No arrests made at anti-Trump demonstrations, police say
In Glasgow, a woman aged 49 was arrested at a 'mass deportation rally' led by Ukip's Nick Tenconi, which was met by a counter-protest in George Square.
The woman, who was a counter-protester, was arrested in connection with an alleged obstruction of the police and a report will be submitted to the procurator fiscal.
People take part in a Stop Trump Scotland protest outside the US consulate in Edinburgh (Jane Barlow/PA)
Police Scotland said two arrests were made in Aberdeen at 'other events' on Saturday, but not at a huge anti-Trump demonstration in the city.
A spokesperson said the force 'took action at demonstrations and protest events' but did not make any arrests at Trump rallies across the country.
In Aberdeen, an 18-year-old man was arrested in connection with a number of outstanding warrants and will appear in court at a later date, according to Police Scotland.
A 56-year-old man will be the subject of a report to the procurator fiscal after an alleged assault in Aberdeen city centre.
Police Scotland said they could not give further details.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
In wartime, demonstrations in Ukraine can never be more than a peaceful protest
Once a decade, Ukraine has a moment in which street protests redefine the country's political direction. The Orange revolution of 2004; the Maidan revolution of 2014; and now, over the past 10 days, the first major wave of protest since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion. A series of unexpectedly boisterous and well-attended demonstrations forced Volodymyr Zelenskyy to execute a swift U-turn on his decision to scrap the independence of two anti-corruption bodies. On Thursday, MPs reversed the contentious changes they had adopted a week previously. Outside the parliament building, crowds whooped and cheered as the result of the vote was announced. The size, scope and demands of this latest protest movement have been much more modest than those of its revolutionary predecessors, but the spectacle has been no less remarkable, given the context of full-scale war in which it has taken place. The final, celebratory gathering came only hours after the latest massive Russian airstrike had hit Kyiv, killing at least 28 people including three children. Hardly anyone had managed a good night's sleep before arriving at parliament armed with banners and high spirits. This wartime context to a large extent inspired the protests: a common sentiment that when people are laying down their lives for the country on the frontline, the government has to live up to a certain set of values. But it also limited their scope. There was none of the revolutionary enthusiasm of Maidan present here; instead, there was a sober acknowledgement that all-out political unrest would only play into Russia's hands. 'There were some people chanting for impeachment and the vast majority of others said, 'Shut up, we do not undermine the legitimacy of the president, what happened is that the legitimate president made a mistake,'' said Inna Sovsun, an MP from the opposition Holos party who attended several protests. Dmytro Koziatynskyi, whose post on social media provided the initial spark for the protest, dismissed any comparisons to Maidan for exactly this reason. 'Even if they don't pass the law, this will never become anything other than a peaceful protest,' he said, in an interview before the parliamentary vote. Koziatynskyi was a masters student in the Czech Republic before returning to Ukraine after the full-scale invasion in 2022 and signing up to become a combat medic. After three years on various parts of the frontline, he left the army in May and now works for an NGO. When he saw the news last week that parliament had rushed through a law curtailing the independence of two bodies specially designed to go after high-level corruption, he found it 'insulting', he said. 'People are not fighting so that our government can do some crazy stuff, that destroys all our achievements since 2014,' he said. He penned an angry post on social media calling on people to protest against the new law. He expected 'maximum 100 people, mostly friends and acquaintances' to join the protest. By the second night there were about 10,000 people outside the Ivan Franko theatre, the nearest point to the presidential office that is accessible to the public. Most of those who came out were young – this has been a protest wave dominated by gen Z, with friends competing for the wittiest slogan or meme reference on their handwritten placards. On Wednesday evening, a man leading the singing of the Ukrainian national anthem through a loudspeaker was holding a sign that bore a single word: 'Cringe'. Suddenly, the fate of two relatively small institutions – the national anti-corruption bureau, known as Nabu, and the specialised anti-corruption prosecutor's office, Sapo – had become the issue of the day among Ukrainian teenagers. Nabu and Sapo were established after the Maidan revolution as part of a drive against the long-running scourge of corruption in Ukraine, financed partly with US money. Some western observers agree that there are problems with Nabu and Sapo: too many cases opened and not enough of them brought to a conclusion, for one. In theory, some streamlining would make sense; in practice, Zelenskyy's move looked a lot like bringing independent investigators under political control. With the Trump administration no longer pushing an anti-corruption agenda, and Europe on summer holidays, Zelenskyy's team appears to have felt they could push the bill through quickly, without anyone paying much attention. That might have been the case were it not for the protests. But the images of thousands of young people demanding the law's repeal forced European politicians to take a stand, and several leaders spoke privately to Zelenskyy to tell him he needed to find a way out of the self-inflicted mess. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion 'This became a major breach of trust. It's problematic both from an EU accession point of view and in that it makes it much harder for friends of Ukraine to continue making the case that the country needs support,' said one diplomatic source in Kyiv. Zelenskyy's response was swift and decisive, even if somewhat embarrassing for the MPs of his Servant of the People party, who were instructed to vote against the very thing they had been ordered to vote for the previous week. Now that the status quo has been re-established, there are two very different readings of the whole episode. One sees a leader using wartime powers to try to stifle independent institutions, too out of touch to predict the obvious backlash. Another reflects on how, even in wartime, Ukrainian society is still capable of expressing democratic sentiment, and its leaders still able to react swiftly to it. Koziatynskyi, whose post started off the protest wave, leans towards the second view. 'The protests showed that Ukrainian democracy is as strong as possible in times of a full-scale war, and our society is mature enough to have a dialogue with the government, and the government is able to listen,' he said. Zelenskyy's five-year presidential term should have ended last year, but almost all Ukrainians, including his fiercest opponents, agree that elections are both legally and technically impossible during wartime. With Russia's nightly attacks continuing, and a hope that Donald Trump might finally start getting tougher on Russia, that consensus has not changed. Nobody wants upheaval, but the outburst of protest may yet change the political atmosphere. 'Legally, everything will go back to how it was; politically, it's more complicated,' said Sovsun. 'It's unpredictable what this might have done to Ukrainian society. We have basically lifted the unspoken rule that we don't protest during martial law.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Operation Broadcroft: Police Scotland refuse to reveal costs
He said the investigation was looking into claims that a 'very, very senior civil servant - Mr James Hynd - gave a false statement on oath at the inquiry'. When the former First Minister and Alba Party leader died suddenly, aged 69, in North Macedonia in October last year it was not clear if and for how long the police investigation into the matter would continue. But The Herald revealed in June that the investigation was still ongoing. READ MORE: Following our report, this newspaper asked the force under freedom of information legislation details on the cost of the inquiry, how many officers were involved and the date the inquiry began. However, our request for the cost and the number of officers working on the inquiry was refused by Police Scotland on the grounds the force does not have the information "In response to your request, I can advise you that the information sought is not held by Police Scotland and section 17 of the Act therefore applies," Police Scotland told The Herald. "By way of explanation, the total costs relating to any investigation, both relating to the investigation itself and the number of hours involved, are difficult to quantify as the nature of policing means that officers are deployed to wherever their services are most required. "Furthermore, the number of officers required throughout an investigation will fluctuate and officers involved in a particular investigation, or multiple investigations, can be redeployed to other duties at any time, dependant on their skillsets." It continued: "Police Scotland may keep limited records for investigations, which record overtime costs and non-pay costs. These costs do not provide an accurate reflection of the total number of hours spent on an investigation nor do they provide, for the reasons stated above, an accurate cost for an investigation. "The costs do not include, for example, officer hours where that officer would have been on duty anyway and as such are not recorded as a specific expense to a particular investigation." Alex Salmond giving evidence to the Holyrood inquiry into how the Scottish Government handled complaints against him. (Image: PA) The force also refused to release the date the inquiry started on the basis this information could "prejudice" the probe. Outlining its decision, the force's freedom of information officer told The Herald: "The information sought is held by Police Scotland, but I am refusing to provide it in terms of section 16(1) of the Act on the basis that the section 34(1)(b) – Investigations, exemption applies. "Information is considered exempt from disclosure if it has at any time been held by Police Scotland for the purposes of an investigation which may lead to a decision to make a report to the Procurator Fiscal to enable it to be determined whether criminal proceedings should be instituted. The matter you are enquiring about is subject to a live police enquiry. "This exemption is non-absolute and requires the application of the public interest test. I do appreciate that there is a degree of interest in the release of the information you have requested and that to do so would help inform public debate on policing in Scotland. "However, it is essential that any release of information does not interfere or prejudice enquiries or risk such enquiries in the future. To do so would put the enquiries at risk and to do so would be vastly against the public interest. The balance lies in withholding the information requested at this time." The Herald is seeking a review of the decision. READ MORE: [[Alba]] leader Kenny MacAskill, a former [[Scottish Government]] justice secretary, criticised Police Scotland for withholding the information from [[The Herald]]. "Utterly ridiculous and deeply disturbing," he said before making reference to other inquiries around how complaints against Mr Salmond were handled. Last year the Information Commissioner criticised the [[Scottish Government]] relating to a legal battle around freedom of information requests about Irish lawyer James Hamilton's report into Nicola Sturgeon. Mr Hamilton's inquiry was into whether Ms Sturgeon broke the ministerial code when her predecessor Mr Salmond was being investigated for sexual harassment by the Scottish Government. She was not found to have breached the code. "The investigations relating to the Holyrood inquiry and Alex Salmond grow murkier by the hour. "We've a government which was found to have been acting illegally by the court and which has had to be brought to heel by the information commissioner. "Whether it's the redaction of documents or the denial of legitimate information the tale of obfuscation and what appears a cover up continues unabated. "Police Scotland is though independent and separate from government abd openness and transparency are required in this of all cases." Police Scotland has previously given details about the cost of Operation Branchform, the inquiry into the SNP's finances, including when the investigation was ongoing. Operation Branchform ended in March with the inquiry costing the force £2.2million. The police investigation was launched in July 2021 following a number of complaints and concluded in March this year. During that 44 month period [[Nicola Sturgeon]] resigned as First Minister and [[SNP]] leader in February 2023 and was succeeded by Humza Yousaf. In April that year, Ms Sturgeon's husband and former [[SNP]] Chief Executive Peter Murrell was arrested. He was later charged by Police Scotland and appeared in court in March this year on one charge of embezzlement where he made no plea and was granted bail. No date has yet been given for his second court appearance. During Operation Branchform Ms Sturgeon was also arrested and questioned, as was Colin Beattie, the former SNP treasurer. However the police investigations against both ended in March with no charges or further action against either. Operation Broadcroft is into evidence given by Mr Hynd, who was the Scottish Government's head of cabinet, parliament and governance at the time, into the Holyrood inquiry in 2020 which probed how the Scottish Government handled complaints of sexual harassment made against Mr Salmond. The former First Minister was later cleared of all of the charges against him in a separate criminal trial. The Court of Session was told in August 2024 that detectives were probing evidence given to the Scottish Parliament inquiry by Mr Hynd, The probe by a committee of MSPs - formally called the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints - concluded in March 2021 that the government investigation into Mr Salmond was 'seriously flawed". During his evidence to the parliamentary inquiry Mr Salmond alleged that there was a conspiracy among senior SNP figures, including Ms Sturgeon to imprison him. Ms Sturgeon has strongly denied the claim. The Court of Session action was launched by Mr Salmond in November 2023 to seek "significant damages" and compensation for loss of earnings reportedly worth £3 million. The sum would be in addition to the £500,000 that Mr Salmond was awarded in legal costs after a judge said in 2019 that the government investigation into the allegations against him had been 'unlawful in respect that they were procedurally unfair" and also "tainted with apparent bias". Mr Salmond's lawyer Gordon Dangerfield told the Court of Session last August that the Police Scotland investigation into Mr Hynd was called Operation Broadcroft and was being headed by a senior detective. Mr Dangerfield told the court hearing at the time: 'I can advise that the ongoing Police Scotland investigation is named Operation Broadcroft. It is led by senior investigating officer Detective Superintendent Graham Lannigan." Mr Hynd was responsible for drawing up the government's policy on the handling of complaints involving former and current ministers - the policy under which Mr Salmond was investigated. The Scottish Government has previously said would not comment on a live police investigation or on individual staffing matters. Police Scotland was approached for comment.
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Scots schools must continue to invest in libraries to protect children's futures
Glasgow City Council is considering removing librarians from 30 schools, but Record View demands that they think again. School libraries play a crucial role in expanding the minds of pupils. Not every child grows up in a house with books. For some youngsters, a school library is where they discover a lifelong appreciation of books. So it's deeply concerning that Glasgow City Council is considering removing the position of librarian from its 30 secondary schools. While there are no plans to close the libraries, the loss of such experienced professionals would be devastating. In these financially straitened times, all local authorities must make difficult decisions to balance their books. But it seems perverse that cutting cash from the school libraries budget would even be considered in the first place. Councils are being forced into these choices by a council tax freeze that has devastated local services. The freeze was brought in by the SNP to try to tackle soaring household bills. This was considered a vote winner by successive first ministers and enjoyed widespread support. Now the freeze has been lifted and bills have gone up again but the damage done to local services is still being felt. But before councils resort to measures like removing librarians from our high schools, they must think of the impact on young people. This generation of high school pupils has already lost years of schooling through the Covid lockdowns. They deserve to have their services protected – especially those which help them expand their horizons. Libraries can play as crucial a role for kids as classrooms. They deserve investment – not cutbacks. The city council must think again and keep its librarians. He's Don a U-turn Stock markets around the world slumped again as US President Donald Trump announced new tariffs on more than 90 countries. Trump is touting tariffs as the answer to trade deficits with other nations – but clearly the move will slow the global economy and devastate jobs. During his visit to Scotland last weekend, it appeared that Trump was on a more reasonable course. It may have been the sea air at Turnberry and Aberdeenshire that made him mellow, as he appeared to open a window of opportunity to get a deal done on whisky tariffs. But now he's back on the warpath and using the threat of tariffs to get his own way with countries that should be allies. It's typical of this erratic, unpredictable figure that he would say one thing one week, and something different the next. The world will be much safer and more prosperous place when his time in office finally ends.
