Legal Entity – Monster Beats Kopfhorerde Tue, 05 Oct 2021 07:23:33 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Legal Entity – Monster Beats Kopfhorerde 32 32 Department of Health discusses applicability of HIPAA to COVID-19 vaccination information Tue, 05 Oct 2021 00:13:06 +0000

The Federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has issued guidance on the applicability of HIPAA to COVID-19 vaccination information, directly addressing a number of misconceptions about when HIPAA regulates or no disclosure of an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status. . Here are five key takeaways from orientation.

“The privacy rule does not prohibit any person (for example, an individual or entity such as a business), including HIPAA-covered entities and business associates, from inquiring whether an individual has received a particular vaccine. , including COVID-19 vaccines. “- HHS (Sep 30, 2021)

1. HIPAA only regulates Covered Entities and Business Partners.

The guidelines reiterate that HIPAA only applies to covered entities (health plans, health care providers that perform standard electronic transactions, and health care clearinghouses) and their associated providers. HIPAA does not generally apply to employers, restaurants, stores, schools, and places of entertainment. Additionally, HIPAA does not apply to the disclosure by individuals of their own immunization information.

2. HIPAA does not prohibit Covered Entities or Business Associates from asking questions about vaccinations.

HIPAA restricts how covered entities and business associates can use and disclose Protected Health Information (PHI) – HIPAA does not prohibit anyone from request if anyone has been vaccinated. For example, HIPAA does not prohibit a covered entity from asking if patients or visitors have been vaccinated against COVID-19. However, patient immunization information is PHI and HIPAA regulates how the covered entity uses and discloses this information once received.

3. HIPAA does not apply to employee information.

With regard to employers in particular, the guide notes that HIPAA does not apply to health information in employee records, even when the employer is a covered entity or business partner. This means that the employee vaccination records that an organization keeps as an employer are not regulated by HIPAA. HIPAA also does not apply to employees questioned about their own immunization status or who disclose their own immunization status. Although there may be other federal and state laws that are involved in these situations, HIPAA does not apply. For example, see the EEOC guidelines “What You Need to Know About COVID-19 and ADA, Rehabilitation Law and Other EEO Laws”.

4. Entities covered by HIPAA do not always need permission to disclose information about vaccination.

The general rule under HIPAA is that a covered entity needs the individual’s permission to use or disclose PHI, unless an exception applies. 45 CFR § 164.502 (a). The HHS guidelines summarize scenarios in which HIPAA allows a covered entity to disclose an individual’s immunization status without the individual’s permission, including, without limitation, (i) to a plan to health when necessary to obtain payment for immunization, (ii) to public health authorities, and (iii) when required by law.

Note, however, that such disclosures may be further restricted by applicable state law. The guidelines also state that the covered entity will generally need permission to disclose the person’s immunization status to entertainment venues, cruise ships, airlines and similar types of disclosures.

5. Healthcare providers in HIPAA-covered entities may disclose immunization information to employers without authorization only in specific circumstances.

Covered entities need permission to disclose immunization information to an individual’s employer, unless the disclosure meets all of the following conditions:

  1. The covered entity is a health care provider who provides health care to the person at the request of the employer to perform an assessment relating to the medical surveillance of the workplace (for example, monitoring the spread of COVID -19 within the workforce) or to assess whether the person suffers from a work-related illness or injury;

  2. RPS disclosed are the results of a work-related illness or injury or work-related medical surveillance;

  3. The employer needs the results to comply with their legal obligations under OSHA, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, or state laws with a similar purpose; and

  4. The Covered Entity has provided written notice to the Individual that PHI related to workplace health surveillance and work-related illnesses will be disclosed to the Employer through one of the HIPAA-authorized notification methods.

45 CFR § 164.512 (b) (1) (v). If any of these conditions are not met, covered entities will generally need the employee’s permission to disclose their immunization status to the employer. Additionally, as noted above, such disclosures may be further restricted by applicable state law.

For reference, the following table summarizes some of the examples provided by HHS in the guide:

Fact model

Does HIPAA apply?

Covered Entity or Business Associate Uses or Discloses Patient / Health Plan Member Vaccine Information


Covered entity or business associate asks if person has been vaccinated

No (although the use or disclosure of this information, whether the person is a patient or a plan member, is regulated by HIPAA)

Individual A asks individual B if individual B is vaccinated


Person discloses their own immunization status


A school, employer, store, restaurant or place of entertainment asks someone about their immunization status


The person asks their doctor if the doctor is vaccinated


An individual asks the company if its staff are vaccinated


Employer requires employee to provide vaccination documents


Source link

]]> 0
Campaign to label Russian journalists and media as ‘foreign agents’ gathers pace after election · Global Voices Sun, 03 Oct 2021 22:34:00 +0000

Sonia Groisman, a journalist declared “foreign agent”, demonstrates in front of the FSB headquarters in Moscow. Image from Avtozak Live on Telegram CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.

This ODR Editors article appeared on Open Democracy on September 30, 2021. It is republished as part of a content sharing partnership and has been edited to fit the GV style.


The above post is what journalists at independent media outlets Mediazona and OVD-Info must now place on their websites and social media feeds every time they publish an article.

Mediazona has documented hundreds of cases of torture and police brutality, drug forgery and political accusations, and systemic violence inside the country’s prison system. OVD-Info is a human rights media project that covers all political arrests and prosecutions – there are now dozens across Russia every week – and provides legal assistance to those detained at protests or just at the outside their home. Over the past few years, openDemocracy has translated and published dozens of articles through both outlets to emphasize their importance.

On September 29, these media outlets, along with Mediazona publisher and editor-in-chief Sergey Smirnov, were declared “foreign agents” by the Russian Ministry of Justice. Staff working for Golos, the election observer, were also placed on the list of “foreign agents”.

They are not the first.

The effects of Russian “foreign agents” legislation against the media and civil society have been direct and deeply troubling. Indeed, the label “foreign agent” marks a medium as undesirable for the sources, the advertisers, the supporters and the readers. They are indeed considered “enemies of the people”, to use the Soviet term. This makes the daily work of journalists incredibly difficult.

Meduza, an independent organization specializing in hard-hitting investigation and news reporting, was added to the list of “foreign agents” in May and has since reported the loss of advertising revenue, resulting in the loss of high-quality journalists. . VTimes, which was born from the ashes of the high-quality business daily Vedomosti, decided to shut down entirely the same month after it was also added to the list.

These are just two examples. The Justice Department has now declared more than 20 media outlets and dozens of individuals “foreign agents,” and it’s clear that is not slowing down. While it was hoped that the targeting of independent media this summer would ease after the parliamentary elections this month, it seems clear that the Russian authorities intend to clear the ground for independent media.

This means that the pressing issues that concern Russian citizens – law and justice, socio-economic rights, democracy and, more recently, military activity – do not have to be reported in detail, care and independence. Instead, attempts to do so independently must be closed and isolated under the rubric of “foreign influence” – of which there is no evidence. When the media ask for proof of their “foreign funding”, Russian prosecutors refuse to disclose it.

Ironically, like Sergey Smirnov, editor-in-chief of Mediazona, underline after the decision, it is the officials of Vladimir Putin’s United Russia Party and their elite supporters who hold property, money and assets in the West – but it is the media and civil society people who continue to work in Russia who are “foreign agents”.

It was not possible for everyone to continue working. On September 30, it was reported that Russian security services had raided the home of Roman Dobrokhotov, editor-in-chief of The Insider, a media outlet central to the investigations into the poisoning of opposition leader Alexey Navalny and other public figures. It turned out that Dobrokhotov apparently left Russia in August. Others, like journalist Ivan Safronov, have been jailed for months on charges of treason.

Russian journalists have sought to consolidate their protests and efforts in response to these constant and unpredictable threats, including picketing against the use of the “foreign agent” legislation and a new petition calling on authorities to revoke it – and readers to financially support these media in whatever way they can. One hundred and fifty thousand people have already signed the petition.

Tweet from journalist Katya Arenina with screenshots from several Russian and international media websites with the campaign slogan “There are no foreign agents, there are journalists”.

Media workers called on supporters inside and outside the country to help disseminate information about the situation facing their Russian colleagues. Earlier in September, independent Russian media launched an online solidarity campaign against the country’s “foreign agents” law, under the slogan “There are no foreign agents, there are journalists” .

Following the announcement of their appointment, the Mediazona team said in a statement on its website:

егодня государство хочет, чтобы независимые рналисты исчезли. – хотим елать нашу работу и честно рассказывать о России.

сли этого же хотят наши читатели, то вместе у нас все олучится.

Today, the state wants the disappearance of independent journalists. We want to do our job and tell honest stories about Russia.

If our readers want the same thing, together we should be able to make it work.

Source link

]]> 0
Qatar-Pak-Turkey link behind Twitter trend against India, ultimate target was Saudi Arabia: report Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:19:06 +0000

The #BoycottIndianProducts trend on Arab Twitter was the work of Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Egypt with troll handles in Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan, fueling the campaign against India, according to a report from Disinfo Lab.

On its website, Disinfo Lab describes itself as “a separate legal entity with the motive of exposing false news and propaganda aimed at sowing public concern.”

According to the report, the trend was started by the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood after a man was killed in police gunfire during a deportation campaign in Assam, but the trigger was an excuse to harm economic interests from India. He adds that handfuls in Pakistan and Turkey have pushed the hashtag further using fake videos and distorting the facts.

The report goes on to say that the real target of the campaign was Saudi Arabia and its Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, who has cordial relations with India. He said the “Qatar-Pakistan-Turkey link” was aimed at Saudi Arabia to “control the Islamic world”.

He said a similar campaign had also been launched against France to bring the “nexus” to center stage in the Islamic world to “create an exclusionary economy of gigantic proportions”.

Read all the latest news, breaking news and coronavirus news here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Telegram.

Source link

]]> 0 Center provides more than five crores of tap water connections in rural areas Fri, 01 Oct 2021 21:30:06 +0000

Despite the Covid-19 pandemic, the Center has provided more than five crores of piped water connections as part of its Jal Jeevan mission over the past 24 months, Jal Shakti’s ministry said.

The ministry said state and Union governments are working tirelessly to ensure tap water is available to rural households. The secure tap water supply in homes relieves people, especially women and girls, of fetching water and carrying heavy loads remotely, the ministry said.

The Jal Jeevan mission was announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi two years ago on August 15 to provide a functional household power connection (FHTC) to every household by 2024.

In 2019, out of about 18.93 crore households in rural areas, only 3.23 crore (17%) had piped water connections. As a result, 15.70 crore households are to be supplied with tap water by 2024. “In addition, the functionality of all existing water supply systems and tap connections must also be ensured. The program directly benefits more than 19 crore of rural families, bridging the rural-urban divide and improving public health, ”said a senior Jal Shakti official. To date, around 8.26 crore (43%) of rural households have a supply of tap water in their homes, he said.

The motto of the Jal Jeevan mission is “no one is left behind”. Each rural household in 78 districts and 1.16 lakh villages receives tap water supply. Following a bottom-up approach, JJM is implemented as a decentralized, demand-driven and community-managed program with Gram Panchayats and / or its sub-committees, i.e. village water committees and (VWSC) / Pani Samitis playing a key role. in the planning, implementation, management, operation and maintenance of water supply systems in villages, thus providing clean tap water to every household on a regular and long-term basis.

The Pani Samitis / VWSC operate as a legal entity as provided for in the 73rd Amendment to the Constitution. It consists of 10 to 15 members with at least 50% women and proportional representation of the weakest sections. The VWSC has prepared a one-off Village Action Plan (PAV), which coincides with the period of the 15th Finance Commission by combining different resources at the village level, which is to be approved in a Gram Sabha. The PAV includes 4 key elements of increasing the drinking water source, the drinking water supply system, the gray water treatment and reuse, as well as the regular operation and maintenance of the system. village water supply.

In addition, a cadre of 30 to 40 members in each village is trained and qualified to build their capacity to manage their water supply systems in the villages. 5 women from each village, viz. ASHA, Anganwadi teachers, SHG leaders, etc. are trained to test water quality using Field Test Kits (FTKs). 5-10 members are trained as plumbers, bricklayers, auto mechanics, fitters, etc. so that qualified resources are available in each village to meet all requirements, and also increase employment opportunities. GP / VWSC members are trained to act as service providers, operate as local water supply utilities. A silent revolution is taking place in the villages.

Source link

]]> 0
Voting rights EANS: Schoeller-Bleckmann Oilfield Equipment AG / Publication of a notice of participation in accordance with art. 135 par. 2 Stock Exchange Act Fri, 01 Oct 2021 09:46:02 +0000
  Notification of voting rights transmitted by euro adhoc with the aim of a 
  Europe-wide distribution. The issuer is responsible for the content of this 
2. Reason for the notification: Acquisition or disposal of voting rights 
3. Person subject to notification obligation 
Name: Global Alpha Capital Management Partnership 
City: Montreal 
Country: Canada 
4. Name of shareholder(s): 
5. Date on which the threshold was crossed or reached: 29.9.2021 
|6. Total positions                                                            | 
|               |               |  % of voting  |             |                | 
|               |               |    rights     |             |                | 
|               |  % of voting  |    through    |             |                | 
|               |rights attached|financial/other|Total of both|Total number of | 
|               |      to       |instruments    |in % (7.A +  |voting rights of| 
|               | shares (7.A)  |(7.B.1 +       |7.B)         |     issuer     | 
|               |               |7.B.2)         |             |                | 
|Resulting      |               |               |             |                | 
|situation on   |               |               |             |                | 
|the            |               |               |             |                | 
|date on which  |4,37 %         |    0,00 %     |4,37 %       |16 000 000      | 
|threshold was  |               |               |             |                | 
|crossed /      |               |               |             |                | 
|reached        |               |               |             |                | 
|  Position of  |               |               |             |                | 
|   previous    |               |               |             |                | 
| notification  |4,37 %         |               |             |                | 
|(if applicable)|               |               |             |                | 
7. Notified details of the resulting situation: 
|A: Voting rights attached to shares                                           | 
|             |    Number of voting rights    |       % of voting rights       | 
|             |_______________________________|________________________________| 
|             |    Direct     |   Indirect    |    Direct     |    Indirect    | 
|  ISIN Code  |(Sec 130 BörseG|(Sec 133 BörseG|(Sec 130 BörseG|(Sec 133 BörseG | 
|             |     2018)     |     2018)     |     2018)     |     2018)      | 
|AT0000946652 |               |        699 235|               |          4,37 %| 
| SUBTOTAL A  |            699 235            |             4,37 %             | 
|B 1: Financial / Other Instruments pursuant to Sec. 131 para. 1 No. 1 BörseG  | 
|2018                                                                          | 
|             |               |               |Number of voting |              | 
|             |               |               | rights that may |              | 
|             |               |               |       be        |              | 
|   Type of   |Expiration Date|Exercise Period|acquired if the  | % of voting  | 
| instrument  |               |               |  instrument is  |    rights    | 
|             |               |               |    exercised    |              | 
|             |               | SUBTOTAL B.1  |                 |              | 
|B 2: Financial / Other Instruments pursuant to Sec. 131 para. 1 No. 2 BörseG | 
|2018                                                                         | 
|           |            |           | Physical /  |             |            | 
|  Type of  | Expiration | Exercise  |    Cash     | Number of   |% of voting | 
|instrument |    Date    |  Period   | Settlement  |voting rights|   rights   | 
|           |            |           |SUBTOTAL B.2 |             |            | 
8. Information in relation to the person subject to the notification obligation: 
Full chain of controlled undertakings through which the voting rights and/or the 
financial/other instruments are effectively held starting with the ultimate 
controlling natural person or legal entity: 
|          |            |           |             | Financial/  |             | 
|          |            | Directly  | Shares held |    other    |             | 
|   No.    |    Name    |controlled |directly (%) | instruments |Total of both| 
|          |            |  by No.   |             |held directly|     (%)     | 
|          |            |           |             |     (%)     |             | 
|          |Global Alpha|           |             |             |             | 
|          |Capital     |           |             |             |             | 
|    1     |Management  |           |             |             |             | 
|          |Partnership |           |             |             |             | 
|          |Global Alpha|           |             |             |             | 
|          |Capital     |           |             |             |             | 
|    2     |Management  |     1     |       4,37 %|             |       4,37 %| 
|          |Ltd.        |           |             |             |             | 
9. In case of proxy voting 
Date of general meeting: - 
Voting rights after general meeting: - is equivalent to - voting rights. 
10. Sonstige Kommentare: 
Global Alpha Capital Management Ltd. is a Canadian based discretionary asset 
manager, and has filed the notification on behalf of a number of pooled funds 
and client accounts, for which Global Alpha Capital Management Ltd. has 
discretionary control of voting rights. The pooled fund units are held by 
various clients. Global Alpha Capital Management Ltd. does not hold any of the 
shares on its own behalf. 
Further inquiry note: 
Andreas Böcskör, Corporate Communications 
Schoeller-Bleckmann Oilfield Equipment AG 
Tel: +43 2630 315 DW 252 
Ildiko Füredi-Kolarik 
Metrum Communications GmbH 
Tel: +43 1 504 69 87 DW 351 
end of announcement                         euro adhoc 

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

October 01, 2021 05:45 ET (09:45 GMT)

Source link ]]> 0
Ferdinand Omanyala sever ties with law firm that represented him in doping case Kenya News Thu, 30 Sep 2021 02:55:51 +0000

  • Snolegal released a statement on Wednesday, September 29, explaining why they stopped representing Ferdinand Omanyala
  • In the press release, the law firm said the engagements with the sprinter ended on September 7, 2021.
  • Company succeeded in correcting false or defamatory media accounts of Omanyala’s past anti-doping rule violation
  • Omanyala was suspended for 14 months by the Kenya Anti-Doping Agency (Adak) after testing positive for a banned substance on September 17, 2018

Africa 100m record holder Ferdinand Omanyala suffered another blow after losing a new partnership.

Ferdinand Omanyala (photo). The law firm had represented him in a doping case. Photo: Ferdinand Omanyala.
Source: Facebook

It was after the Snolegal law firm that handled his doping case announced that he had terminated his contract with the athlete.

The company released a statement on Wednesday, September 29, explaining why it stopped representing Omanyala.

Read also

Irungu Nyakera delivers bare-bones analysis of Raila’s meeting with members of the Mt Kenya Foundation

PAY ATTENTION: Don’t miss out on new Kenyan trends. Follow on Twitter!

In the press release, the law firm said the engagements with the sprinter ended on September 7, 2021, after making a unilateral decision.

“Snolegal Sports & Entertainment Law provided him with legal, reputation management, intellectual property, public relations and communications services until September 7, 2021, when we made the unilateral decision to cease him. represent and we have not been involved in its decision-making since then, “the statement read.

The Omanyala case on doping

The company had succeeded in correcting false or defamatory media accounts of the sprinter’s past anti-doping rule violation, as part of the high-level lobbying that led to his admission to the Olympic team.

According to the firm’s senior lawyer, Sarah Ochwanda, the company was instrumental in setting up Omanyala’s first communication and public relations channels.

Ochwanda said the company also moderated and negotiated fair and meaningful sponsorship for the sprinter.

Read also

Ferdinand Omanyala: Details of why Dba Africa terminated contract with Africa’s fastest man

Snolegal also led a reflection, created and set up the corporate entity of Omanyala and structured its intellectual property in its new brand.

Ochwanda said his company understood their mission and carried it out with the honor and respect worthy of one of their great athletes.

“However, we also understand when it is time to leave in order to allow our former client to grow and take charge of their own destiny,” Ochwanda said, adding that they will continue to celebrate Omanyala’s progress and successes. and will always be proud of the strides he does for himself and for the Kenyan sprints.

Omanyala was banned for 14 months by the Kenya Anti-Doping Agency (Adak) after testing positive for a banned substance on September 17, 2018.

DBA Africa terminates Omanyala contract

In addition, the sports management company DBA Africa announced Monday, September 27 that it had terminated its contract with the fastest man in Africa, Omanyala.

Read also

Reuben Kigame questions curfew logic when Raila and Ruto organize huge political rallies

The company released a statement confirming that it had parted ways with the Kenyan sprinter with immediate effect.

The reasons for the separation between the two companies remain speculative, although some reports claimed that there had been a communication breakdown in the preparation for the termination of the contract.

“We are proud to have played a huge role in allowing him to compete across the continent which has allowed him to reach four qualifying times for the Tokyo Olympics and achieve numerous national records and personal bests. “, can we read in the press release sent to the editors.

Source: Tuko Journal

Source link

]]> 0
Paddy Cosgrave’s Web Summit sues former partners for ‘secret’ venture capital fund Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:16:51 +0000

Web Summit, the company founded by Paddy Cosgrave, has filed a lawsuit in the United States against two former business partners that it accuses of secretly setting up an investment fund to profit from the company’s success.

The allegations, which are vigorously denied, relate to the creation of a fund which the company maintains benefited from its association but from which she and Mr. Cosgrave were excluded.

Among the detailed claims, fund managers David Kelly and Patrick Murphy went behind Mr Cosgrave’s back to woo investors in an initial fund that all three had been partners of.

The claims, according to court documents filed in San Francisco, “result from a plan devised by Murphy and Kelly to deceive Web Summit and Mr. Cosgrave, break a deal with them and secretly establish a follow-up fund that improperly usurped the brand. from Web Summit. , resources and assets ”.

Sources say the dispute arose out of a falling out between Mr Kelly and Mr Cosgrave and a failure to reach consensus on how the new fund would be structured. Mr. Kelly resigned as a board member and employee of the Web Summit earlier this year.

The company’s action – alleging breach of contract, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, violations of unfair competition law and commercial defamation among a total of nine allegations – seeks compensation through a jury trial. A separate but related legal action has been filed against Mr Kelly in the High Court in Dublin.

A spokesperson for Mr Kelly said it was a “baseless case”. We will firmly defend our position.

It is understood that Mr. Kelly and Mr. Murphy will argue that the second investment fund was not established independently of Mr. Cosgrave’s involvement until after the three could not agree on the conditions.

The US case is filed under the plaintiff Manders Terrace, the operator of Web Summit. The articles describe how, in 2018, in an effort to build on the success of her global conferences, she founded the original venture capital entity Amaranthine Fund I with the defendants.

“Web Summit was in a unique position to establish such a fund given its broad and well-established relationships with investors, founders, holding companies and other figures in the tech industry,” the documents say. Given the structure of these funds, the defendants are likely to argue that the fund was never a Web Summit fund per se.

However, the documents indicated that from the inception of the fund, the capital investment, branding, connections and intellectual property of the Web Summit would play a central role. He notes an initial capital commitment of $ 2 million and says he received 30 percent of the profits.

“Web Summit has played a key role in attracting investors, showcasing start-ups for potential investment, and using Web Summit’s resources, assets, data, employees and intellectual property to ensure the fund’s success. », Say the newspapers.

Mr. Cosgrave was a member of the fund’s “general partner” and, together with Mr. Kelly, representative of Web Summit within its management company.

However, relations appear to have deteriorated when the second follow-up fund was established – with apparent disputes over the role the Web Summit played in the success of the original fund and the extent of the profit share that should be given. to the company and its general manager. Mr. Cosgrave, however, is said to have sought an increased share of the profits for some Web Summit staff.

The lawsuit alleges that around this time the defendants made efforts to create their own venture capital fund – eventually called Semble II – ousting Mr Cosgrave in the process.

They have started “secretly establishing it”, marketing it to existing investors and securing binding commitments, the newspapers say.

“As part of their scheme, and in an effort to further cover up their illicit fundraising and marketing activities, in May 2021, Kelly and Murphy removed Mr. Cosgrave and Web Summit without cause from the management company and the general partner, respectively. “

However, a spokesperson for Mr Kelly and Mr Murphy said Mr Cosgrave and Web Summit were just “one of the many contributors to Amaranthine”, which was founded and run by the two men as as an autonomous legal entity with third-party capital.

“Since the separation, Cosgrave intends to disrupt the life and affairs of David and Patrick. today [US court] the filing is the highlight, ”he said.

“This is a baseless case, which follows a clear pattern of behavior from Cosgrave. Patrick and David will stand up for their position firmly.

A spokeswoman for Mr Cosgrave said the lawsuit was brought “in the interests of protecting all stakeholders at the Web Summit”.

Source link

]]> 0
Afghan government officials urge US to stop drone patrols in airspace_ 英语 频道 _ 央视 网 ( Wed, 29 Sep 2021 01:53:30 +0000

KABUL, Sept. 28 (Xinhua) – Afghan government officials have urged the United States to stop unmanned drone patrols in Afghanistan, state-run Bakhtar news agency reported on Tuesday.

All international countries, especially the United States, should keep their commitment to the Afghan government and not encroach on its airspace, the officials said, without being identified, as quoted by the news agency.

Officials said the United States recently violated Afghan sovereignty by conducting drone patrols in Afghan airspace.

They stressed that all countries were the “sole owners of territorial and air sovereignty” of their states under international law.

“The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, as the sole legal entity of Afghanistan, is the guardian of Afghanistan’s land and air space; but the United States recently acted in violation of all international laws and of the United States’ commitments to the Islamic Emirate in Doha, Qatar, “officials said.

Such violations must be rectified and prevented, the officials added.

Source link

]]> 0
Taliban government warns US against “invasion of Afghan airspace” Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:39:33 +0000

The newly formed Taliban government called on all countries, especially the United States, to “act in accordance with international commitments and not encroach on the airspace of Afghanistan.”

According to a statement released Tuesday by the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA), all countries are the sole owners of the territorial and air sovereignty of their states under international law, “therefore, the Islamic Emirate, as that Afghanistan’s only legal entity is the guardian of Afghanistan’s land and air space ”.

The official statement added: “But the United States recently acted in violation of all international laws and its commitments to the Islamic Emirate of Doha, Qatar.

US drones, IEA officials said, are invading Afghanistan’s sacred airspace and such violations must be rectified and prevented.

The interim government in Afghanistan has urged all countries to abide by international laws under the guise of mutual respect and a commitment to “prevent any negative consequences”.

The Taliban declared the war in Afghanistan over after taking control of Kabul on August 15.

Read also : Collapse of Afghan army “took us all by surprise”, says US defense secretary

Additionally, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told Congress on Tuesday that the sudden collapse of the Afghan military caught the Pentagon off guard as it admitted miscalculations in America’s longest war. , including corruption and damaged morale in the Afghan ranks.

“The fact that the Afghan army that we and our partners formed simply melted away – in many cases without firing a shot – took us all by surprise,” Austin told the Senate Forces Committee. armies.

“It would be dishonest to pretend otherwise.

Austin was speaking at the start of two days of what is expected to be one of the most controversial hearings in memory over the chaotic end of the war in Afghanistan, which has claimed the lives of American soldiers and civilians and left the Taliban in power.

(With additional contribution from Reuters)

Source link

]]> 0
UEFA drops lawsuits against Super League rebels Tue, 28 Sep 2021 02:03:04 +0000

UEFA overturned disciplinary measures against dissident Super League clubs Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, after a court in Madrid ruled that European football’s governing body should not sanction rebel clubs.

UEFA had opened an investigation against the three clubs but in June it suspended the proceedings after being informed by the Swiss authorities of an order from the commercial court in Madrid obtained by the legal entity European Super League Company SL.

UEFA’s latest action was to declare the procedure canceled.

“Following the stay of proceedings against FC Barcelona, ​​Juventus FC and Real Madrid CF, in the case relating to a potential violation of UEFA’s legal framework in the context of the“ Super League ”, the ‘UEFA’s appeal body today declared the proceedings void. and no one, as if the procedure had never been opened, “UEFA said in a statement.

Juve, Barca and Real are the last of the 12 clubs which signed up for the Super League in April not to have distanced themselves from the breakaway project which collapsed when the six English clubs as well as Inter Milan, AC Milan and Atletico Madrid have withdrawn.

Real Madrid president Florentino Perez has continued to argue that the plan remains the best way forward for European football despite criticism.

Proceedings continued in a court in Madrid to prevent UEFA from punishing clubs that attempted to break with established structures of European football, including the UEFA Champions League.

In July, Madrid’s 17th Commercial Court ordered the abandonment of all financial and sporting sanctions against founding members of the Super League, including amounts owed to UEFA by the other nine clubs, including six football teams. Premier League, which was originally part of the project.

Plans, announced in April, for the 12 clubs to create a European Super League collapsed after just two days as eight of the 12 founding members from England, Italy and Spain abandoned the breakaway plan under tremendous pressure from football fans, politicians and officials.

The Super League has argued that it will increase the income of top football clubs in Europe and allow them to distribute more money to the rest of the game.

However, sports governing bodies, other teams and fan organizations have said that the league will only strengthen the power and wealth of elite clubs, and that the partially closed structure goes against the model of long standing in European football.

In a time of both disinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever.
By subscribing you can help us tell the story well.



Source link

]]> 0