trump said while speaking at Fort Bragg. "We won a lot of battles out of those forts. It's no time to change," Trump said as uniformed service members stood behind him. Fort Lee, located in Petersburg, Virginia, was renamed Fort Gregg-Adams in 2023. After Trump's announcement, the Army said that Fort Lee would be renamed after Private Fitz Lee, a Medal of Honor recipient from the Spanish-American War. During Trump's speech at Fort Bragg, some audience members, including those in uniform, cheered as the president made the announcement. They also jeered at the press as Trump pointed towards reporters and called them "Fake News" and applauded as he took shots at his predecessor, Joe Biden. Uniformed members of the U.S. armed forces are meant to be apolitical, carrying out the policies of Democratic and Republican administrations. The 2023 move to shed Confederate names for military bases came in the wake of nationwide protests after the 2020 death of George Floyd, a Black man killed by police in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Confederate flags and base names can be offensive to many Americans, who see them as reminders of the enslavement of Black Americans and symbols of white supremacy. Congress in 2021 passed legislation forbidding the naming of bases after anyone who voluntarily served or held leadership in the Confederate States of America, the breakaway republic of Southern states that fought against the U.S. in the Civil War in the 19th Century. (Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt in North Carolina, Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart in Washington D.C.; Editing by Stephen Coates)
