Tag: crackdown

  • German police call for crackdown on growing climate protests

    German police call for crackdown on growing climate protests

    [ad_1]

    Police representatives, members of the judiciary and politicians in Germany are calling for harsher penalties for climate activists, including preventive detention and longer prison terms, in an effort to halt their disruptive protests.

    This week has seen the most intense protests yet by the campaign group Letzte Generation (Last Generation), with hundreds of its members blocking scores of roads during rush hour in Berlin.

    Rainer Wendt, the head of Germany’s police trade union, led the calls for what he called the “Bavarian model” to be rolled out across the country. In the southern state, activists can be placed in preventive detention for up to 30 days in anticipation of their participation in a blockade.

    In Berlin, the maximum preventive detention is currently 48 hours. “It is no accident that activists have chosen to centre their protests on Berlin and not on Munich [the capital of Bavaria],” Wendt told the news network RND.

    He said the penalties in Berlin were too mild. “I consider this to be way too little … We will only get this situation under control if the punishments are harsher.”

    Benjamin Jendro, of the Berlin police, said that as the protests had increased in number, alternative ways of controlling them were necessary. “We don’t want Bavarian-type rules, but we would like to have more ability to get to grips with the protests,” he told Welt TV.

    Germany’s interior minister, Nancy Faeser, of the Social Democrats, has urged the 16 states to come together to create a unified stance on preventive detention.

    It has been more than a year since Letzte Generation started its protests, which have mainly involved sit-ins in front of traffic, and activists sticking themselves to the road. The actions have earned them the nickname Klimakleber or “climate stickers”.

    Other protests have included throwing mashed potato at works of art in galleries, lopping off the top of a municipal Christmas tree, turning off a gas pipeline, throwing fake oil at the German constitution, spraying paint on political party headquarters, and cutting through the perimeter fence of Berlin airport.

    Letzte Generation activist glued to a road in Berlin
    Letzte Generation activists who glue themselves to roads have been nicknamed ‘Klimakleber’ or ‘climate stickers’. Photograph: Markus Schreiber/AP

    The group has repeatedly said its main aim is to highlight how imminent a climate catastrophe is, and to press the government for more urgent action, in particular to stop the use of fossil fuels.

    It wants to see the establishment of a people’s council, made up of 150 Germans representing every level of society, who would create realistic ideas to tackle the emergency and present them to parliament. It also wants the government to introduce a 130kmh (80mph) speed limit on motorways.

    Letzte Generation points to recent surveys in which four-fifths of Germans have called for the government to take more and swifter action on the climate emergency.

    Initially, penalties against participants in the protests included cautions or fines. But German courts have started to raise the stakes in recent weeks, imposing prison sentences on some campaigners.

    On Wednesday, a woman identified as Maija W, who has been a participant in Letzte Generation actions for more than a year and who last August glued herself to the frame of an oil painting by Lucas Cranach in Berlin’s Gemäldegalerie, was sentenced to four months in prison without probation.

    The judge, Susanna Wortmann, said: “It is not acceptable that parts of society make reference to their objectives as the reason for breaking the law.” She said a suspended sentence was out of the question because the woman had shown “intransigence” and said she intended to take part in future protests, so that “there is no positive social prognosis”.

    The woman, a 24-year-old design graduate, told the court that her protest had been symbolic and she and her fellow protester knew the painting would not be damaged as it was protected behind glass. “My participation in these actions isn’t frivolous or impetuous,” she said, adding that it was meant to throw light on the threat posed by inaction on the climate.

    Earlier this month, three other protesters were sentenced to several months each in jail in Heilbronn for halting traffic. The judge, Julia Schmitt, accused the participants of coercion, for which she could have given a sentence of up to three years.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Critics have drawn comparisons between the sentences handed down to Letzte Generation and myriad far milder penalties given for traffic accidents caused by careless driving in which people have died.

    A Letzte Generation march in Berlin on Wednesday
    A Letzte Generation march in Berlin on Wednesday. Photograph: Christian Mang/Reuters

    Members of the German government have been increasingly vocal in their criticism of the group’s actions. The Green party’s Katharina Dröge questioned how they wanted to achieve their goals, saying their main success had been to “get on the nerves of normal people going about their day-to-day lives”.

    The economy minister, Robert Habeck, of the Greens, told NTV he believed the actions were wrong. “This protest doesn’t win a majority for climate protection; instead it irritates people, divides society, and in that sense it’s not a helpful contribution to climate protection,” he said.

    Members of the government have compared the group to the Taliban, the Nazis and the RAF, a far-left guerrilla group that terrorised Germany in the 1970s and 80s and murdered 34 people.

    The head of Berlin’s Greens, Bettina Jarasch, who has just lost her position in the government, said that while she was keen to “keep a distance” from the group, she rejected the proposals to extend preventive detention.

    “Preventive detention means putting people in prison for crimes they have not yet committed,” she said in an interview with RBB Inforadio. “That is very questionable and must be strictly controlled.”

    In a recent survey, 86% of participants said they were against the methods of protest used by Letzte Generation.

    Anger has been heightened over accusations that the blockades hold up emergency vehicles. During this week’s Berlin protests, the fire brigade said 15 of its vehicles had been held up in one day, seven of them on their way to an emergency.

    Letzte Generation insists it always leaves space for emergency vehicles. It has said membership and general support for the group has only increased the longer it has been protesting.

    Carla Hindrichs, a spokesperson for the group, said: “I don’t want to stick myself to roads. I’m not doing it for fun but because we can see from examples in history that disruptive, nonviolent action can be the most effective type of action. We are like a fire alarm, which is annoying but necessary.”

    [ad_2]
    #German #police #call #crackdown #growing #climate #protests
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • TechScape: Could this billion-pound ‘crack-down’ end fake reviews and subscription traps?

    TechScape: Could this billion-pound ‘crack-down’ end fake reviews and subscription traps?

    [ad_1]

    The British government hasn’t yet succeeded in passing its flagship piece of internet regulation, but it’s about to introduce a second. Hot on the heels of the online safety bill comes the digital markets, competition and consumer bill, introduced today “to crack down on rip-offs, protect consumer cash online and boost competition in digital markets”.

    From our story:

    Major tech firms face the threat of multibillion-pound fines for breaching consumer protection rules under new legislation that will tackle issues including fake online reviews and subscriptions that are difficult to cancel.

    The digital markets, competition and consumers bill will empower the UK’s competition watchdog to tackle the “excessive dominance” that a small number of tech firms hold over consumers and businesses.

    Firms that are deemed to have “strategic market status” – such as tech firms Google and Apple, and online retailer Amazon – will be given strict rules on how to operate under the bill and face a fine representing up to 10% of global turnover if they breach the new regime.

    Just like the online safety bill, this is multiple pieces of regulation squashed together in a somewhat ungainly fashion.

    One – undoubtedly the most important – part of the bill is aimed at beefing up the Competition and Markets Authority, the UK’s competition regulator. It finally gives statutory powers to the “digital markets unit” (DMU), a subgroup of the CMA formed to monitor and regulate, well, digital markets – specifically, the largely American mega-platforms whose scale and heft defines the contours of the internet and, increasingly, society in general.

    The DMU was first announced almost two and a half years ago, after the government revealed plans to empower the unit to write and enforce a new code of practice for technology companies. And it’s been reannounced every year since then: in 2021, the CMA announced it would set up the unit “later this year”, which it duly did. But the unit wasn’t given any actual power, so in May 2022 the government announced that ministers would introduce legislation to bestow it the ability to actually issue fines and create rules.

    That legislation has finally been introduced. The government simply needs to pass it, a task that should be trivial for a party with a parliamentary majority of 67 but is frequently beyond the ken of this one (as anyone who has followed the online safety bill through its half-decade history will be all too aware).

    Once (if?) it passes, the DMU will be empowered to regulate a tiny number of enormous companies – an FT report (£) on a leaked draft of the bill suggests that the threshold for coverage will be £1bn of UK revenue, or £25bn of global revenue. That would include giants like Apple, Meta and Microsoft, but exclude still very large companies like Spotify, Epic Games (of Fortnite fame) and TikTok.

    Those tech titans will be deemed to have “strategic market status”, opening themselves up to handcrafted rules designed “to provide more choice and transparency to their customers”. It’s too soon to know what those rules might be, but expect this to be the mechanism by which the UK state begins putting pressure on companies over their app stores, marketplaces and advertising offerings: all the parts of a massive platform that don’t easily fall under traditional competition policy but do, at the scale of these businesses, have a substantial economic impact.

    The DMU will have teeth, theoretically: breaches of its rules can come with a fine of up to 10% of global turnover. It will also be able to “carry out targeted interventions”, the government says, “opening up new paths for start-ups or smaller firms that have previously struggled to grow and compete in these markets”. Think, for instance, requiring a market leader to reduce barriers to building services on top of its platform.

    The second part of the bill is distinct but overlapping, giving the CMA itself more powers to directly enforce consumer law. At the moment, an awful lot of its functions require a lengthy court process, and the government wants to give it the ability to directly impose penalties for breaching consumer law, again with a fine of up to 10% of a company’s global turnover.

    And then, awkwardly tied to the CMA part of the bill, is the rest of it. This is the stuff that has made the headlines in the consumer press: a ban on fake reviews, a policy to end “subscription traps”, and a new requirement to advise customers when a free trial or introductory offer is coming to an end.

    Those policies are good popular reforms, but are unlikely to have anywhere near the impact of the meatier regulatory side of the bill. The consumer rights group Which? supports them, at least:

    Whether it’s fake reviews by dishonest businesses or people getting trapped in unwanted and costly subscriptions, our consumer protections are overdue an upgrade. Which? has long campaigned for stronger powers for the Competition and Markets Authority, including tough enforcement and the ability to fine firms that break the law directly.

    In the meantime, the online safety bill trundles ever onwards. Last week it was reintroduced to the House of Lords, where it is winding through committee stage. WhatsApp and Signal have united and implied they may withdraw from the country entirely if it passes unchanged. The government doesn’t appear to care. Politics!

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Bl-ew tick

    Twitter’s Blue Tick logo on a smartphone with the Twitter bird icon in the background.
    Photograph: Avishek Das/SOPA Images/Rex/Shutterstock

    A quick recap of verification on Twitter:

    • Once, there was no verification on Twitter. All accounts were as one.

    • Then people began impersonating celebrities, and the threat of lawsuits prompted the introduction of a verification programme, placing a checkmark beside the name of users who had proved their identity.

    • The programme grew to encompass a broad swathe of notable users, including many journalists, in part because it was effectively administered by businesses who would work to verify their staff.

    • A “blue tick” became a desirable mark of status – or a divisive sign of elitism.

    • Elon Musk buys Twitter, and begins selling the ability to “verify” your account to end the “lords and peasants” system. No verification occurs, but accounts with a phone number attached are eligible for a checkmark. A few hundred thousand sign up.

    • Some of the newly verified users express annoyance at the older, “legacy” verified users receiving the same status for free. Musk announces that they will have that status stripped from them on 20 April, a date known for its significance in weed culture.

    • The legacy checkmarks are removed. Only people who pay are marked out. This immediately becomes a source of embarrassment. A grassroots campaign begins to block anyone with a paid-for mark.

    • Celebrities with more than one million followers wake up to find they have had the mark forced on them – with a public explanation claiming they paid for it, even though they did not. Some discover they can’t remove it even if they try.

    • Elon Musk takes a break from blowing up rockets to tweet a laughing-face emoji and the words “A troll, me??”

    It’s like selling Nobel prizes to raise revenue, then taking all the Nobel prizes you had previously awarded back and wondering why a Nobel prize isn’t impressive any more. Truly genius stuff.

    If you want to read the complete version of the newsletter please subscribe to receive TechScape in your inbox every Tuesday.

    Last week’s TechScape included a wrong name for AI wrangler Simon Willison. It has been corrected in the web version.



    [ad_2]
    #TechScape #billionpound #crackdown #fake #reviews #subscription #traps
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Massive Crackdown Launched By JK Police

    Massive Crackdown Launched By JK Police

    [ad_1]

    SRINAGAR: Police in Baramulla district of North Kashmir launched a crackdown on stunt bikers, with fines and motorcycle seizures carried out on Sunday.

    According to official sources, the police acted on information that dozens of bikers were performing stunts on the Srinagar-Baramulla highway during Eid-ul-Fitr.

    Police stopped dozens of bikers, checked their documents, and found most of them were without helmets.

    1320x120 ad feed desktop

    “We have a zero-tolerance policy against two-wheeler drivers performing stunts, which can frighten drivers and pedestrians,” said a senior police officer. [KNT]

    [ad_2]
    #Massive #Crackdown #Launched #Police

    ( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

  • McHenry clashes with SEC’s Gensler over crypto crackdown

    McHenry clashes with SEC’s Gensler over crypto crackdown

    [ad_1]

    congress 83187

    Gensler has long argued that much of the lightly regulated $1 trillion market violates U.S. securities rules because many of the products consist of unregistered securities.

    Gensler, an ally of top progressives like Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), has been on a collision course with McHenry since the GOP took control of the House in January. The veteran regulator’s turbocharged rulemaking agenda includes planned overhauls of the private equity industry and stock market trading, along with a sweeping climate disclosure proposal that Republicans have battered with claims of government overreach.

    But much of the fireworks during Tuesday’s marathon five-and-a-half-hour hearing were over crypto.

    McHenry — along with other Republicans like Reps. French Hill of Arkansas and Bill Huizenga of Michigan — attacked Gensler over his approach to regulation. They said he was too focused on enforcement and not enough on providing clarity for the industry. They also blasted the SEC chair for stonewalling their efforts to investigate his response to the FTX failure, with McHenry calling the agency’s responses “unacceptable.”

    “If you continue to thwart this institution by ignoring our requests and providing incomplete responses, we will be left with no choice but to pursue all avenues to compel the information or documents we need,” McHenry said.

    In one contentious exchange, McHenry challenged Gensler to explain whether Ether — the second-largest crypto token after Bitcoin — is a security, while hinting at a potential turf war between the SEC and another regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. CFTC Chair Rostin Behnam, whose agency oversees derivatives products, has said that Ether falls under the CFTC’s jurisdiction.

    “Do you think it serves the market for an object to be viewed by the commodities regulators as a commodity and the securities regulator to be viewed as a security? Do you think that provides safety and soundness for the products?” McHenry asked Gensler, who led the CFTC during the Obama administration. “I think ‘no’ should be a very simple answer for you here.”

    But Gensler declined, citing a longstanding precedent for SEC officials to not comment on specific cases. Instead, he offered a high-level response explaining the SEC’s test for determining whether an asset is a security.

    The SEC chair called on exchanges, brokers and issuers to comply with the same rules that Wall Street follows.

    “It’s not a matter of a lack of clarity,” he said. “This is a field that in the main is built up around non-compliance.”

    Democrats, led by ranking member Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), defended Gensler’s crypto strategy — as well as most of the SEC’s agenda. Waters said his approach to crypto marked a “stark difference” from that of previous SEC officials. And Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut criticized Republicans for taking issue with the SEC for doing “too much, too quickly” just weeks after blasting bank regulators for doing “too little” and moving “too slowly” following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.

    The hearing offered Republicans a rare opportunity to harangue Gensler to his face rather than through public letters and official statements.

    Gensler was often quick to defend the SEC’s work, but the frustration was palpable. Several lawmakers, including House Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) and Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, voiced displeasure with Gensler’s refusal to answer yes or no questions about his agenda.

    Rep. Alex Mooney (R-W.V.) bashed as “radical” Gensler’s high-profile bid to require public companies to disclose climate risks.

    Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) said the SEC’s attempt to force private equity firms to make new disclosures to their investors would strip competition from the private funds market and harm investors. And Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.), who chairs the committee’s panel on capital markets, said the planned overhaul of U.S. stock trading risks making “equity markets more costly, less efficient and overall worse” for individual investors.

    Even some Democrats had questions.

    Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York wondered aloud whether the SEC’s plans to update stock trading rules are “fixing what ain’t broken.”

    [ad_2]
    #McHenry #clashes #SECs #Gensler #crypto #crackdown
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • ‘Shut it off immediately’: The health industry responds to data privacy crackdown

    ‘Shut it off immediately’: The health industry responds to data privacy crackdown

    [ad_1]

    For consumers, health care industry experts said, the shift offers more privacy, but could also make it more difficult to find primary care, mental health and other medical services online.

    “Legal and compliance teams … are telling the marketing team that these tools are dead men walking, you need to shut it off immediately,” said Ray Mina, head of marketing at Freshpaint, a San Francisco firm that provides software to health care firms for managing customer marketing data.

    The backdrop for this new concern is a rising trend of Americans receiving information or services from mental health apps, telehealth services and hospital websites. People may not know these services are capturing detailed personal information that is then used for marketing and advertising.

    Now, as regulators set new limits on how this data is used and shared, Mina said clients have swamped his firm with questions about what data it’s collecting and with whom it is sharing it. So Freshpaint has to ensure it doesn’t run afoul of the regulators.

    It’s a seismic shift for the industry that’s playing out in the numbers.

    In the first three months of 2023, telemedicine firms spent a quarter of what they did on targeted Facebook and Google ads during the same period last year, according to data from MediaRadar, an ad industry intelligence platform. Meanwhile, MediaRadar data shows nonprofit health systems also halved their spending on targeted ads during that same three-month period year-over-year.

    HIPAA and its limits

    Until recently, much of the health data online — picked up in searches, by websites, apps and wearables — was thought to be outside the government’s purview. The federal health data privacy law, HIPAA, only covers patient data collected by insurers and health care providers, like doctors or hospitals.

    Collecting data consumers leave online, and using it to market products, is a key mechanism for reaching customers that executives are now fretting about.

    Last year, lawmakers proposed broad data privacy legislation, but Congress didn’t pass it. Agencies from HHS to the FTC are trying to expand data protections anyway, arguing that existing authorities provide them the power to do so, even though they haven’t used those authorities to broadly protect health data in the past.

    HHS’ Office for Civil Rights surprised insurers and health care providers in December when it issued a bulletin expanding its definition of personally identifiable health information and restricting the use of certain marketing technology.

    The office warned that entities covered by HIPAA aren’t allowed to wantonly disclose HIPAA-protected data to vendors or use tracking technology that would cause “impermissible” disclosures of protected health information.

    That protected data can include email addresses, IP addresses, or geographic location information that can be tied to an individual, under HHS’ 22-year-old HIPAA privacy rule.

    “We’re seeing people go in and type symptoms, put in information, and that information is being disclosed in a way that’s inconsistent with HIPAA and being used to potentially track people, and that is a problem,” said HHS Office for Civil Rights Director Melanie Fontes Rainer at the International Association of Privacy Professionals’ summit in Washington this month.

    Meanwhile, in February, the Federal Trade Commission said it had fined prescription discount site and telehealth provider GoodRx $1.5 million for sharing customer data with Google, Facebook and other firms.

    The FTC’s principle power allows it to police “unfair and deceptive” practices and GoodRx had told customers it would not share their data, and misled them into thinking their records were safe under HIPAA, the agency said.

    But the FTC also cited a violation of its health breach notification rule, which says that entities not covered by HIPAA that collect personally identifiable health information must tell consumers when there’s been a breach of their data. The agency had never used the rule, which was previously considered a cybersecurity enforcement tool, as a stick to wield against companies that knowingly shared customer data with business partners.

    The agency said to expect similar enforcement to come and last month fined online therapy provider BetterHelp $7.8 million for sharing customer data after telling patients it would not.

    “Firms that think they can cash in on consumers’ health data because HIPAA doesn’t apply should think again,” said Samuel Levine, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Our recent actions against GoodRx and BetterHelp make clear that we are prepared to use every tool to protect Americans’ health privacy, and hold accountable those who abuse it.”

    In both of the cases, the FTC required the firms to change their data protection practices and to halt sharing customer information. Both companies settled their cases, but denied wrongdoing.

    GoodRx said in a statement that it “had used vendor technologies to advertise in a way that we believe was compliant with all applicable regulations and that remains common practice among many health, consumer and government websites.”

    BetterHelp said in a statement that it was accused of using “limited, encrypted information to optimize the effectiveness of our advertising campaigns so we could deliver more relevant ads and reach people who may be interested in our services.”

    The company suggested that it had been unfairly singled out, since “this industry-standard practice is routinely used by some of the largest health providers, health systems, and healthcare brands.”

    Everyone from online telehealth providers to major hospital systems is taking notice.

    “They’re taking a look at anything that looks like a marketing operation that sits on their website and they’re pulling back from it until they get more guidance from HHS,” said Anna Rudawski, a partner at law firm Norton Rose Fulbright who advises health care organizations on data protection.

    Measuring the fallout

    Data privacy advocates are urging the regulators on, arguing that health information deserves special protections and that enforcement needs to evolve now that the world has moved online. They expect companies can adjust.

    “Advertising does not have to be privacy-invasive to be valuable or effective,” said Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, managing director of the Washington office of the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

    And the industry is hardly putting up a united front in response.

    Lartease Tiffith, the executive vice president for public policy at the Interactive Advertising Bureau, a trade group for online advertising firms, for example, said that recent enforcement actions target companies that explicitly misrepresented their data privacy policies by not telling customers they were sharing information about them with third parties.

    “If you tell consumers, we’re not going to do X, and you do X, that’s a problem,” he said. “I don’t think it has anything to do with our industry.”

    But some health care executives aren’t so sure. “This has been the reason that my CEO can’t sleep at night,” said a lawyer for a telehealth company whom POLITICO granted anonymity so as not to draw attention to their client.

    Rudawski said risk-averse health care organizations are discontinuing advertising with major platforms like Google and Facebook until the new regulatory environment is clearer.

    And Brett Meeks, executive director of the Health Innovation Alliance, which represents providers, insurers, and others on health technology matters, said that health systems want to follow the rules, but were not prepared for the abrupt policy changes. “It’s hard to follow rules that change with little notice,” he said.

    Others may be trying to avoid the fines and remedies imposed on GoodRx and BetterHelp with preemptive action.

    Online telehealth provider Cerebral, which is under federal investigation for allegedly overprescribing controlled substances and, reportedly, for violating privacy regulations, recently filed a data breach notification with HHS, citing its December guidance.

    “Cerebral determined that it had disclosed certain information that may be regulated as protected health information under HIPAA to certain Third-Party Platforms and some Subcontractors without having obtained HIPAA-required assurances,” the firm said in the notice, which it also sent to 3.18 million patients and others who visited its website or used its app.

    At the same time, the company told customers it hadn’t done anything unusual by tracking their clicks and sharing that information with other businesses, calling it standard practice “in many industries, including health systems, traditional brick and mortar providers, and other telehealth companies.”

    In a statement, Cerebral said that the new HHS guidance marked a sea change for the health care industry because it said that “all data — including the submission of basic user contact information — gathered from a healthcare entity’s website or app should be treated as [protected health information]” under HIPAA.

    A number of other health care organizations not previously known to be in regulators’ sights have also submitted breach reports this year, acknowledging that web trackers they’d employed had collected patient data. New York-Presbyterian Hospital, UC San Diego Health and alcohol recovery telehealth company Monument filed breach reports last month; Brooks Rehabilitation did so in January.

    Still other firms are taking a wait-and-see approach, hoping for more guidance from both the FTC and HHS.

    An executive at a telehealth company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to draw attention to his firm, said he doesn’t take issue with the FTC’s actions or the HHS guidance, but is concerned it could lead to more restrictive privacy guidance that directly interferes with standard advertising practices.

    “That would suddenly create real challenges for companies to market their services, which if their company is doing something good in the world, you want their services marketed. So how do you balance?” he asked.

    [ad_2]
    #Shut #immediately #health #industry #responds #data #privacy #crackdown
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • 348 people held during Amritpal crackdown freed, Punjab govt tells Akal Takht

    348 people held during Amritpal crackdown freed, Punjab govt tells Akal Takht

    [ad_1]

    Chandigarh: The Punjab government has informed the Akal Takht that 348 of the 360 people taken into preventive custody during a police crackdown against radical preacher Amritpal Singh have now been freed.

    The Akal Takht Jathedar’s personal secretary Jaspal Singh on Thursday said a message was received from the state government that the rest would also be released soon.

    Earlier this week, Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Harpreet Singh had given an ultimatum to the state government to release all Sikh youths held during the police crackdown against Amritpal Singh and his aides.

    The Jathedar had also condemned the state government for invoking the National Security Act against a few people during the police crackdown.

    A few days prior to the Jathedar’s ultimatum, the Punjab Police had said that out of those detained, nearly 30 were hardcore criminals. The rest would be released after verification, a senior police official had said.

    Meanwhile, police have stepped up security in and around Amritsar and Bathinda amid reports that Amritpal Singh may surrender after entering any of the two Sikh shrines the Golden Temple in Amritsar or the Takht Sri Damdama Sahib in Bathinda.

    Vehicles are being checked at several places in other districts, including Hoshiarpur, in search of the head of ‘Waris Punjab De’.

    Amritpal, who has been on the run since March 18 when the police crackdown was launched, appeared in a video on Wednesday.

    In the undated clip, he urged the Akal Takht to summon a “sarbat khalsa” a congregation of Sikhs to discuss issues concerning the community.

    The Punjab Police on Tuesday night launched a massive search operation in a Hoshiarpur village and many adjoining areas following inputs that radical preacher Amritpal Singh and his aides could be in the area.

    [ad_2]
    #people #held #Amritpal #crackdown #freed #Punjab #govt #tells #Akal #Takht

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Akal Takht Jathedar gives 24-hr ultimatum for release of Sikhs held following crackdown on Amritpal Singh

    Akal Takht Jathedar gives 24-hr ultimatum for release of Sikhs held following crackdown on Amritpal Singh

    [ad_1]

    Amritsar: Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Harpreet Singh on Monday gave a 24-hour ultimatum to the state government to release all Sikh youths who were held during the police crackdown against radical preacher Amritpal Singh and his aides.

    He also condemned the state government for invoking the National Security Act against a few persons during the police crackdown.

    The Jathedar of Akal Takht, the highest temporal seat of Sikhs, had convened a special gathering of Sikh organizations, including intellectuals, Sikh lawyers, journalists, religious and social leaders here to discuss the current situation in Punjab following the March 18 action against elements of ‘Waris Punjab De’ headed by Amritpal Singh.

    Addressing the gathering, the Jathedar gave a 24-hour ultimatum to the Punjab government for releasing all Sikh youths in Punjab, saying otherwise the anger of Sikh community would remain simmering.

    He also attacked certain TV channels, accusing them of promoting hate propaganda against Sikhs by describing the youths who have been held as separatists.

    The Jathedar asked the state government to revoke the detention of some persons under the NSA and demanded that those who have been sent to Dibrugarh jail in Assam should be brought back to Punjab so that law can take its own course.

    He said it would be wrong to say that there was a threat to national security due to the Sikhs who have been detained.

    Without naming anyone, Singh said the NSA should also then be invoked against those who speak about ‘Hindu Rashtra.’

    The Jathedar said it would extend all help to those “innocent Sikhs” who have been held in this matter.

    The Jatehdar claimed around 400 Sikh youths had been “arrested” and 198 had been released.

    But the Sikh community wanted release of all arrested Sikhs, he said.

    He also asked the police to release the impounded vehicles of the Sikhs.

    Punjab Police on Sunday had said it has released 197 persons out of total 353 taken into preventive custody on apprehension of breach of peace and disturbance of law and order.

    The police had last week launched a crackdown against elements of ‘Waris Punjab De,’ headed Amritpal.

    The elusive preacher himself, however, gave the police a slip and escaped their dragnet when his cavalcade was intercepted in Jalandhar district.

    [ad_2]
    #Akal #Takht #Jathedar #24hr #ultimatum #release #Sikhs #held #crackdown #Amritpal #Singh

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Crypto industry poised for clash with government over crackdown

    Crypto industry poised for clash with government over crackdown

    [ad_1]

    The $1 trillion crypto industry is going on the offensive against what executives say is an existential threat to “de-bank” digital asset businesses, mounting a lobbying campaign to oppose efforts to discourage lenders from taking them on as customers.

    “The concern is very real,” Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), one of several GOP lawmakers allied with the industry, said in an interview. “We’ve seen this sort of regulatory abuse before with Operation Choke Point,” the Obama-era program that pushed banks away from financing gun dealers and payday lenders. “A lot of the facts are lining up in the same manner right here, right now.”

    The clash marks the latest front in what is already an all-out battle between the once high-flying industry and officials in Washington that could shape the future of crypto in the U.S. European lawmakers are trying to court crypto companies, sparking concern among Republicans that the U.S. may see its reputation as a home for financial innovation diminished.

    The Blockchain Association, a leading advocacy group, is vowing to investigate concerns that regulators are de-banking crypto firms. Ryan Selkis, CEO of Messari, a major research firm, is pressing lawmakers to scrutinize agencies like the FDIC over claims that the fall of both Silvergate Capital and Signature Bank was connected to their crypto ties. And lawmakers like Hagerty and Rep. Tom Emmer
    of Minnesota, the No. 3 Republican in the House, are joining the fight.

    The FDIC — which along with the Fed and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is warning banks not to allow crypto’s risks to migrate over to the financial system — declined to comment. A spokesperson for the OCC, a national regulator, said it did not supervise Silvergate, Silicon Valley Bank or Signature. The Fed did not respond to a request for comment.

    Much of Washington has long been skeptical — if not hostile — toward crypto, seeing little real value in digital assets and worrying about investor protection. But the industry’s troubles multiplied with the collapse of FTX, the one-time exchange giant whose founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, has been charged with massive fraud and is alleged to have orchestrated a sweeping political influence campaign to push for lighter regulation.

    In the wake of FTX, lawmakers and regulators have become especially wary of the market. SEC Chair Gary Gensler, for one, is ramping up enforcement after months of calling on crypto companies to comply with securities laws. Non-compliance, he told POLITICO in January, is “part of the business model.”

    As the SEC cracks down, bank regulators have put lenders on notice about crypto — prompting some experts to offer blunt assessments of their intentions.

    The regulators are “taking actions to basically shadow ban crypto,” said John Rizzo, a former Treasury Department official who is now a senior vice president of public affairs at Clyde Group. “If you can’t access the banking system, how can you exist?”

    Little concrete evidence has emerged to suggest there’s a coordinated campaign to force banks to turn away crypto depositors. Yet regulators’ warnings — as well as the risks themselves — appear to be carrying weight among bank executives.

    Messari has had conversations with banks where “they say anything that is even touching crypto is a no-go from on high,” Selkis said. Swan Bitcoin CEO Cory Klippsten said Citigroup shut down both his company’s and his personal accounts late last year without explanation. And several banks have pulled back on their exposure to the asset class.

    Even executives at the since-failed Signature Bank said last year that they planned to slash the concentration of crypto-linked deposits to under 20 percent. Others like Metropolitan Commercial Bank fled the market entirely.

    “We see a lot of smoke,” Blockchain Association CEO Kristin Smith said. “We’re not sure where the fire is, but we want to figure that out.”

    The Blockchain Association recently filed information requests with the FDIC, the Fed and the OCC regarding the de-banking allegations such as account closures and firms struggling to open new accounts. The group’s members include crypto exchange Kraken, brokerage eToro and decentralized finance platform Uniswap.

    None of the agencies have indicated that there is anything preventing banks from dealing with crypto clients, as long as they are operating within the law and properly managing the risks. The effort, former FDIC official Todd Phillips said, is instead about alerting banks to rising and lurking risks — basic bank supervision.

    “This is bank regulators doing their jobs, and it just so happens that right now the regulators have identified risks with crypto customers,” said Phillips, who is now a financial regulation consultant. Crypto firms “are clearly trying to get the banking agencies to back off by calling it something that it’s not.”

    The regulators’ warnings proved prescient. Just weeks after they advised banks that crypto deposits can be volatile, Silvergate, one of the industry’s leading lenders, announced it would voluntarily wind down after suffering billions in withdrawals. Both Silicon Valley Bank and Signature failed days later.

    But the de-banking concerns have persisted — fanned in part by former Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.

    Frank, an architect of the landmark Dodd-Frank reform and a Signature board member since 2015, said New York regulators’ decision to shut down the bank was tied to its crypto exposure.

    “The only explanation is they just wanted to send a message that banks should not be heavily or marginally involved in crypto,” he told POLITICO.

    Frank, who says he has “always been skeptical of crypto,” argued that Signature was simply doing what banks do: operating as an intermediary for its customers.

    “To the extent that people choose voluntarily to migrate to crypto from traditional financing, you accommodate that,” he said. “For a bank, that’s the business you’re in.”

    The FDIC took over Signature as the federal government sought to cut off any contagion within the banking system. New York regulators have pushed back on Frank’s assertion that crypto played a role in Signature’s failure. In an earlier statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Financial Services said the decision “had nothing to do with crypto” but was about “a crisis of confidence in the bank’s leadership.”

    Even some executives aren’t buying the idea that the crypto industry is being unfairly targeted.

    While Swan’s Klippsten also questioned the Signature shutdown, he dismissed the idea of a coordinated conspiracy to de-bank crypto.

    Klippsten, who only deals in Bitcoin, points to a less mysterious theory behind why banks would be cutting off crypto depositors: Risk. Following the string of bankruptcies and fraud that rocked the market last year, including Voyager, Celsius and FTX, Klippsten said banks were naturally going to reduce their risk from the sector.

    In Swan’s case, Klippsten said the Bitcoin financial services company likely got caught in Citigroup’s “dragnet” as the bank pulled back. But Swan has had little trouble since, and, with thousands of banks out there, Klippsten said that as long as a company has a “solid business,” there will be a lender willing to take it on.

    “It might be a pain to get de-banked by Citibank with no warning like we were,” Klippsten said. “But you can literally walk next door to Chase or Wells if there’s nothing wrong with your business.



    [ad_2]
    #Crypto #industry #poised #clash #government #crackdown
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • India must immediately end crackdown on Kashmiri human rights defenders: UN expert

    India must immediately end crackdown on Kashmiri human rights defenders: UN expert

    [ad_1]

    United Nations: A top UN expert on Friday asked India to immediately end the crackdown on Kashmiri human rights defenders and urged New Delhi to release and close all investigations initiated against them.

    Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders made this comment days after the National Investigation Agency (NIA) formally arrested jailed Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society programme coordinator Khurram Parvez in connection with its NGO terror funding case.

    The NIA said the case relates to the terror funding of proscribed terrorist organisations, such as LeT and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, by certain NGOs, trusts and societies based in the Valley.

    “Indian authorities appear to be intensifying the long-standing repression of Kashmiri civil society,” Lawlor said. “The State must respect its human rights obligations and be held accountable where it violates them,” she said in a statement. Parvez has been in prison since his arrest by the NIA in November 2021 for anti-national activities, including collecting information on vital installations and deployment and movement of security forces, procuring secret official documents and passing the same to his LeT handlers for monetary consideration. He was charge-sheeted along with six others on May 13 last year.

    India has previously said that authorities in the country act against violations of law strictly in accordance with established judicial processes. The UN expert said prior to Parvez’s arrest, a former associate of the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Societies, human rights activist and journalist Irfan Mehraj, was also arrested in the same case on March 20 from Srinagar and transferred to New Delhi.

    “The Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) carries out essential work monitoring human rights. Their research and analysis of human rights violations are of immense value to international organisations seeking to ensure accountability and non-repetition of abuses,” Lawlor explained.

    The statement issued in Geneva said UN experts have repeatedly highlighted “grave concerns” regarding the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, which allows the designation of any individual as a “terrorist,” bypassing the requirement to establish membership or association with banned outfits.

    The expert also called for the release and the closing of investigations against Kashmiri human rights defenders. “The arrest and detention of persons for exercising their human rights are arbitrary. There must be accountability and remedy where such abusive actions are taken,” Lawlor added.

    [ad_2]
    #India #immediately #crackdown #Kashmiri #human #rights #defenders #expert

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Punjab: VHP hails crackdown on Khalistan sympathiser Amritpal Singh

    Punjab: VHP hails crackdown on Khalistan sympathiser Amritpal Singh

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) on Monday hailed the police crackdown on radical Sikh preacher and Khalistan sympathiser Amritpal Singh in Punjab, saying the state government’s action in collaboration with the Centre reflects the country’s resolve to take on forces challenging the sovereignty of India.

    Addressing a press conference, VHP working president Alok Kumar also appreciated the Punjab government for showing the “will-power and determination” to take action against such elements.

    He also called upon everyone to rise above political lines and come together to send out a message that the country will not allow anyone to let Punjab “burn in the fire of terrorism once again.”

    “In the last two days, the will power and determination that Punjab has shown as well as the way the state government and the Centre together has taken on the forces challenging the sovereignty of India reflects the country’s resolve,” Kumar told reporters.

    “The Punjab government joining hands with the Centre has challenged the divisive forces in the state and we see that the one, who used to challenge the government and challenge the country’s Home minister, had to run and hide today,” he said.

    The VHP leader alleged that Khalistan is “a new business, especially in Canada and England,” and said every Indian should rise and protest against it.

    (Except for the headline, the story has not been edited by Siasat staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Punjab #VHP #hails #crackdown #Khalistan #sympathiser #Amritpal #Singh

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )