Venezuela's sound of silence
Venezuelans are calling it the 'ghost election'. On May 25th the regime of President Nicolás Maduro staged a vote to elect governors, mayors and National Assembly representatives. Turnout appeared pitiful. Polling stations were deserted. 'Nothing will change with this farce,' says an octogenarian voter in the working-class district of Petare in the capital, Caracas, who cast a ballot only 'out of habit'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
18 hours ago
- BBC News
South Korea votes for new president after failed martial law bid
Update: Date: 22:33 BST Title: How did we get here? Content: Anti-Yoon protesters gather for the constitutional court's verdict on Yoon's impeachment on 4 April South Korea descended into political turmoil last December after former President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law. Yoon said he was protecting the country from "anti-state" forces that sympathised with North Korea - but it soon became clear that he was spurred by his own political troubles. The military takeover, which stunned the world, was voted down overnight. The turbulent months that followed saw parliament vote to impeach Yoon and prosecutors charge him with insurrection. The country also saw days and nights of protests in the chilly temperatures, with tens of thousands of people calling for Yoon to be removed from office. His supporters showed up in similar measure demanding that he stays. On 4 April, the constitutional court upheld Yoon's impeachment and permanently removed him from office, paving the way for today's election. Update: Date: 22:32 BST Title: Key events leading to today's election Content: South Koreans protest on 14 December 2024 Here is the timeline of key events that led to this snap election: 3 December: Former President Yoon Suk Yeol declares emergency martial law in a late night televised address. Heavily-armed troops surround the National Assembly to block lawmakers from entering. 4 December: Just past 01:00 local time, 190 lawmakers, including 18 from Yoon's own party, voted to overturn the law. Yoon rescinds his order about three hours later. 7 December: Opposition lawmakers try to impeach Yoon for the first time but fail after a boycott by members of his conservative People Power Party. 12 December: Yoon defends his martial law order, saying he did it to protect the country's democracy. He vows to "fight to the end". 14 December: Amid days and nights of protests - both by Yoon's supporters and detractors - the National Assembly votes to impeach Yoon. 31 December: A district court issues a detention warrant for Yoon. 15 January: Some 3,000 police officers manage to detain Yoon at his heavily-fortified residence. This is their second attempt. In the first, hundreds of them faced a six-hour deadlock with his security detail. 19 January: The court grants a formal arrest warrant for Yoon, leading a mob of his supporters to riot, some even breaking into the courthouse. 26 January: Prosecutors indict Yoon on charges of leading an insurrection using his martial law bid. 4 April: The constitutional court upholds Yoon's impeachment and formally removes him as president. Authorities announce the following week that a snap election will be held on 3 June. Update: Date: 22:30 BST Title: South Koreans head to the polls Content: It's election day in South Korea, where voters are choosing the country's next president after months of unprecedented political turmoil. It started in December, when former president Yoon Suk Yeol placed the country under martial law. It sparked an impeachment trial that led to his removal from office and for a snap election to be held today. Yoon's martial law and impeachment highlighted deep divisions in South Korean society and large protests have been staged for and against him. For South Koreans, today's vote offers an opportunity to restore stability and forge ahead. There are five candidates, but Democratic Party's Lee Jae-myung holds a strong lead over his rivals. Lee had lost to Yoon in 2022 by a razor-thin margin. Whoever gets elected president will have to deal with issues ranging from US tariffs to tensions with North Korea and a declining birth rate. Join us as our teams across South Korea, Singapore and the US bring you the latest updates as they come.
The Independent
21 hours ago
- The Independent
Judge blocks administration from revoking protected status for small subset of Venezuelans
An estimated 5,000 Venezuelans granted temporary protected status can continue to work and live in the U.S. despite a Supreme Court ruling revoking protections while their lawsuit against the Trump administration is pending. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco ruled Friday that Venezuelans whose Temporary Protected Status was extended to October 2026 are not affected by the Supreme Court's order and are not eligible for deportation. The Supreme Court last month gave the go-ahead for the Republican administration to strip TPS from an estimated 350,000 Venezuelans that would have expired in April. In doing so, the court put on hold Chen's order blocking the administration from revoking protections granted under President Joe Biden. The justices provided no rationale, which is common in emergency appeals. But they singled out applicants who had received work authorization and other paperwork with new expiration dates of Oct. 2, 2026. Chen said at a hearing Friday that the justices could have stayed silent as to that subset of people, but didn't. His court continues to hear the underlying claim that the revocations by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem were unlawful. TPS allows people already in the United States to live and work legally because their native countries are deemed unsafe for return due to natural disaster or civil strife. President Donald Trump promised on the campaign trail to deport millions of people, and in office has sought to dismantle Biden administration policies that expanded paths for migrants to live legally in the U.S.
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
What cases are left on the Supreme Court's emergency docket? Here's a look
The sequence of events is familiar: A lower court judge blocks a part of President Donald Trump's agenda, an appellate panel refuses to put the order on hold while the case continues and the Justice Department turns to the Supreme Court. Trump administration lawyers have filed emergency appeals with the nation's highest court a little less than once a week on average since Trump began his second term. The court is not being asked to render a final decision but rather to set the rules of the road while the case makes it way through the courts. The justices have issued orders in 11 cases so far, and the Trump administration has won more than it has lost. Among the administration's victories was an order allowing it to enforce the Republican president's ban of on transgender military service members. Among its losses was a prohibition on using an 18th century wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelans alleged to be gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The most recent emergency filing arrived May 27. A judge rebuked the administration over deportations to South Sudan The Trump administration's latest appeal asks the high court to halt an order by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston. The White House violated his earlier order, Murphy found, with a deportation flight bound for the African nation carrying people from other countries who had been convicted of crimes in the U.S. Those immigrants must get a real chance to raise any fears that being sent there could put them in danger, Murphy wrote. Trump's top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General D. John Sauer, asked for an immediate high court order that would allow the third-country deportations to resume. Murphy has stalled efforts to carry out deportations of migrants who can't be returned to their home countries, Sauer wrote. Finding countries willing to take them is 'a delicate diplomatic endeavor' and the court requirements are a major setback, he said. Lawyers for the deported men have until Wednesday to respond. A watchdog group is trying to bring transparency to DOGE The Department of Government Efficiency, overseen by billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk until his departure on Friday, is resisting a lawsuit calling for it to publicly disclose information about its operations. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argues in a lawsuit that DOGE, which has been central to Trump's push to remake the government, is a federal agency and must be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW claims that DOGE 'wields shockingly broad power' with no transparency about its actions. The administration says DOGE is just a presidential advisory body that is exempt from FOIA disclosures. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper had found that its role is likely more than just advisory, especially in helping to shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development and cut billions of dollars in government contracts. The administration appealed Cooper's orders requiring documents be turned over and acting Administrator Amy Gleason to answer questions under oath. Last week, Chief Justice John Roberts agreed to temporarily pause the orders pending additional word from the Supreme Court. A judge blocked DOGE's access to Social Security systems over privacy concerns Social Security has personal data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, bank details, salary information and medical and mental health records for disability recipients, according to court documents. The Trump administration says DOGE needs access to Social Security's systems as part of its mission to target waste in the federal government. But U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland restricted the team's access to Social Security under federal privacy laws, saying DOGE's efforts at the agency amounted to a 'fishing expedition' based on 'little more than suspicion' of fraud. The judge is disrupting DOGE's work and interfering with decisions that belong to the executive branch, not courts, Sauer wrote in asking the high court to block Hollander's order in the suit filed by labor unions and retirees. The justices could act anytime. Trump wants to change citizenship rules in place for more than 125 years Several judges quickly blocked an executive order Trump signed his first day in office that would deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are in the country illegally or temporarily. The administration appealed three court orders that prohibit the changes from taking effect anywhere in the country. Earlier in May, the justices took the rare step of hearing arguments in an emergency appeal. It's unclear how the case will come out, but the court seemed intent on keeping the changes on hold while looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. One possibility advanced by some justices was to find a different legal mechanism, perhaps a class action, to accomplish essentially the same thing as the nationwide injunctions blocking Trump's citizenship order. Nationwide injunctions have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts to remake the government and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. Judges have issued 40 nationwide injunctions since Trump began his second term in January, Sauer told the court during the arguments. The court could act anytime, but almost certainly no later than early summer. ___
