A Milan criminal court on Wednesday acquitted Italian fashion influencer and businesswoman Chiara Ferragni of aggravated fraud in the so-called Pandorogate scandal. The case, one of Italy’s most high-profile celebrity trials, centered on allegations of misleading advertising linked to the promotion of the sweet pandoro Christmas bread — luxury sugar-dusted brioches — in 2022 and Easter eggs sold in 2021 and 2022. Prosecutors, who had requested a 20-month prison sentence, argued that consumers had been led to believe their purchases would support charitable causes, when donations had in fact already been made and were not tied to sales. Ferragni denied any wrongdoing throughout the proceedings. Judge Ilio Mannucci rejected the aggravating circumstance cited by prosecutors, reclassifying the charge as simple fraud, according to ANSA. Under Italian law, that requires a formal complaint to proceed. But because the consumer group Codacons had withdrawn its complaint last year after reaching a compensation agreement with Ferragni, the judge dismissed the case. The ruling also applies to her co-defendants, including her former close aide Fabio Damato, and Cerealitalia Chairman Francesco Cannillo. “We are all very moved,” Ferragni said outside the Milan courtroom after the verdict. “I thank everyone, my lawyers and my followers.” The scandal began in late 2023, when Ferragni partnered with confectioner Balocco to market a limited-edition pandoro to support cancer research. But Balocco had already donated a fixed €50,000 months earlier, while Ferragni’s companies earned more than €1 million from the campaign. The competition authorities fined Ferragni and Balocco more than €1.4 million, and last year, Milan prosecutors charged Ferragni with aggravated fraud for allegedly generating false expectations among buyers. Ferragni and her then-husband and rapper Fedez used to be Italy’s most politically influential Instagram couple, championing progressive causes, campaigning for LGBTQ+ rights and positioning themselves against the country’s traditionalist Catholic mainstream, often drawing sharp criticism from Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and the Italian right. Since the scandal erupted in December 2023, however, that cultural and political empire has unraveled: the couple divorced, Ferragni retreated from public life, and Fedez reemerged in increasingly right-leaning political circles. Wednesday’s acquittal closes a legal chapter that had sparked intense political and media scrutiny, triggered regulatory fines and fueled a broader debate in Italy over influencer marketing, charity and consumer protection.

Wies De Graeve is the executive director of Amnesty International Belgium’s Flemish branch. Tomorrow, Seán Binder will stand trial before the Mytilene Court of Appeals in Lesvos, Greece for his work as a volunteer rescuer, helping those in distress and at risk of drowning at sea. Alongside 23 other defendants, he faces criminal charges including membership in a criminal organization, money laundering and smuggling, with the risk of up to 20 years in prison if convicted. I first met Seán in 2019. A bright, articulate Irish activist in his twenties, he was our guest at the Belgian launch of Amnesty International’s annual end-of-year campaign. And there, he shared his equally inspiring yet shocking story of blatant injustice, as he and others were being prosecuted for saving lives. Two years earlier, Seán had traveled to Lesvos as a volunteer, joining a local search-and-rescue NGO to patrol the coastline for small boats in distress and provide first aid to those crossing from Turkey to Greece. Since 2015, the war in Syria has forced countless individuals to flee their homes and seek safety in Europe via dangerous routes — including the perilous journey across the Aegean Sea. In 2017 alone, more than 3,000 people were reported dead or missing while attempting to cross the Mediterranean, and when authorities failed to step in, many volunteers from across Europe did so instead. Seán was one of them. He did what any of us would hope to do in his position: save lives and help people. Yet, in 2018, he was arrested by Greek authorities and held in pretrial detention for over 100 days before being charged with a range of crimes alongside other humanitarian workers. These charges aim to portray those who help people on the move as criminals. And it’s part of a trend sweeping across Europe that’s criminalizing solidarity. In Malta, three teenagers from West Africa stand accused of helping to bring more than 100 people rescued at sea to safety, and are facing charges that carry a lifelong sentence. In Italy, ships operated by search-and-rescue organizations are being impounded. And in France, mountain guides have faced prosecution for assisting people at the border with Italy. European governments are not only failing people seeking protection, they’re also punishing those who try to fill that dangerous gap. I met Seán again in 2021 and 2023, both times outside the courthouse in Mytilene on Lesvos. In 2023, the lesser misdemeanor charges against him and the other foreign defendants — forgery, espionage and the unlawful use of radio frequencies — were dropped. Then, in 2024, the rest of the defendants were acquitted of those same charges. While leaving the courthouse that day, still facing the more serious felony charges along with the other 23 aid workers, Seán said: “We want justice. Today, there has been less injustice, but no justice.” As Amnesty International, we’ve been consistently calling for these charges to be dropped. The U.N. and many human rights organizations have also expressed serious concerns about the case, while thousands across Europe and around the world have stood by Seán’s side in defense of solidarity with migrants and refugees, signing petitions and writing letters. This trial should set off alarms not only for Europe’s civil society but for any person’s ability to act according to their conscience. It isn’t just Seán who is on trial here, it’s solidarity itself. The criminalization of people showing compassion for those compelled to leave their homes because of war, violence or other hardships must stop. This trial should set off alarms not only for Europe’s civil society but for any person’s ability to act according to their conscience. | Manolis Lagoutaris/AFP via Getty Images Meanwhile, a full decade after Syrians fleeing war began arriving on Europe’s shores in search of safety and protection, Europe’s leaders need to reflect. They need to learn from people like Seán instead of prosecuting them. And instead of focusing on deterrence, they need to ensure the word “asylum,” from the Greek “asylon,” still means a place of refuge or sanctuary for those seeking safety in our region. People who save lives should be supported, not criminalized. This week, six years after our first encounter, Seán and I will once again meet in front of the Mytilene courthouse as his trial resumes. I will be there in solidarity, representing the thousands who have been demanding that these charges be dropped. I hope, with all my heart, to see him finally receive the justice he is entitled to. Humanity must win.

LONDON — British MP Tulip Siddiq has been handed a two-year prison sentence in Bangladesh in her absence following a corruption trial she did not attend. Siddiq, a former U.K. minister, was found guilty of influencing her aunt, Bangladesh’s ex-Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, to secure a plot of land for her family in the outskirts of the capital Dhaka, according to a BBC report of the trial. Siddiq, a former U.K. Treasury minister, has strongly denied the claims and is unlikely to serve the sentence. She is based in London and is the MP for the London constituency of Hampstead and Highgate. The case is one of a number launched by prosecutors against Hasina and her family in Bangladesh. Hasina fled the country last year after more than a decade in charge. The ex-PM was sentenced to death in a separate trial a fortnight ago. Siddiq quit as a  Treasury minister in January following multiple media reports — heavily disputed by Siddiq — that she benefited from her family’s rule of Bangladesh. She said she did not want to be a “distraction” for the government. In a statement at the start of the trial, Siddiq said prosecutors had “peddled false and vexatious allegations that have been briefed to the media but never formally put to me by investigators,” and insisted she had “done nothing wrong.” “Continuing to smear my name to score political points is both baseless and damaging,” she added. A group of senior lawyers, including Britain’s ex-Justice secretary Robert Buckland, former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, and Cherie Blair, a human rights lawyer and wife of former prime minister Tony Blair, last week said the trial had been “contrived and unfair.” The U.K. does not have an extradition treaty in place with Bangladesh. In a fresh statement Monday morning, Siddiq slammed what she called a “flawed and farcical” legal process. “The outcome of this kangaroo court is as predictable as it is unjustified,” she said. “I hope this so called ‘verdict’ will be treated with the contempt it deserves. My focus has always been my constituents in Hampstead and Highgate and I refuse to be distracted by the dirty politics of Bangladesh.”

Haris Doukas is a member of the Eurocities Executive Committee and the mayor of Athens. Vasil Terziev is the president of the B40 network and the mayor of Sofia. On a dry late August afternoon, we stood outside Silivri — the high-security prison west of Istanbul, where Ekrem İmamoğlu, the elected leader of Europe’s largest city, has been detained for months. Behind us, Turkish civil society leaders held aloft banners; beside us were colleagues from his municipal team; and around us were a quiet but resolute crowd of supporters, including six other local leaders from large cities across Europe. It wasn’t the visit we had planned, but it was powerful all the same. In that moment, what struck us most wasn’t just the absence of the man we had traveled to see — and to whom national authorities had denied us access. It was the presence of his values echoing from every voice that spoke. Hope, we realized, isn’t incarcerated by prison walls. And everything we witnessed only deepened our resolve to stand by our fellow city leaders and defend local democracy. What we heard in Istanbul wasn’t despair but moral strength. İmamoğlu’s colleagues told us of how he remains engaged even behind bars, how he still asks about city projects and encourages his team to stay the course, insisting that the work of building a more inclusive, sustainable Istanbul continues. He isn’t the only target. Dozens of opposition mayors in Turkey have been arrested for dubious charges in recent months. Any local leader who dares to govern differently, who poses a threat to the central government’s grip, will be punished — that’s the message. Istanbul is the country’s economic engine, and its democratic mandate is being steadily eroded. But even under such immense government pressure, the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality continues to serve its people. Acting Mayor Nuri Aslan told us how the city is still pushing forward with policies to improve life for all its residents — more public transportation, support for women, migrant integration and earthquake resilience. We also met with İmamoğlu’s wife, Dilek, who has become a still yet powerful voice for justice despite threats to her family. And her resilience reminded us that political repression doesn’t just affect the individuals targeted but their families too. This visit wasn’t our first act of solidarity. Back in March, just days after İmamoğlu’s arrest, over 80 European mayors joined a public declaration, coordinated by Eurocities, calling for his release and for EU action. This mission was built on that commitment. So, why should this matter to Brussels? Because Turkey remains an EU candidate country, which presupposes rule of law. It’s also a crucial trading partner and a strategic neighbor. Turning a blind eye to political repression at the bloc’s borders sends a dangerous signal — not only to Ankara but to other regimes that are watching. The EU’s credibility as a defender of democracy is at stake here. Back in March, just days after İmamoğlu’s arrest, over 80 European mayors joined a public declaration, coordinated by Eurocities, calling for his release and for EU action. | Laura Guerrero/Barcelona City Council And why should it matter to mayors across Europe? Because city leaders aren’t just local administrators, they’re defenders of democratic values. Throughout history, cities have been places of openness, diversity and dialogue. That’s what makes them so threatening to authoritarian regimes, which fear example not ideology. Moreover, democracy doesn’t just disappear overnight. It begins with legal harassment, budget cuts and disinformation. Then it escalates. We’ve seen it before, and we’re seeing signs of it again — not just in Turkey but also uncomfortably closer to home. For example, Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony, who joined our delegation, faces similar pressures in Hungary. Yet, he still came to Istanbul. Not for himself but to show solidarity — because he understands democracy must be defended beyond borders. Nowadays, cities must become diplomatic actors in their own right. They can’t wait for national governments to lead. And we’re inviting EU institutions to join us in this fight. Until now, their response has been weak at best — a bland statement here, a half-hearted expression of concern there. Only the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions have spoken with any real clarity on the matter, but they lack the tools to act. And for all its rhetoric about defending European values, the European Commission seems unwilling to do so. That’s why we’re calling for a meeting with the European Commissioner for Enlargement to discuss how Turkey’s EU accession process and pre-accession funds relate to this assault on democracy. We’re also asking that the European Council put this case on its agenda. Together, we can lift the bars erected to confine local democracy in Turkey — and in Europe. Our commitment doesn’t end with this mission. We will continue to advocate, organize and speak out. We owe it to İmamoğlu, and to every city leader risking their freedom for their citizens. Democracy begins locally. If we don’t defend it here, we risk losing it everywhere.

The European Court of Human Rights on Wednesday ruled Russia is responsible for downing flight MH17 in 2014 and human rights violations during its war in Ukraine. The decision marks the first time an international court has found Russia guilty of international human rights abuses since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, and ruled on Russia’s role in the MH17 disaster. The judges are set to rule on a total of four cases, brought against Russia by Ukraine and the Netherlands, including the abduction of Ukrainian children to Russia in 2014 and violations during the armed conflict in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Donbas. “In none of the conflicts previously before [the Court had] there been such near universal condemnation of the ‘flagrant’ disregard by the respondent State for the foundations of the international legal order established after the Second World War,” said the Strasbourg-based court in its judgment. Malaysia Airlines flight 17 was traveling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur on July 17, 2014, when it was hit by a surface-to-air missile over eastern Ukraine, during the conflict between pro-Russia rebels and Ukrainian forces in the region. All 298 passengers on board were killed, among them 196 Dutch citizens. In November 2022, a Dutch court found guilty of murder and sentenced (in absentia) to life imprisonment Russian nationals Igor Girkin, Sergey Dubinskiy and Ukrainian national Leonid Kharchenko. Girkin, a pro-war Russian nationalist, was also sentenced by Russia to four years on charges of inciting extremism after complaining too much about President Vladimir Putin’s leadership of the war against Ukraine. The Dutch court also confirmed a previous Dutch-led joint international investigation concluded in 2018 that the airliner was downed by a surface-to-air missile launched from pro-Russian separatist-controlled territory in Eastern Ukraine. In January 2023, a Dutch court ruled that the Netherlands could bring a case before the European Court of Human Rights over the downing of the flight. It argued that Russia was responsible for the crash, due to its support for the self-proclaimed republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Russian authorities have repeatedly denied any involvement in the attack. The United Nations Aviation Council found Russia responsible for downing the plane in May, stating that it failed to uphold its obligations under international air law, which requires that states “refrain from resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight.” The ECHR, an international court of the Council of Europe, stated that it had jurisdiction to rule on complaints concerning events that occurred before Sept. 16, 2022, when Russia was excluded from the organization.

Mujtaba Rahman is the head of Eurasia Group’s Europe practice. He tweets at @Mij_Europe. France’s 2027 presidential race is wide open. The country’s last five or six elections all had surprises and plot twists, but each time the contest’s basic structure was still foreseeable two years ahead of time. That isn’t the case now. There are several reasons for this: A generalized mood of discontent with politics; the scrambling of the old left-right divide; the weakness of the incumbent president, who can neither run again nor readily influence the choice of his successor; as well as the global, economic and political uncertainties generated by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. Moreover, the choice of candidates is particularly uncertain this time around, as President Emmanuel Macron’s center is hugely fragmented. Until last month, the competition to succeed Macron was limited to two of his former prime ministers: the leader of the center-right Horizons party, Edouard Philippe, and the leader of Macron’s Renaissance party, Gabriel Attal. But now, both have fallen out with the president and are attempting to appeal to his socially progressive, pro-European, pro-business base, while simultaneously distancing themselves from an unpopular president with a patchy record. Polls indicate that Philippe is a clear early leader in this battle for the center, with 21 to 24 percent support in the first round of the election, while Attal’s polling is around 14 to 15 percent. All the while, hard-line Minister of the Interior Bruno Retailleau’s bid threatens to turn the “central civil war” into a three-way fight. As head of the much weakened ex-Gaullist center-right party Republicans, Retailleau seems certain to become his party’s candidate, which sets up three of the four party leaders in the governing alliance as rivals to be Macron’s successor — an inherently explosive situation. The French president has lost almost all domestic influence since his unsuccessful snap elections last year, and he has little leverage to influence this crucial race within a race. Moreover, both Philippe and Retailleau are unlikely to campaign to “save Macronism” but rather to bury it and restore something closer to the socially conservative, economically liberal and less enthusiastically European center right of former presidents Jacques Chirac or Nicolas Sarkozy. On the left, the stage is even more crowded. The perennial hard-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon is showing at 13 to 15 percent in early first-round polling despite his status as the most disliked man in French politics, with negatives of over 70 percent. As always, his undeclared but likely presence in the race will make it difficult for a broad-left candidate to emerge. The strongest early contender on the moderate, pro-European left is Raphaël Glucksmann. | Mohammed Badra/EPA Still, the strongest early contender on the moderate, pro-European left is Raphaël Glucksmann — a member of the European Parliament who performed surprisingly well in the 2024 European elections and is currently polling at 10 to 11 percent. Both Glucksmann and Mélenchon have ruled out participating in any pan-left primary contest. Meanwhile, the once powerful center-left Socialist Party remains split between its radical and reformist, pro-European wings. Narrowly retaining his seat for a fourth time, the party’s left-leaning First Secretary Olivier Faure hopes to be its presidential candidate for 2027. However, at least two rising figures from the party’s moderate wing — Carole Dega, president of the southwest Occitanie region, and Karim Boumrane, mayor of Saint-Ouen in the Paris suburbs — plan to oppose him. So, overall, it looks like there will probably be up to eight left-wing candidates in the presidential race by the end of next year. For the far right, being in pole position doesn’t necessarily translate to victory either, though. Polling numbers remain strong for the National Rally party despite the March court verdict banning opposition leader Marine Le Pen from seeking office for five years. All recent surveys show Le Pen and her deputy, Jordan Bardella, boasting over 30 percent of first-round support. And if confirmed in April 2027, either of them would be in pole position to win the runoff the following month — but that’s still no guarantee. Both Le Pen and Bardella have very high negatives — in the range of 47 to 49 percent — which would make it exceedingly hard for them to assemble the 50 percent of the vote needed to prevail. Relations between the two have also deteriorated since the court ruling. Le Pen, who still regards herself as the National Rally’s candidate until next year’s appeal, has been angered by suggestions — from both the Bardella camp and the media — that he’s now the true presidential frontrunner, pointing out his youth and lack of experience on several occasions. So far, however, these tensions haven’t reduced their joint popularity in the polls. Of course, this far out from the 2027 race, opinion polls for the second round are rare; however, several recent Ifop and Odoxa surveys suggest that Philippe would beat both Le Pen and Bardella, while they might defeat Retailleau or Attal. The outcome will, therefore, depend on who snatches second place in the first round — something that might be decided by a slim margin of just a few thousand votes if the center and left-wing candidates remain neck-and-neck to the finish line. Simply put, Macron has a succession problem — and there’s not much time to solve it.

Mark Gitenstein (ret, 2009-2012), Adrian Zuckerman (ret, 2019-2021) and Jim Rosapepe (ret, 1998-2001) are all former U.S. ambassadors to Romania. We all know Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine with tanks in 2022. But many don’t know that in 2024, he invaded Romania — with tweets. In both cases he failed — for now. But Putin’s aggression is focused on the U.S. and all its allies. He’s spending millions of dollars, bombarding European voters with manipulative social media and disinformation campaigns on a mass scale. It’s a new type of warfare on democracy that eliminates the need to roll tanks into capitals. Putin’s constantly evolving playbook is the result of his failed military campaign to capture Kyiv and strangle Ukrainian democracy. He ran into Ukraine’s indominable resilience, and as a result, he began deploying a long-standing Russian (and Soviet) strategy to destroy Western democracies from within by supporting and cultivating pro-Putin political candidates. And TikTok, Telegram and other social media channels are now weapons in this new kind of war. Never far from his KGB roots, the Russian president realizes public opinion can be manipulated and shaped by political proxies and propaganda beholden to Russia’s strongman. One only need examine Romania’s recent election to confirm this sinister truth. Back in 2024, Putin spent millions to elect a pro-Russian president in Romania. His method: infiltrate elections, support authoritarian-leaning candidates and manipulate digital platforms to bend public perception. So, the Russian leader boosted candidate Călin Georgescu from obscurity, and in just two weeks, Georgescu had captured 21 percent of the vote, leaving a divided field of 15 candidates stunned. Violating common sense, reality, as well as Romanian law, Georgescu claimed he neither raised campaign contributions nor incurred campaign expenses. Instead, he had a malevolent benefactor in Putin. The social media blitzkrieg consisted of “misinformation” and a multimillion dollar Leninist-style effort to destroy democracy in Romania. The effort’s design also included undermining U.S., NATO and EU security interests. And it was just in time that this stealth invasion of Romania’s electoral process was uncovered by Romanian and other Western intelligence services. Citing serious violations of electoral law and foreign interference, the country’s constitutional court annulled the first round of the election and ordered a do-over. When the second round was held, voter turnout surged past the average 51 percent to nearly 65 percent, as Romanians responded to the crisis with clarity and courage. They rejected Putin’s candidate and chose the democratic, pro-NATO path by a decisive 54 percent to 46 percent margin. Together with a bipartisan group of seven former U.S. ambassadors to Romania, we had publicly urged Romanians to reject Putin’s candidate. We couldn’t silently stand by and allow the patently false Russia-driven propaganda to go unchallenged. “We saw first-hand Romania’s successful climb from Russian imposed dictatorship to freedom, and integration with the rest of Europe in the EU and alliance with the U.S. through NATO,” we wrote in an open letter. While Putin’s efforts in Romania eventually miserably failed, but real damage could have been done. | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images We recognized the opportunity to accurately frame the historic choice Romanians were going to have to make at the polls, and we made the stakes clear: “Under Putin, Russia is again on the march. First invading Ukraine. Will Romania be its next target as it was Stalin’s? . . . Romanians face a clear historic choice: domination by Russia or your own future allied with America in NATO.” While Putin’s efforts in Romania eventually miserably failed, but real damage could have been done. Fortunately, the country’s democratic institutions and voices refused to be cowed by his latest tactics. And we now encourage others to raise their voices to counter Putin’s attempts to decapitate democracy at the ballot box. Romanians rightly took responsibility for their own future — and they chose freedom and prosperity over Putinism. After Nicusor Dan’s victory in the presidential race, U.S. President Donald Trump reassured Romanians that he would “strengthen our ties with Romania, support our military partnership, and promote and defend America’s economic and security interests abroad.” Unfortunately, too many people who should know better are still cozying up to Putin, backing his pro-Russian candidates and undermining the security of the U.S. and other democratic allies. Elon Musk protégé Mario Nawfal was in Moscow in May, while tech billionaire Elon Musk’s father and controversial American right-wing commentators Jackson Hinkle and Alex Jones attended the Future 2050 forum in Moscow in June. Speaking at the forum were numerous Putin allies: right-wing Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov and former president Dmitry Medvedev. The Romanian battle was won, but Putin’s war on democracy continues. Who’s next on his list? This fall’s elections in Moldova, Estonia, Georgia, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and other European nations are all ripe for interference. But before his propaganda can take hold, it’s imperative to crack down on his violations of election laws. The fight for democracy now extends to cyberspace, where Putin’s invasion tactics must be thwarted, just as they’ve been on the battlefield. The new battlefield is online, and the stakes are democratic sovereignty. The lesson from Romania is clear: The best defense against propaganda is truth — and the courage to speak it.

DUBLIN — Former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams has won a €100,000 libel judgment against the BBC after a Dublin jury found that the broadcaster had falsely connected him to a 2006 Irish Republican Army killing. Friday’s ruling marked the latest legal victory for Adams, 76, who led Sinn Féin from 1983 to 2018. He has become the most senior in a long list of Sinn Féin figures to pursue journalists with the aid of Ireland’s unusually plaintiff-friendly libel laws. These commonly place the burden of proof on the defendant — and that can prove an impossibly high bar when reporting on reputed chieftains of the Provisional IRA. That outlawed group killed nearly 1,800 people before calling a 1997 cease-fire in the neighboring British territory of Northern Ireland. Flanked by his legal team outside Dublin’s Four Courts, Adams said he had filed his lawsuit to “put manners on the British Broadcasting Corporation.” Adams again denied any involvement in the slaying of Denis Donaldson. Donaldson, a Provisional IRA veteran, had been appointed Sinn Féin’s senior office administrator at the Stormont Parliamentary Building in Belfast. He was killed with a point-blank shotgun blast months after admitting — at a 2005 press conference alongside an ashen-faced Adams — that he had served as a British intelligence agent operating secretly within Sinn Féin-IRA circles for more than a decade. As Adams himself has noted in the past, any admission of “informing” typically results in an IRA death sentence. In its 2016 documentary on the Donaldson slaying, BBC Northern Ireland’s Spotlight program interviewed a former IRA and Sinn Féin member, identified only as “Martin,” who claimed that Adams had final sign-off on the killing. Speaking outside the courthouse, Adam Smyth, director of BBC Northern Ireland, said the jury’s award for Adams would have a “profound” effect on journalists vulnerable to the Republic of Ireland’s libel laws. “If the BBC’s case cannot be won under existing Irish defamation law, it’s hard to see how anyone’s could,” Smyth said. For decades, Adams has been identified in every credible history of the Irish republican movement as a Provisional IRA commander since at least 1972, when British authorities freed him from prison to participate in the Provisionals’ first face-to-face truce talks with U.K. government ministers in London. The Irish government, citing its own security services, says Adams stepped down from the IRA’s ruling “army council” only in 2005 when the group formally renounced violence and disarmed. Yet Adams has insisted he was never in the IRA — a position repeated at the end of each episode of Disney’s recent acclaimed series “Say Nothing” that depicted Adams as, indeed, a key IRA figure involved in orchestrating Belfast bloodshed from the early 1970s onward. That TV show was based on a book about the IRA’s 1972 abduction, execution and secret burial of a Belfast mother of 10. Adams was arrested in 2014 over claims he oversaw the IRA unit responsible but was released without charge. Since then, Adams has successfully sued the British government to quash the only criminal convictions in his record — for trying to escape from prison in 1973 and 1974 while being interned without trial as an IRA suspect. This time, after a three-week trial, the 11-member jury ruled that the BBC’s Spotlight program and a follow-up online article had damaged Adams’ reputation by contending that he had sanctioned Donaldson’s killing. Jurors rejected the BBC’s defense that reporting the allegations against Adams was “fair, reasonable and in the public interest.”

A German regional court on Monday convicted four former Volkswagen executives of fraud in connection with the long-running Dieselgate emissions scandal. The court sentenced two of the former executives to prison for several years, while the remaining two received suspended sentences. The ruling concludes a major trial that spanned nearly four years. The scandal known as Dieselgate first came to light in September 2015, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discovered that many diesel vehicles produced by German carmaker Volkswagen were equipped with illegal so-called defeat devices. These devices detected when a car was undergoing emissions testing and altered performance to meet environmental standards — while in real-world driving conditions, the cars emitted pollutants far above legal limits. In 2017, Volkswagen admitted to manipulating emissions data in the United States, sparking global backlash and triggering one of the biggest corporate scandals in automotive history. The fallout plunged the Wolfsburg-based carmaker into a deep crisis. In 2019, German prosecutors charged then-CEO Herbert Diess, Chair Hans Dieter Pötsch and former CEO Martin Winterkorn — who resigned shortly after the scandal broke in 2015 — with market manipulation related to the emissions deception. In 2020, a German court ended legal proceedings against Deiss and Pötsch as VW coughed up a €9 million fine over the scandal. Winterkorn was originally set to be part of this trial, but was removed for health reasons before it kicked off in September 2021. In his capacity as a witness and defendant, Winterkorn has continued to deny responsibility for the scandal. Since the scandal erupted, Volkswagen has faced a barrage of lawsuits and legal proceedings. In 2020, the company said that the crisis had cost it more than €30 billion in fines and settlements.

The head of the Council of Europe on Saturday pushed back against a call by nine EU countries to make it easier to expel migrants who commit crime. COE Secretary-General Alain Berset warned that courts must not be “weaponized” for political gain. In a statement released Thursday, Italy, Denmark, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland asked the European Court of Human Rights to review how it interprets the European Convention on Human Rights. They argued that in some cases, the court “posed too many limitations on the states’ ability to decide whom to expel from their territories” and requested “a new and open minded conversation about the interpretation” of the court. Berset hit back at the group, saying in a statement that “upholding the independence and impartiality of the Court is our bedrock.” He added that while political debate is “healthy” in any democracy, “politicizing the Court is not,” and warned that “no judiciary should face political pressure.” “Institutions that protect fundamental rights cannot bend to political cycles. If they do, we risk eroding the very stability they were built to ensure,” Berset insisted. Created in 1949, the Council of Europe gathers 46 member countries and has the core task of upholding fundamental human rights across the European continent.