- Over 1,000 people were detained after participating in protests in Moscow on Saturday.
- Citizens were protesting the election officials’ refusal to allow opposition candidates on the ballot for upcoming elections.
- The commission claims that the candidates did not receive enough petition signatures to run, however the opposition claims otherwise.
- A spokesperson for the U.S. Embassy in Moscow said these detentions undermined the “rights of citizens to participate in the democratic process.”
Protests in Moscow
Police detained over 1,300 people during protests in Moscow on Saturday.
Attendees were protesting election authorities’ decision to not allow candidates opposing Vladimir Putin and the United Russian party on the ballot of upcoming elections.
Protestors chanted things like “Russia will be free” and “Putin is a thief” during the event. Officers say the demonstration was unauthorized. Footage shows them using force like pushing attendees and beating attendees with batons.
According to OVD Info, a political persecution monitoring organization, 77 people sustained injuries. They also report that of the 1,373 people detained, 265 were held overnight. Some of those detained were people trying to run for office.
Police say that 3,500 people attended the demonstrations. However, the Associated Press says that aerial footage shows over 8,000 people. Last week, 20,000 people attended protests in Moscow for the same reason.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Embassy in Moscow said the detentions undermined the “rights of citizens to participate in the democratic process.”
What is being protested?
On September 8, all 45 seats in the Moscow City Duma will be up for re-election. The election commission raised the number of petition signatures required to appear on the ballot to 5,000 people, which is a move critics say was made to block opposition candidates from running.
Vladimir Kara-Murza, a politician in Russia’s People’s Freedom party, wrote about the effects this will have in the Washington Post.
“Each signature on the petition means volunteering one’s personal information for the government’s database of opposition supporters,” he wrote.
Even with this setback, the opposition claims that most of their candidates did get enough signatures. However, election officials say that the signatures contained irregularities, like misprints.
Kara-Murza also disputes this.
“Naturally, most irregularities were created by the commissions themselves, whose official experts invalidated signatures by deliberately adding misprints to names or identity document numbers when cross-checking them against police databases,” he said.
When hopeful opposition candidates tried to appeal, their requests were ignored, prompting protests for their inclusion.
The Arrest of Alexei Navalny
Saturday’s protest was called for by prominent opposition activist Alexei Navalny. Navalny was arrested on Wednesday and sentenced to 30 days for calling for an anti-government protest.
On Sunday, he was taken to the hospital after falling ill after alleged chemical exposure, with symptoms like severe facial swelling and skin redness. His spokesperson said that it appeared to be an allergic reaction, but also noted that Navalny has no known allergies. He left the hospital and returned to prison several hours later.
According to the doctor who treated him, Dr. Anastasy Vasilyeva, he was diagnosed with contact dermatitis. The substance that caused the condition is still unknown.
Dr. Vasilyeva wrote on her Facebook page that she found the chemical tests run on him to be insufficient. She also said that she disagrees with the decision to have him return to prison.
“I have clearly stated that I am categorically against such an emergency discharge of alexey (sic) and his premises again to the place where this most unknown chemical agent is probably there,” she wrote.
Some reports are saying there is reason to believe Navalny could have been poisoned. However, according to The Guardian, he and his team do not expect foul play. They are citing poor conditions in the prison, as he experienced the same symptoms when last placed in that same cell.
See what others are saying: (Associated Press) (The Guardian) (Vox)
U.K. Court Rules Julian Assange Can Be Extradited to U.S.
The judgment overrules a lower court decision that blocked the WikiLeaks founder’s extradition on the grounds that his mental health was not stable enough to weather harsh conditions in the American prison system if convicted.
New Developments in Assange Extradition Battle
A British court ruled Friday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can be extradited to the United States to face charges of violating the Espionage Act that could land him in prison for decades.
Prosecutors in the U.S. have accused Assange of conspiring with former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2010 to hack into a Department of Defense computer network and access thousands of military and diplomatic records on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The information obtained in the hack was later published by WikiLeaks in 2010 and 2011, a move U.S. authorities allege put lives in danger.
In addition to a charge of computer misuse, Assange has also been indicted on 17 espionage charges. Collectively, the charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 175 years.
The Friday decision from the High Court overturns a lower court ruling in January, which found that Assange’s mental health was too fragile for the harsh environment he could face in the U.S. prison system if convicted.
Notably, the January ruling did not determine whether or not Assange was guilty. In fact, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser explicitly rejected the defense’s arguments that the charges against him were politically motivated and that he should be protected under freedom of press.
However, she agreed that the defense had provided compelling evidence that Assange suffers from severe depression and that the conditions he could face in the U.S. prison system were “such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America.”
The U.S. appealed the ruling, arguing that Assange’s mental health should not be a barrier to extradition and that the psychiatrist who examined him had been biased.
In October, the Biden administration vowed that if Assange were to be convicted, he would not be placed in the highest-security U.S. prison or immediately sent to solitary confinement. Officials also said that the native Australian would be eligible to serve his sentence in his home country.
High Court Ruling
The High Court agreed with the administration’s arguments in its ruling, arguing that the American’s assurances regarding the conditions of Assange’s potential incarceration were “sufficient.”
“There is no reason why this court should not accept the assurances as meaning what they say,” the ruling stated. “There is no basis for assuming that the USA has not given the assurances in good faith.”
Assange’s fiancé, Stella Moris, said in a statement that his legal team would appeal the decision to the British Supreme Court at the “earliest possible moment,” referring to the judgment as a “grave miscarriage of justice.”
The Supreme Court will now decide whether or not to hear the case based on if it believes the matter involves a point of law “of general public importance.” That decision may take weeks or even months.
If the U.K. Supreme Court court objects to hearing Assange’s appeal, he could ask the European Court of Human Rights to stay the extradition — a move that could set in motion another lengthy legal battle in the already drawn-out process.
Assange and his supporters claim he was acting as an investigative journalist when he published the classified military cables. They argue that the possibility of his extradition and prosecution represent serious threats to press freedoms in the U.S.
U.S. prosecutors dispute that Assange acted as a journalist, claiming that he encouraged illegal hacking for personal reasons.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (NPR) (The Washington Post)
Early Data Indicates Omicron is More Transmissible But Less Severe
The studies come as Pfizer and BioNTech claim that preliminary research shows a third shot of their COVID vaccine appears to provide sufficient protection against the new variant, but two doses alone may not.
More Information About Omicron
Several preliminary studies published in recent days appear to show that the new omicron COVID-19 variant may be more transmissible but less severe than previous strains.
One recent, un-peer-reviewed study by a Japanese scientist who advises the country’s health ministry found that omicron is four times more transmissible in its initial stage than delta was.
Preliminary information in countries hit hard by omicron also indicates high transmissibility. In South Africa — where the variant was first detected and is already the dominant strain — new COVID cases have more than doubled over the last week.
Health officials in the U.K. said omicron cases are doubling every two or three days, and they expect the strain to become dominant in the country in a matter of weeks.
In a statement Wednesday, World Health Organization Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that while early data does seem to show high transmissibility, it also indicates that omicron causes more mild cases than delta.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevent Director Rochelle Walensky echoed that sentiment, telling reporters that of the 40 known omicron cases in the U.S. as of Wednesday, nearly all of them were mild. One person has been hospitalized so far and none have died.
Studies on Vaccine Efficacy
Other recent studies have shown that current COVID vaccines are effective at preventing severe illness and death in omicron patients, and boosters provide at least some added protection.
On Wednesday, Pfizer and BioNTech announced that laboratory tests have shown a third dose of their COVID-19 vaccine appears to provide sufficient protection against the omicron variant, though two doses may not.
According to the companies, researchers saw a 25-fold reduction in neutralizing antibodies for omicron compared to other strains of the virus for people who had just two Pfizer doses.
By contrast, samples from people one month after they had received a Pfizer booster presented neutralizing antibodies against omicron that were comparable to those seen against previous variants after two doses.
Still, Pfizer’s chief executive also told reporters later in the day that omicron could increase the likelihood that people might need a fourth dose earlier than previously expected, which he had initially said was 12 months after the third shot.
Notably, the Pfizer research has not yet been peer-reviewed, and it remains unclear how omicron will operate outside a lab, but other studies have had similar findings.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (Bloomberg) (NBC News)
40 Camels Disqualified From Beauty Contest After Breeders Inject Their Faces With Botox
The animals were barred from competing for $66 million in prizes at this year’s King Abdulaziz Camel Festival in Saudi Arabia.
Camels Booted From Beauty Contest
More than 40 camels were disqualified from a beauty contest in Saudi Arabia this week after judges found artificial enhancements in their faces, marking the biggest crackdown on contestants in the competition to date.
The animals were competing for $66 million in prizes at the King Abdulaziz Camel Festival, a month-long event that is estimated to include around 33,000 camels.
However, according to The Guardian, they were forced out of the contest when authorities found that breeders had “stretched out the lips and noses of the camels, used hormones to boost the animals’ muscles, injected heads and lips with Botox to make them bigger, inflated body parts with rubber bands, and used fillers to relax their faces.”
Those types of alterations are banned since judges look at the contestant’s heads, necks, humps, posture, and other features when evaluating them.
An announcement from the state-linked Saudi Press Agency said officials used “specialized and advanced” technology to detect tampering.
“The club is keen to halt all acts of tampering and deception in the beautification of camels,” the SPA report added before warning that organizers would “impose strict penalties on manipulators.”
While it’s unclear what that actually entails, this isn’t the first time people have tried to cheat in this way.
In 2018, 12 camels were similarly disqualified from the competition for injections in their noses, lips, and jaw.