Estonia has imposed sanctions on another 19 Georgian officials
Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna has signed a decision to impose sanctions on another 19 high-ranking officials of Georgia.
Estonia has now banned a total of 102 Georgian citizens from entering the country.
The officials added to the sanctions list are considered directly or indirectly responsible for the persecution of peaceful protesters in Georgia, as well as journalists and opposition figures. The use of violence by Georgian authorities, politicized court cases, and disproportionate punishments for protesters and opposition politicians contradict the fundamental values of democracy and the conditions associated with Georgia's EU candidate status, the Estonian side stated.
'Estonia, in defending the rights and dignity of the Georgian people, will continue to support Georgia's civil society, independent media, and European integration,' said Tsahkna.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
24 minutes ago
- The National
When it comes to femicide in Scotland why don't Women of Colour count?
Her death has sent shockwaves through not only Dundee where she lived but communities of colour across Scotland. While it is right that we refrain from public speculation about the circumstances surrounding her murder, it is no wonder that some communities of colour in Scotland are feeling afraid. I believe Dr Gomo's case highlights legitimate questions about women's safety in Scotland. I have no intention to stir up more anxiety but when listening to politicians and police insist there should be no wider safety concerns following the death of Dr Gomo, I'm unsurprised that few within my community believe them. In part, this is because hate crime in Scotland is at record levels and the threat of far-right racism still looms over us in the wake of last summer's violence. And while the leader of Dundee City Council has insisted the city is safe, I simply don't believe there isn't a strong enough basis of evidence to reassure me that this is true for all, especially women of colour. I don't believe it because we know that on a UK-wide level, women of colour are one of the most vulnerable groups to domestic abuse and femicide, yet we have almost no data in Scotland for us to know the extent of the issue here. The latest stats show 22% of female homicide victims in the UK recorded between 2020 and 2022 were from minority-ethnic groups – a massive overrepresentation compared to their share of the population. Most statistics on domestic abuse, femicide and ethnicity rely on freedom of information (FOI) requests by campaign groups to police, yet in the most recent Femicide Census, police forces only provided the ethnicity of 41% of all victims. When the charity that conducts the census received the pitiful number of responses from their FOIs, blatantly racist terms like 'dark European' and 'oriental' were used to describe the murdered women the census counts. The issue goes beyond criminal justice alone, as an anti-racist activist, I frequently encounter a lack of ethnicity data in my work, and it is at its worst in Scotland. It seems it's routine practice for public bodies paid for by taxpayers to not publish or even record data relating to ethnicity and where it is recorded, we see consistent results. People of colour in Scotland are more vulnerable to violence, poverty and homelessness, and women of colour are even more disadvantaged. By not recording violent crime and femicide by ethnicity, we risk losing vital insights that could help us mitigate harm. Evidence suggests that women of colour are more vulnerable to violence because in part of factors like racism and systemic discrimination by police, yet we cannot tackle an issue we don't count. Scotland already has a poor track record of effective interventions to reduce violence against women and there is a real risk that the interventions we do have will not serve ethnic minority women. This is more than a statistical oversight; it is systemic erasure of women of colour in Scotland. Let's be clear, for a country with a strong reputation for human rights and progressive politics, this is a national disgrace. It feels as if our discourse surrounding feminism in Scotland completely ignores these issues. While women are killed on Scotland's streets, our public debate seems stuck on arguing about who gets to use women's loos. Reactions on social media too have shown just how flippantly violence against women of colour is treated. Every person in Scotland, regardless of their race, deserves to feel equally safe. But if we don't take violence against women of colour equally seriously, communities will continue to live in fear. Dr Fortune Gomo was more than a statistic. She was a talented scientist, a mother, a friend, a human being with hopes, dreams and fears. She mattered. Scotland owes her and her family justice and real work to ensure a crime like this can never happen again. I want to believe that regardless of her race or gender, this will happen, but I am scared the real but too often unrecorded inequality in Scotland could endanger this.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Recognising Palestine will consign Britain and France to total irrelevance
The current warmth between Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron may have opened the door to greater co-operation between France and the UK, but the Prime Minister must resist the French president's ardent desire for the entente amicale to extend to premature recognition of the state of Palestine. Announcing an annual national day of commemoration for Alfred Dreyfus (the Jewish army captain wrongly imprisoned for treason in 1894) last week, President Macron had the audacity to warn of the 'demons of anti-Semitism' while urging his Western allies to join him in entrenching an anti-Israel bias that would supercharge those demons. It is barely believable that any liberal democracy would think that this could be the moment to reward the terrorist regime and its proxies by recognising the state of Palestine – before any peace deal or path to stability is agreed, and while the region is a tinderbox and the butchers of October 7 2023 are still keeping hostages from their families after the horrendous mass murder and rape of Jewish civilians. Yet that is precisely what Macron is continuing to press on Sir Keir. The Prime Minister deserves credit for resisting so far. But the fact that France is stepping up the campaign for recognition, rather than stepping back, continuing to lobby the UK and the EU, shows that Starmer must go beyond privately saying 'pas encore' to this absurdly damaging suggestion. To be clear, as a former chairman of Labour Friends of Israel, I am deeply committed to the ultimate goal of two sovereign states, Israel and Palestine, living securely and independently at peace. The alternatives are either a greater Israel with no justice for Palestinians, or the terrorists' goal of wiping Israel off the map completely. Both are unconscionable. But it is post-empire arrogance to think that countries such as the UK and France, looking in from the outside, can short-circuit the process by officially recognising Palestine as a state without any agreement between the people who will have to live side by side and make it work. Announcing recognition like this will not make Starmer and Macron key players in the push for peace. The gesture would do the opposite; it would indefinitely sideline France and Britain from the difficult discussions ahead in the Middle East after many years in which their friendship with Israel had made the countries genuinely influential in this vital area. The consequence of recognising Palestine now, in the shadow of a conflict triggered by the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, would do more damage than just making the UK seem weak and ineffective on the international stage. It would be seen as Britain rewarding the Islamist terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah, and bolstering their Iranian puppet masters, who are dedicated to exporting violence and anti-Semitism to undermine our liberal freedoms in the West. It is wrong to view any international diplomacy through the prism of the impact it will have on the government's domestic standing with voters. Leaders need to lead on the international stage and act in the UK's long-term strategic interest, not be buffeted by ever-changing opinion polls on intractable global issues. So Labour should ignore siren voices urging it to recognise Palestine to win back discontented Muslim voters in communities where the rise of Gaza-focused independent politicians is a genuine electoral threat. If party strategists are weighing up the domestic impact of any change on Labour's policy towards Palestine, they must bear in mind that the political backlash will surely outweigh the benefits. The Jewish community in Britain may be relatively small and contain a wide variety of views on Israel-Palestine, but Sir Keir should not underestimate how many British Jews will feel deeply disappointed in him if he makes this gesture on recognition now. Particularly after he has worked so hard to restore trust in Labour after the appalling anti-Semitism that stained the party during Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. It is true that many Jews in Britain are dismayed by the increasingly hardline policies of the Netanyahu government and the scale of destruction in Gaza. That does not mean they will accept or forgive a futile diplomatic gesture on recognition that will be treated as a victory by Hamas. And the domestic blowback of a Labour Government recognising Palestine now will not end there. The solutions to conflict in the Middle East may not be top of the priority list of many white working-class voters in towns such as Barrow-in-Furness, which I used to represent in the House of Commons. But sure as hell those Red Wall voters will hate the idea that Labour is being swayed by the crowds they see marching for Gaza, with all the extremism on display in those protests. That is exactly what they will be told by Nigel Farage and his new army of Reform councillors in key electoral battlegrounds if Labour moves its position. And just as Hamas would be emboldened by the sense their actions have results, so would the organisers of the marches feel their aggressive tactics have been vindicated – encouraging fresh militancy. Decisions facing leaders on international affairs are often delicately balanced. Prematurely recognising the state of Palestine should not be one of those decisions. The Prime Minister is showing strength and deft judgment on other security issues, such as Ukraine and the need for rearmament. He should reject this nonsense and sideline anyone around him who is urging him down this path.
The National
7 hours ago
- The National
'Vulnerability' left in UK constitution after UKIMA review
The Internal Market Act (UKIMA) faced fierce criticism from devolved administrations when it was introduced in 2020 to regulate trade within the UK following EU withdrawal. They argued it enabled Westminster to override devolved decision-making in areas such as public health and food standards in pursuit of a unified UK market. After winning power in 2024, the Labour Government announced it would be reviewing the legislation. The findings of the UKIMA review were published last Tuesday. The review introduced procedural changes – including a mechanism to fast-track exclusions from the act where the economic impact is less than £10 million per year – and pledged to prioritise the use of common frameworks, post-Brexit agreements intended to manage formerly EU-governed policy areas collaboratively. READ MORE: Lesley Riddoch: I was steered by BBC bosses on how to report. I ignored it However, the review's changes are not legally binding and could easily be reversed, Professor Thomas Horsley, a constitutional law expert at the University of Liverpool, said. 'All they've done is said, 'these legal powers that exist, we commit politically to exercise them in accordance with what we agree in the common frameworks',' Horsley said. 'But that is a political commitment, and we all know that intergovernmental commitments can be – even the strongest ones – can be disregarded by a particular recalcitrant government in London. 'So the constitutional vulnerability, if you want to put it like that, remains.' He also said the £10m threshold below which UKIMA exclusions would be fast-tracked was a 'low bar', noting that it could be met by the turnover of a single company. Following the publication of Labour's review, both the SNP Government in Edinburgh and the Welsh Government in Cardiff welcomed changes to the exclusions process – but called for UKIMA to be fully repealed. Welsh Deputy First Minister Huw Irranca-Davies (Image: Welsh Government) Huw Irranca-Davies, the Deputy First Minister of Wales, said: 'We particularly welcome the commitment to implement any exclusions agreed via common frameworks, which should improve the functioning of the UK internal market. The common frameworks operate on a clear set of principles which fully respect devolution and include dispute resolution mechanisms. 'However, it is our long-standing and consistent view that the act should be repealed and replaced with a system, underpinned by legislation, designed around the common frameworks.' Scottish Constitution Secretary Angus Robertson hit out in stronger terms, saying UKIMA 'introduces radical new uncertainty as to the effect of laws passed by the Scottish Parliament and effectively provides a veto to UK ministers'. 'Nothing set out in the UK Government's response to the review changes this position, which is completely unacceptable,' he went on. READ MORE: Kate Forbes calls for Internal Market Act to be scrapped 'The conclusion of the review falls well short of our stated position of repeal and replace UKIMA, and indeed short of the legislative change required to mitigate the most damaging aspects of the operation of UKIMA.' Horsley said he could understand the argument being made by the devolved governments, that the 'common frameworks can do it all' and UKIMA is unnecessary. 'It is precarious because if things don't get agreed through the common frameworks – or a future UK Government decides, well, these political commitments we made, we're changing our mind – the legal powers are still there,' he said. 'This review doesn't change the legal framework, it just says, wait a minute, we're going to park it in the background and we're going to try and work using more intergovernmental political mechanisms, the common frameworks.' However, Horsley said that although the Labour Government's review has resulted only in political pledges, it was 'definitely a move in the right direction and a move that speaks to the ambition of the UK Government to reset relations'. He went on: 'There are other parts of UKIMA which are just not discussed. [The devolved governments] would like to reopen discussions around the direct payments that can be made from London in devolved areas. So there are things that are not so narrowly related to intratrade that are still rubbing up wounds. 'But in terms of just narrowly looking at UKIMA and the market access principles, there are some positive things there and some clear commitments from the UK Government towards more consensual policy making … which is very different to obviously the more abrasive approach which preceded under previous governments.' READ MORE: John Swinney sets out 3-point plan for fresh independence push In late 2024, Horsley was one of four constitutional legal experts to co-author a report on UKIMA which concluded that reform of the legislation was 'essential to restore intergovernmental trust'. Asked if Labour's review had provided that essential reform, he said: 'What this review shows is that there is more work to be done, but it's around those common frameworks. 'It's now shifting the attention to making the common frameworks work. These are not off-the-shelf things that are super functioning and solve all the problems. 'So the work between the governments now is going to have to be making those common frameworks work.' Douglas Alexander is UK Trade Policy Minister (Image: UK Parliament) After the review was published, UK Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander acknowledged there were 'real concerns' about how the laws have operated, and pledged "improvements'. Alexander stressed the importance of having a 'well-functioning UK internal market' as part of the Government's 'ambition to improve economic growth for the benefit of businesses and people in all parts of our country'. He added: 'Latest figures show that trade between the four nations of the UK is valued at £129 billion and that it is particularly important to the economies of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.'
