Belgian officials go after a 92-year-old diplomat for his role in the murder of Patrice Lumumba
Belgian prosecutors are looking to take Etienne Davignon (92), a former diplomat who was allegedly involved in the murder of the Congolese revolutionary, Patrice Lumumba.
Belgian prosecutors are investigating Etienne Davignon's involvement in Patrice Lumumba's murder.
Accusations center on unlawful detention and degrading treatment of Lumumba prior to his execution.
Davignon was a trainee diplomat at the time and is the sole survivor among the suspects.
According to the prosecutor's office, the accused was involved in the "unlawful detention and transfer" of the former Congolese head of state, who was wrongly imprisoned and subjected to "humiliating and degrading treatment".
AFP news agency disclosed that Davignon is the only survivor of ten Belgians who are suspected of being engaged in Lumumba's assassination.
He held the position of vice-chairman of the European Commission throughout the 1980s and was a trainee diplomat at the time of the killing.
As reported by the BBC, in 2011, Lumumba's children filed a complaint in Belgium to seek justice for their father's murder at the age of 35.
A hearing is scheduled for January 2026 to determine if he should go to trial.
The news was welcomed by Juliana, Lumumba's daughter, who told Belgian network RTBF: "We're moving in the right direction. What we're seeking is, first and foremost, the truth."
Life of Patrice Lumumba
Patrice Lumumba, born in 1925 in the Belgian Congo, was a fierce anti-colonial leader and the first Prime Minister of an independent Congo.
A powerful orator and visionary, he led the Congolese National Movement and played a central role in securing the country's independence from Belgium on June 30, 1960.
His passionate Independence Day speech, in which he denounced the cruelty of Belgian colonialism, shocked Western leaders and marked him as a threat to foreign interests.
Within months of independence, Congo descended into crisis.
The mineral-rich Katanga province, backed by Belgian interests, declared secession. As Lumumba sought Soviet assistance to defend Congo's unity, Western powers, including the U.S. and Belgium, grew increasingly hostile.
He was soon overthrown in a coup led by Colonel Joseph Mobutu, who had Western backing.
Lumumba was arrested, humiliated, and eventually handed over to Katangan secessionists. On January 17, 1961, he was executed by firing squad alongside two allies.
His body was dismembered and dissolved in acid to prevent a grave from becoming a rallying point.
Foreign complicity in his death is widely acknowledged today. Patrice Lumumba remains a martyr of African liberation, his life and brutal killing symbolize the deep struggles Africa faced in shaking off the chains of colonialism.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
27 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Map Shows Where 250 Million Acres of Public Land is Being Sold Off
The largest single sale of national public land in modern history could be carried out as part of President Donald Trump's budget bill to help pay for his sweeping tax cuts. However, a professor who is an expert on climate policy questioned the efficacy of the proposals, telling Newsweek that "selling off public lands will not reduce federal spending to any significant degree." Newsweek has contacted the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service via email for comment. The Senate committee said that a lot of the land owned by BLM and USFS cannot be used for housing, and so by opening up portions of federal land for large-scale housing construction, they intend to solve the "housing crisis." However, the nonprofit land conversation organization The Wilderness Society argued the opposite—that research suggests "very little of the land managed by the BLM and USFS is actually suitable for housing." It warned that much of the public land eligible for sale in the bill include "local recreation areas, wilderness study areas, inventoried roadless areas, critical wildlife habitat and big game migration corridors." The organization said the measure "trades ordinary Americans' access to outdoor recreation for a short-term payoff that disproportionately benefits the privileged and well-connected." The measure, which was included in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's version of the tax-and-spending legislation released last week, aims to generate revenue for tax cuts by auctioning off public lands in 11 Western states. The legislation mandates that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) sell more than 2 million acres over the next five years, with a total of 258 million acres now legally available for potential sale. The proposal mandates the nomination of tracts within 30 days, then every 60 days until the multi-million-acre goal is met, all without hearings, debate or public input. The plan is also part of a broader move to generate around $29 billion through a combination of expanded oil, gas, coal and geothermal lease sales, as well as new timber sales. According to The Wilderness Society, the total of USFS and BLM land available for sale under the new proposals for the Senate Reconciliation Bill, which are consolidated in the West, are as follows for each state: Alaska: 82.8 million acresArizona: 14.4 million acresCalifornia: 16.7 million acresColorado: 14.4 million acresIdaho: 21.7 million acresNevada: 33.6 million acresNew Mexico: 14.3 million acresOregon: 21.7 million acresUtah: 18.7 million acresWashington: 5.4 million acresWyoming: 15 million acres Studies show that less than 2 percent of USFS and BLM land is "close enough to population centers to make sense for housing development," Patrick Parenteau, a professor of law and senior fellow for climate policy at Vermont Law and Graduate School, told Newsweek. "Economists also found that more than half of federal lands within a quarter mile of towns needing more housing and a population of at least 100 people had high wildfire risk," he added. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said that the proposal is estimated to generate between $5 to $10 billion during the 2025-2034 period. However, whether this move will have a positive financial impact for the government has been debated by experts. Parenteau said "selling off public lands will not reduce federal spending to any significant degree." "There are lands that have been identified for sale or swaps due to the difficulty of managing them like checkerboard lands, but this legislation is not limited to those lands," he said. "The goal is to maximize revenue to offset the massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy." Parenteau added that the mandate also means that ultimately "buyers will have the upper hand." "The percentage of acreage being discussed is too small, in my view, to have any real effect on either the agencies' management budgets or the national debt," Deborah A. Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law, told Newsweek. "Most of these lands, especially remote lands managed by BLM, don't need or receive substantial or intensive management effort by the agencies; instead, they function largely as some of the last remaining ecological habitat for our dwindling wildlife," she said. Although, Wendie L. Kellington, a law attorney at Kellington Law Group, told Newsweek that the legislation "should have a positive budgetary impact on federal land maintenance and holding costs, because 5 percent of the proceeds from land sales must go to addressing the federal government's not insignificant backlog of deferred maintenance on federal BLM and forest lands in the states where the land is sold." She added that is expensive to own land and the federal government "has done a relatively poor job of maintaining its lands." The sale of public lands as part of Trump's tax bill has been a divisive measure, and a proposal to sell around 500,000 acres of federal land in Utah and Nevada was struck off the legislation by the House after some Republican lawmakers opposed the move. A number of Republican representatives launched the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus with the aim of "expanding public access to federal lands, not auctioning them off." Patrick Parenteau, a professor of law and senior fellow for climate policy at Vermont Law and Graduate School, told Newsweek: "The legislation sets a target of over 3 million acres to be sold by 2030, but over 200 million acres of public lands would be eligible for sale to the highest bidder which is likely to be real estate developers or wealthy individuals looking for property near major attractions like Lake Tahoe or Gates of the Arctic. "Even though national parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers and other protected areas are excluded, the areas eligible for sale include local recreation areas, wilderness study areas, inventoried roadless areas, critical wildlife habitat and big game migration corridors." He added: "Sales could impact local communities by eliminating access to popular recreation areas for hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, and more, reducing revenues from tourism near gateway communities, imposing more costs for public services like sewage and fire and police protection, increasing air and water pollution depending on what land uses are allowed, and so forth." Wendie L. Kellington, a law attorney at Kellington Law Group, told Newsweek: "The impact should be positive in the states and regions where the land is sold because the federal land to be sold can only be used for the development of housing or to address associated community needs. "The states identified in the bill are ones with disproportionately great housing shortages and affordability challenges. The affected regions will not lose beloved park or conservation lands. Rather, the bill is narrow and expressly prohibits sales of 'federally protected land" which includes national parks, wild and scenic river areas, national wildlife refuges, national historic sites and many other federally protected sites. "The bill is an effort at a federal solution to a well-known, stubborn, serious housing shortage problem that no one has been able to solve for the past three decades." Deborah A. Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law, told Newsweek: "Most federal public land is remote from infrastructure and communities, which means it has little value as land per se on the private market and is unlikely to raise appreciable revenue. Maybe there are some parcels immediately adjacent to human communities and services, but for the most part, developers will not be interested in lands that do not connect to supporting infrastructure, human amenities, or nearby jobs." She added: "Starting in 1976, we largely halted, as a matter of public policy, the very long history of selling or giving away federal lands. And I recently saw yet another poll reaffirming that Americans remain overwhelmingly opposed to the sell-off of public lands, which are considered a national treasure and legacy for future generations." The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committeesaid in its fact sheet on the legislation: "In the West, this means that the federal government is depriving our communities of needed land for housing and inhibiting growth. President Trump recognized the connection between federal land ownership and the housing crisis, which is why he pledged to 'open up portions of federal land for large-scale housing construction.'" It added: "This proposal allows a fraction of 1 percent of federal land to be used to build houses. In doing so, it will create thousands of jobs, allow millions of Americans to realize the American dream, and reduce the deficit and fund our public lands." The committee's proposals, unveiled June 11 and revised June 14, is still subject to debate and potential amendment as the Senate deliberates over Trump's tax bill ahead of the self-set deadline of July 4. Related Articles E. Jean Carroll on 'Comedy Gold' of Trump Trial and How She'll Spend $83MNo Kings Protests or Trump's Army Parade-Which Won the Weekend? Newsweek Contributors DebateDonald Trump's Approval Rating is Suffering With RepublicansHow Recall of 20 Million Eggs Could Affect US Prices 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Chances in Upcoming 'Referendum' Get Worse
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Democratic candidate running to be Virginia's governor has the edge, polls and experts say, in a contest that is expected to serve as a referendum on President Donald Trump and his administration's policies. Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former U.S. Representative, will face Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears in a election that will see Virginia elect its first female governor in November. Why It Matters Virginia is one of only two states that hold statewide elections the year after a presidential election, the other being New Jersey. The party in power typically suffers defeat in Virginia's statewide races, with Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin beating former Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe in 2021 after running against former president Joe Biden's policies. Virginia law does not allow governors to serve consecutive terms. This year's race for governor comes as the Trump administration's cuts to the government have heavily affected the state's large population of federal workers. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the National Memorial Day Observance at the Memorial Amphitheatre in Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, on May 26, 2025. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the National Memorial Day Observance at the Memorial Amphitheatre in Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, on May 26, 2025. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images Why Virginia's Vote Could Be 'Trump Referendum' The Virginia governor's race "will be seen as a bellwether race for the administration and also for the 2026 midterms," David Richards, the chair of the political science department at the University of Lynchburg, told Newsweek. He said that a win by Earle-Sears "could be taken by Trump as a referendum on his policies, that the average voter outside the beltway is fine with what he is doing." But a big loss "could be a warning that the GOP faces real problems in the 2026 midterms," he said. "Trump looms large over this race." Trump's endorsement "will matter" for Earle-Sears, he said, and his policies "will be a talking point for Spanberger and the rest of the Democratic ticket." Voters are likely to be motivated by the Trump administration's cuts to the federal government, Richards said. "Northern Virginia often determines who wins the state, as it is simply where the population is the heaviest in Virginia," he said. "And it is Northern Virginia that has been hit the hardest by the DOGE cuts, so I would imagine support for Trump by the middle voter, the independent voter in Northern Virginia is thin at best." What Polls Show in Virginia's Governor Race Polls conducted since December give Spanberger the lead, but experts say the race remains competitive. She is leading by +6.6 points, according to RealClearPolling's average of polls. Spanberger leads Earle-Sears by 17 points—43 percent to 26 percent, according to the the most recent Roanoke College poll. That poll surveyed 658 Virginia residents between May 12 and May 19, and has a weighted margin of error of 5.25 percent. Another May survey gave Spanberger a four-point lead—52 percent to 48 percent—over Earle-Sears. That poll, conducted by Pantheon Insights and HarrisX for Virginia FREE, surveyed 1,000 likely Virginia voters between May 9 and 13, and has a margin or error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The race remains competitive, Richards said. "The Roanoke poll is an outlier," he said. "They asked registered voters, while other polls have asked potential voters (people who say they will vote in the election)." What People Are Saying Abigail Spanberger wrote in a recent op-ed for The Roanoke Times: "As governor, I'm ready to work with anyone — regardless of party — to bring prices down. With chaos in Washington threatening to make life more expensive for families in the Roanoke area and throughout our commonwealth, Virginians deserve leaders who will put partisan politics aside and work together to offer families real relief." Winsome Earle-Sears said in a statement in April: "The stakes in this race couldn't be higher – we must continue our work to protect the Commonwealth from radical changes that would undo the progress we've made in restoring prosperity to Virginia. I will never stop fighting to make life more affordable, our schools stronger, and our communities safer. We've delivered important progress over the past four years, and we still have so much more to do." What's Next Virginia's gubernatorial election will be held on November 4, 2025.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US is the 'wild card' in Iran–Israel conflict
Oil (CL=F, BZ=F) prices tick higher as conflict in the Middle East continues, reversing a brief dip on ceasefire hopes. Daniel Dicker, founder of The Energy Word, joins Morning Brief to explain why the US response is the real "wildcard" for oil markets and how he expects to see oil supply and demand impacted. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Morning Brief here. I just would like to start with your outlook for oil right now given some of what we've already seen transpire in the Middle East. Well, Brad, historically speaking these kinds of um Middle Eastern dust ups haven't made much of an impact on global supply but you know there's always a first time and and uh this one is has the wild card of course of of Trump and and uh you know his uh mixed messages going into the, you know, the the war being a part of it or or being a supporter of of Israel with armaments or or more. So um the uh the uh supply problems that are inherent in the two combatants isn't much either from Iran and certainly not from Israel and the Iranians have only limited response to put pressure on oil you know in the straits of Hormuz which historically speaking hasn't been much of a threat. It's been well known inside Iran that the United States will not allow a closing of the straits of Hormuz, so the threats tend to be ignored and they they have been for the most part ignored. Um so the question really becomes you know, how much wider will this get and the wild card as I say is is the United States right now. From what we've been able to track thus far are there already ships that are trying to avoid even a wider radius or a wider zone and thus could add to some of the near term costs at least for delivery that has also a kind of knock on effect to prices paid? Uh you know, Brad, really there's really not much there inside of the the shipping uh issues again, you know, these are these are very weak threats that Iranians have made several times in the past going back 10 15 20 years and uh one time when there was uh you know, an event between an Iranian gunboat and US forces, you know, was quickly made clear to the Iranians that you know, it would not be tolerated in any way for shipping lanes to be shut down for Western supplies of oil coming out of Saudi Arabia, Dubai and what have you. So, you know, again, these are uh you know, they there might be some shipping lanes that are being given a slightly wider birth, but in terms of any, you know, long-term difficulties um with the Iranian side or the Iranian straight for moves, I I don't see it. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
