Persevere and Prevail: A Journey of Defiance and Overcoming Obstacles

How to Effectively Lead Your Team Through Obstacles | Inc.com

Roundup is a widely-used weed killer that has been associated with a variety of health problems. If the use of Roundup has harmed you or someone you love, you may be eligible to join a Roundup lawsuit. A Roundup lawsuit can help you seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other related damages. With experienced legal counsel, you can get the justice you deserve.

At Roundup Lawsuit Help, we are dedicated to providing experienced legal guidance to those whom Roundup has injured. Our professional team of attorneys can help you understand your rights and how to pursue a claim. We’ll work with you to ensure your case is handled correctly and you receive the compensation you deserve. We will also help you understand the legal process and what to expect from a Roundup lawsuit.

We understand the pain and suffering caused by Roundup, and we are here to provide the support and guidance you need. With our help, you can pursue the justice and compensation you deserve. Contact us today to learn how we can help you with your Roundup lawsuit.

What is a Roundup Lawsuit? 

A Roundup lawsuit is a legal case against Monsanto, the famous weed killer Roundup manufacturer. These lawsuits allege that Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, has caused severe health problems, including cancer, in people exposed to the chemical. Over 18,000 Roundup lawsuits have been filed in the U.S., and many more claimants have come forward alleging that their exposure to Roundup caused them to develop cancer.

What is Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, which is believed to be responsible for the health problems associated with the weed killer. Glyphosate is a chemical herbicide and is used in hundreds of products around the world to control weeds. The World Health Organization has classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”, and the state of California has listed glyphosate as a known carcinogen.

What Health Problems are Linked to Roundup?

Exposure to Roundup has been linked to several serious health problems, including cancer. The most common type of cancer associated with Roundup is non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer of the lymphatic system. Other health problems that are linked to Roundup include kidney and liver damage, reproductive issues, and congenital disabilities.

What Can I Do if I Believe Roundup Caused My Cancer?

If you or a loved one have been diagnosed with cancer after exposure to Roundup, you may be eligible to file a Roundup lawsuit. Speaking to an experienced attorney who can help you understand your legal rights and options is essential. An experienced attorney can help you navigate the complicated legal process and ensure you get the justice and compensation you deserve.

Tort Advisor is an excellent resource for those considering a Roundup lawsuit. We offer extensive resources and information to help you understand the legal implications of filing a Roundup lawsuit. In addition to providing detailed information on the Roundup litigation process, including potential legal strategies and potential damages, we also offer a Roundup claims calculator. This tool helps you determine the potential value of your claim based on various factors, such as the amount of Roundup exposure and the severity of your health issues. We can also connect you to experienced Roundup lawyers who can provide legal advice and representation. With TortAdvisor’s help, you can take the proper steps to pursue a Roundup lawsuit and get the compensation you deserve.

Continue Reading

Secrets of Playboy: Shannon Twins Say Sex With Hefner Was Like Rape

When a new trio of younger blonde bombshells replaced Women Up coming Door stars Holly Madison, Bridget Marquardt and Kendra Wilkinson as Hugh Hefner’s set of live-in girlfriends for the sixth and last time of the exhibit, it was simple for enthusiasts to write them off as a paltry substitute for the initial stars that built the E! truth sequence famed. It was also straightforward to dismiss some of the much more troubling elements of the new forged, like the fact that in addition to Crystal Harris, who replaced Madison as Hefner’s “number 1 girlfriend” and later on grew to become the Playboy founder’s 3rd and ultimate wife, Hefner also commenced a partnership with 18-year-outdated twin sisters, Kristina and Karissa Shannon.

By that time, Hefner’s way of living experienced come to be so normalized thanks to the toned-down, cable-Tv set-pleasant version that dominated truth Television set through the latter half of the aughts that few so substantially as blinked an eye at the thought of the octogenarian moving into an incestuous romance with two hardly authorized twin sisters. Also, at the time the public appeared to retain a typical state of disbelief about what was truly going on driving shut doors at the Playboy mansion in individuals days. Confident, Hefner would constantly retain a bevy of blonde beauties by his facet, but there was no way this eighty-one thing-yr-outdated man was essentially even now obtaining intercourse with girls 60-as well as years his junior, right? Potentially bolstered by Hefner’s grandfatherly portrayal on the light-weight-hearted actuality series, the general public additional or considerably less taken care of a perception that Hefner’s polyamorous “relationships” were being all for present at this point.

As we now know thanks to inform-all memoirs and community testimony from numerous ladies who ended up aspect of Hef’s internal circle towards the conclude of his daily life, sex with the growing older magazine publisher did in fact occur, and according to the Shannon twins, it was “like rape.”

Kristina and Karissa Shannon, who lived in the mansion as Hefner’s girlfriends for two decades starting in their late teenagers, are amid the a lot of women of all ages who opened up about the dim side of their encounters with Playboy and its founder in the A&E docuseries, Techniques of Playboy. In the episode that aired Monday evening, Karissa in comparison sexual intercourse with Hefner to assault.

“To me, it is like rape,” she stated. “He utilized control mechanisms totally via anything.” Karissa also opened up about possessing an abortion after turning out to be pregnant by Hefner when she was 19. “I felt disgusted with my system,” she claimed, introducing that she is “so happy” she made the final decision to terminate the being pregnant. “I felt like there was anything like an alien inside me. I was grossed out. I just required to get it about with.” The former Playboy design included that she by no means explained to Hefner about her pregnancy, fearing it would be a further way for him to training control over her. “I did not want him to want me to have it,” she claimed. “I didn’t want to be caught even more inside that bubble. I assume it’s a way for him to manage me even extra, have me on a leash.”

The sisters also exposed that they did have threesomes collectively with Hefner, something they claimed they experienced hardly ever carried out right before, and “would hardly ever want to.” The twins also claimed they have been plied with medication right before their first sexual experience with Hefner, leaving them “the most inebriated we’ve ever been.”

The twins’ tales share a range of similarities with experiences fellow previous girlfriends of Hefner’s have shared in recent several years. In Secrets and techniques of Playboy, Holly Madison recounted a quantity of claims initially manufactured in her 2015 memoir, Down the Rabbit Hole, alleging Hefner presented her medication he known as “thigh-openers” and was a controlling and abusive companion. Meanwhile, allegations of Hefner’s misconduct much pre-date Playboy’s buzzy reality Television period in the early aughts. Sondra Theodore, who dated Hefner in the late ’70s and early ’80s, also recalled becoming subjected to controlling and sexually intense conduct on the Playboy founder’s component.

“There was very little healthier about the sex with Hefner, due to the fact he took it as well much,” Theodore said in the series. “He was having the female upcoming doorway, and he was soiling her.”

Continue Reading

New Book Spoils the Plot of Dwayne Johnson’s DC Super-Pets Movie

The DC universe is growing in lots of means as of late. The major-screen DCEU is continuing to increase, director Matt Reeves just debuted a new Gotham with The Batman, The CW is still growing its slate of controversial collection, and the organization maintains a potent existence in animation. Commonly, Warner Bros. has centered its DC animation on direct-to-property releases, but it can be now stepping up a degree with League of Super-Pets on its way to theaters in July.

DC’s League of Tremendous-Pets will star Dwayne Johnson as Krypto the Superdog, marking the actor’s DC debut ahead of his stay-action purpose in Black Adam. The Kryptonian canine will be joined by Ace the Bathound (Kevin Hart) and a league of other animal companions.

Ad

The animated blockbuster will also function appearances from an all-new Justice League, with voices from the likes of John Krasinski, Keanu Reeves, and additional legendary acting talent.

With the beforehand prepared Could launch now approaching, merchandise has started to surface, revealing spoilery plot information from the motion picture.

Warning – The relaxation of this article possibly contains spoilers for DC’s League of Tremendous-Pets.

Advertisement

DC Ebook Reveals Tremendous-Animals Spoilers

DC introduced a little one-helpful reserve adaptation of its upcoming League of Super-Pets animated movie which reveals spoiler-significant plot details for the Dwayne Johnson flick. 

DC League of Super-Pets Book
DC

Instagram user silenzioalvaro shared pictures from across the reserve – which is readily available now on Amazon – revealing how the animated blockbuster should to enjoy out.

The 24-site ebook opens with Superman teaming up with his tremendous-run canine companion Krypto, his ideal good friend who he thinks may possibly need an additional animal buddy.

Ad

DC League of Super-Pets Book
DC

On a trip to an animal shelter, Krypto is introduced to Chip, PB, Merton, Ace, and Lulu, most of whom will go on to form the Super-Pets. 

DC League of Super-Pets Book
DC

Immediately after coming into get hold of with Orange Kryptonite, the animalistic group begins to create powers, with Lulu’s offering mind powers, sending her down a route toward world domination.

PB gains the ability to shrink and improve, Ace turns into tremendous-strong, Merton develops super-pace, and Chip receives lightning powers.

Ad

DC League of Super-Pets Book
DC

Owning escaped from captivity, Lulu will in some way obtain Green Kryptonite and use it to de-ability Superman and Krypto, seemingly getting the Man of Steel captive.

As the Superdog turns to his new super-driven animal close friends for aid to rescue the DC legend, Lulu varieties his possess military of driven guinea pigs with the Orange Kryptonite.

With the overall Justice League held captive by Lulu and her team, the Super-Animals will endeavor to rescue the workforce, only to uncover by themselves imprisoned too.

Advertisement

The climax of the motion picture will arrive as the villainous guinea pig employs extra Orange Kryptonite to greatly enhance her powers, just as the outcomes of the Eco-friendly rock have on off on Krypto. Last but not least, back at entire ability, the Superdog will no cost his close friends to just take on Lulu’s army and appear out victorious.

PB will then totally free Speculate Woman, Krypto will reunite with Superman, and Ace will launch Batman, setting up the pairings between Super-Animals and Justice League members that are clear from costume similarities on the poster.

Will Tremendous-Animals Land with Audiences?

Prior to drawing any conclusions or viewpoints on DC’s League of Super-Pets based on this guide, it is really crucial to take note this adaptation is for audience aged 4 to seven. So, even though the animated flick does nevertheless glance to be oriented in the direction of young audiences, there may perhaps be more intricacies to the story than this indicates. 

Advertisement

This clarification continue to leaves quite a few questions unanswered relating to what is previously regarded about the motion picture, including how Lex Luthor fits into the puzzle, offered he will reportedly be the just one to capture the Justice League in the movie.

Over-all, although this spoiler-significant guide may possibly not be a body-for-frame adaptation of what League of Super-Pets will provide, it does reveal more than what some may well wish to know likely into the motion picture.

What accurately the future retains for the Super-Animals will rely tremendously on the box business and supporter reception to their debut. If it proves to be a strike, significantly with the younger target audience, a sequel will pretty much absolutely get the greenlight, possibly alongside with an HBO Max spin-off provided DC’s newfound commitment to streaming collection.

Ad

DC’s League of Super-Pets hits theaters on July 29.

Abide by DCU Direct

Continue Reading

Former top State official to plead guilty for helping Qatar

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A former top rated-ranking State Office official is established to plead responsible for improperly serving to a rich Gulf state test to affect U.S. policy and not disclosing on a governing administration ethics form items he acquired from a disgraced political fundraiser.

Courtroom records filed before this month say that Richard G. Olson, who was the Point out Department’s special agent for Afghanistan and Pakistan at the end of the Obama administration, offered “aid and advice” to Qatar on lobbying routines in violation of a “revolving door” prohibition against such actions for one particular yr right after leaving community provider.

Olson, who also served as U.S. ambassador to Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates, indicated in a signed filing previously this thirty day period he intends to plead guilty. It’s unclear if he’s cooperating in other investigations.

The case represents just one of the more high-profile initiatives by the Justice Office in modern decades to crack down on unreported or illegal impact campaigns funded by overseas governments aimed at altering U.S. plan.

Federal prosecutors also mentioned that while at the Condition Division, Olson unsuccessful to disclose particular fiscal advantages he obtained from a California businessman named Imaad Zuberi. After a big political donor, Zuberi is now serving a 12 year prison sentence for funneling unlawful marketing campaign contributions to politicos in each major get-togethers and then peddling the resulting affect to overseas governments. The new court data do not use Zuberi’s name, but The Affiliated Push was ready to establish him based on courtroom filings in other instances, letters a Zuberi representative has despatched to Congress, and interviews with Zuberi associates.

Neither the Justice Division or Olson’s attorney straight away returned requests for comment.

Shortly right after Olson remaining the State Section, many Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, released a blockade from Qatar that sparked a large paying out spree in Washington on lobbying and other endeavours to impact U.S. policy.

Olson, Zuberi and retired Marine 4-star Gen. John Allen traveled to Doha early in the diplomatic disaster to fulfill with best Qatari officers and go over approaches of resolving the concern, in accordance to court information and a assertion Allen’s spokesman offered to the AP previous yr.

Federal prosecutors compose in Olson’s recently filed court docket information that soon soon after the June 2017 trip, Olson, Zuberi, a Qatari official and Allen, who is only discovered as “Person 3,” satisfied with a number of Congressmen “for the function of convincing the U.S. lawmakers to assistance Qatar relatively than its regional rivals in the Gulf Diplomatic Crisis.”

Email messages that Zuberi’s consultant submitted in a letter to Congress also present that Zuberi pushed for Olson and Allen to accompany Qatari officials to a White Dwelling conference with then-National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster.

“We must shift this conversation to WhatsApp,” Allen replied. “I’ll enable Rick converse for himself with regards to his lawful restrictions in dealing with the (U.S. Authorities).”

Allen, who is now president of the influential Brookings Institute feel tank, explained to the AP past calendar year that White Home officials have been mindful of and supported his efforts to revolve the crisis as a private citizen.

“General Allen has never acted as an agent of the Qatari federal government,” his spokesman, Beau Phillips, claimed in a assertion final yr.

The recently submitted court files also display that Olson labored with Zuberi to gain U.S. government approval for a preclearance facility at the Doha airport, which would permit U.S.-certain passengers to very clear customs in advance of they remaining Qatar.

Such approval would increase the range of U.S. metropolitan areas the Doha airport could provide and give it an advantage about competitors in the Gulf, prosecutors stated. As ambassador, Olson experienced labored to build a preclearance facility at the Abu Dhabi Worldwide Airport in the UAE.

Zuberi turned infamous for courting lawmakers and diplomats like Olson. In 2015, prosecutors claimed, Zuberi paid for Olson’s trip from New Mexico to London, in which the then-ambassador satisfied with Esam Janahi, a Bahraini businessman who made available Olson a a single-yr deal really worth $300,000 a calendar year. Janahi was not named in Olson’s court documents, but the AP recognized him by way of individual court docket filings and other records.

Zuberi specific that facet of his romantic relationship with Olson past calendar year in letters to users of Congress, in which a previous federal legislation enforcement officer employed by Zuberi cited a host of irregularities in the fundraiser’s prosecution and described his prolonged jail sentence as a “miscarriage of justice.”

___

Mustian documented from New York.

Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This content might not be printed, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the need of permission.

Continue Reading

Immigration Compliance Changes – Are you Ready?

Special thanks to Sarah Adler, Immigration Legal Counsel, and Simran Nandha for their assistance with this blog.

Further to the increased compliance requirements from Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Immigration, Refugee, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) on all employers which commenced on September 30, 2022 (Government of Canada strengthens protections for temporary foreign workers as new regulations come into force – Canada.ca), IRCC has now incorporated these requirements in its regular audits on employers engaging in the Temporary Foreign Work Permits program in Canada.  In particular, the audits are focused on employees’ rights and program compliance.

Specifically, these changes to regular audits are requesting certain documentation that has not previously been asked of employers, including:

  • Proof that the employee received a copy of the pamphlet entitled International Mobility Program: Get to Know Your Rights While working in Canada. See the following link:  International Mobility Program – Get to know your rights while working in Canada – Canada.ca
    • A copy of the pamphlet must be provided to the employee in their official language of choice on or before the first day or work, and proof of provision of the pamphlet must be provided upon request.
    • The pamphlet must also be readily available within the workplace in both official languages.
  • Proof that the company is compliant with recruitment law in the applicable Province (if applicable);
  • Copy of the employment agreement signed by the employer and the foreign worker prior to the submission of the foreign worker’s work permit application (which is indicated in the attestation section of the Offer of Employment filing);
    • Note that IRCC is currently recognizing that Employment Agreements between the foreign worker and the Canadian company are not always applicable, for example in the case of intermittent travellers, and are currently reviewing their position on this. In the meantime, we recommend that applicants at least have an assignment letter from the company confirming the terms and conditions of their employment in their home office remains applicable.
  • Copies of policies and procedures that address situations of abuse in the work force, and a description of the mechanism to resolve situations of abuse;
  • Proof of training within the last two years provided to employees and supervisors to recognize and address abuse.

In particular these compliance requirements are being implemented to better protect temporary foreign workers from potential reprisal by employers for bringing forward reasonable complaints and prohibiting employers from charging recruitment fees to workers.  Also, there is an increased focus on providing temporary foreign workers with reasonable access to health care services.

Should you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to reach out to the Employment or Immigration teams here at Baker McKenzie.

Continue Reading

Rahim Baba Salifa: The Boy Caught Between Ghana-Guinea Tensions

[Dedication: This piece is dedicated to a dear friend and law school mate, Richard Badombie Esq whose tragic passing at the hands of some armed persons has left us in shock. He would be sorely missed for his public spiritedness and warm personality]

The early days of law school was difficult. It required getting used to the case law method of teaching and learning. And adapting to the workload. There were too many cases to cram and little time to reflect.

As quickly as cases were read, they were forgotten. But despite all this, a few cases make an impression on you. And this remains with you for a long time. The Republic v Director of Prisons, Ex parte Salifa[1] was one of those cases for me.

Put the legal complexities, and jargons away and this case is simply about a child in the grip of the State and a father yelling and doing all he could to have his son back. Nothing is said of what the child is suspected of. But it was widely believed the boy was being held on the charge of subversion.

To better appreciate this story, let’s start with the overthrow of Ghana’s first President, Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. This was in 1966. A group of senior military and police officers led by Lieutenant General (retired) J.A. Ankrah led a coup to overthrow Ghana’s first president. Kwame Nkrumah, by then had left Ghana and was on his way to Hanoi, at the invitation of the Vietnamese Leader, Ho Chi Minh. After a number of stop overs, Nkrumah finally settled in Hanoi. It would not take long for news of his overthrow to reach him on 24 February 1966. It was not something Nkrumah saw coming. On 25 February 1966, Nkrumah through his Foreign Minister, Mr Alex Quaison Sackey, declared that he was still the Head of State of Ghana and that he would return soon.

Nkrumah must have known that returning to Ghana was not an option. He flew to Moscow and then from Moscow to Conakry, Guinea. This was on 2nd March 1966. There, he was made a co-President. The choice of Guinea was not strange. Nkrumah had been generous to Guinea. In 1958, Nkrumah lent 5,000,000 pounds to Guinea, and Guinea’s reciprocity was understandably natural.

 

And it was on this day, 2nd March 1966, that Nkrumah would make a speech that would not only put a strain on the diplomatic relationship between Ghana and Guinea. It would, probably, change the life of a boy – forever.

When Nkrumah arrived in Guinea, he declared:

“I have come here purposely to use Guinea as a platform to tell the world that very soon I shall be in Accra, in Ghana. I am not going to say anything against anyone, because I understand perfectly the factors at work in the world today… All we have to do is to stand firm and see how we can counteract these factors.[2]

Nkrumah’s presence in Guinea and the support he drew from the Guinean State came at a cost. The government of the National Liberation Council closed the Ghanaian embassy in Conakry. Ghana’s diplomatic mission was recalled.

But none of these moves seemed to have bothered either Nkrumah or Sekou Touré. Whiles in Guinea, Nkrumah continued to reach out to Ghanaians through radio broadcast. He would talk about returning soon to Ghana and putting to death all military leaders. “I know that when the time comes, you will crush the new regime. I know the Ghanaian people will remain faithful to me as well as to my party and my government.[3]

Sekou Toure piled up the pressure. “20,000 Guinean ex-servicemen who had been in the French Army, as well as 50,000 soldiers recruited from women members and youths of the Guinean Democratic Party” would be going to Ghana “in military convoys to help the Ghanaian people free itself from the dictatorship of the military traitors[4]”, he declared.

The NLC was on the edge. It did not take Nkrumah’s words lightly and believed in the possibility of a countercoup d’état. For instance, a soviet trawler was arrested off the Takoradi harbour as there were fears that the Soviet Union/Russians were working towards the removal of the NLC.

The above background paints a fair picture of the state of relations between Ghana and Guinea, and the political climate in Ghana. It is, therefore, not hard to see how anyone from Guinea may end up being viewed with suspicion.

The protagonist in this story was a young man by the name of Salifa or Salifu. The law reports named him as Mohammed Abdul Rahim Baba Salifa. The newspapers of the day named him as Abdul Rahim Baba Salifu. For this piece, let’s call him Salifa.

Salifa was a fifteen-year-old schoolboy sent to Guinea by his father in 1965 to study. Two years later, he ran away from his guardian. He run away because he was being maltreated by his guardian. This was not out of the blue. He had previously complained and written about the maltreatment he suffered at the hands of his Guinean guardian – Dr Oury. His father had letters to show. There was, therefore, an established pattern of abuse and mistreatment. So, he chose to flee.

He did not come to Ghana directly. His first stop was Sierra Leone where he asked the Ghanaian High Commissioner to help him return to his parents in Ghana. He got the help he asked for. But not in the way he expected. He arrived in Ghana in June 1967. But once he touched down, he was arrested by the police and detained at the Ussher Fort Prison. He was not charged with any criminal offence. He was just imprisoned. He was home but could not get home. The law report did not give any reason for his arrest. Neither did the newspapers. It was widely rumoured and believed that he was being held simply because he had arrived from Guinea. Others rumoured that he might have been an agent of the Nkrumah sent to deliver some messages to Nkrumah loyalists in Ghana.

With his son at the Ussher Fort prison, his father attempted to do the very natural thing: get his son out of jail. A year after Salifa’s detention (i.e., in June 1968), his father engaged a lawyer to compel the prison authorities to produce his son. A date was scheduled for the hearing. The Director of Prisons showed up. He had a decree signed by the Chairman of the National Liberation Council supposedly authorizing the arrest and detention of Salifa.

Salifa’s lawyer challenged the validity of the decree issued by General Ankrah on the grounds that the decree was undated and not gazetted. Salifa’s lawyer, John Lynes an Australian who had come to settle in Ghana and would eventually be deported, argued that the decree did not mention Salifa’s name and therefore it could not have applied to him. The learned High Court judge, Anterkyi J agreed with Salifa’s lawyer and concluded that the decree authorizing the arrest and detention of Salifa was faulty and not compliant with the National Liberation Council’s own proclamation. On that basis, Salifa was released.

But not for long.

He was immediately re-arrested and brought before a different court. The first case was handled by Mr. K. Gyeke-Darko, a Principal State Attorney, who was famous for prosecuting several coup plot trials. In the re-arrest proceedings, the Attorney-General, Victor Owusu, and the Director for Public Prosecutions were in court. The presence of the Attorney-General and the Director for Public Prosecutions sums up the importance the NLC placed on this case.

Mr. Victor Owusu, as quoted in the 11th July 1968 Daily Graphic, argued that the NLC government had unlimited powers and was “more powerful than the colonial government and even the Government of independent Ghana and its Parliament”. Long story short, the NLC could not whatever it wanted to do, including arresting a seventeen-year-old boy without charge and lawful basis. The second court, presided over by Justice V.C.R.A.C Crabbe upheld the validity of the same detention order, and Salifa was behind bars again. And this is where the story ends.

 

We only get an insight into Salifa’s thinking in a letter he wrote to his father. In his own words he writes:

“Please, father, I will like you to know that when I was coming I reported myself to the Ghana High Commissioner in Sierra Leone that I am a seventeen-year old student who has been to Guinea in 1965 October (i.e. during the old government) and wanted to come back to Ghana and stay with my parents, where I will be able to continue my studies. Well, this man (the High Commissioner) gave me a ticket, prepared my travelling certificate and helped me to embark into the plane for Ghana – with all my loyalty I am arrested.

Everything is clear, I think, that if I were coming to do something against the government I would not have passed through the Ghana High Commissioner in Sierra Leone, but, as I said, I am destined to be arrested. So, leave everything to God, father.

Please, whenever you receive a letter from Oury saying that I have run away, take that letter to the Special Branch (C.I.D.) with my letters which tell you that I am in prison in Ghana, so you have come to beg them torelease me because I am innocent and I am a student, I am not interested in politics.”

Captured in the above letter is a complex and conflicting set of emotions. Salifa asserts his innocence, comes to terms with his circumstances, attempts to console the father, and somewhere in there wishes that his guardian in Guinea Dr. Oury will write to the Ghanaian authorities to corroborate his story and hopefully get him released.

Not much is known of the fate of Salifa. Did he die? Did he survive the turbulent periods in incarceration? How long was he there? Was he eventually released? Did he finally get to know the charges levelled against him? What kind of life did he live afterwards? It is hard to tell. It has been past half of a century since the events described in this piece took place. And sadly, Salifa’s story is still waiting to be told – in full.

***: I wish to thank Mr. Fui Tsikata of Reindorf Chambers for his thoughts and insight on the subject. Also, my gratitude goes to Oliver Barker Vormawor and Ama Asare Korang for reviewing earlier drafts of this piece.

[1] [1968] GLR 630

[2]Keesing’s contemporary archives, March 12-19, pg. (21275) http://web.stanford.edu/group/tomzgroup/pmwiki/uploads/1408-1966-Keesings-a-EYJ.pdf

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid


Samuel Alesu-Dordzi is an Editor of the Ghana Law Hub.


Continue Reading

Why the U.S. Virgin Islands will never be a “State.” – Alton Drew, Consiglieri

For the past two decades or so, the Virgin Islands of the United States (USVI) has been discussing its status in relation to the United States and the rest of the world.  The USVI has tussled between independence, U.S. statehood, and continuing as an unincorporated territory.  Based on comments from Virgin Islanders regarding the recent runoff elections in Georgia, I am off the opinion that the USVI has no intention of creating its own “state of being” and prefers to remain an unincorporated territory.

Every Virgin Islander to a fault was emotionally invested in seeing the incumbent Georgia senator, Raphael Warnock, be returned to the U.S. Senate this coming January.  Mr Warnock was able to squeak out a 2.76 percentage point victory over Herschel Walker, the former University of Georgia running back and Heisman Trophy winner.  Virgin Islanders have been expressing elation for the past 24 hours and during that time I have been asking myself, “Why?”

Mr Warnock, to my knowledge, has not introduced or co-sponsored any legislation that supports the USVI.  Other than being invited to be the commencement speaker at the 2021 University of the Virgin Islands’ graduation ceremony, I have seen no political connection to the territory.

Virgin Islanders’ excitement over Mr Warnock appears to boil down to two things: race and pro-Democratic Party sentiment.

Although Mr Warnock’s opponent was black, the enchantment with Mr Warnock stems back to his special election win that seated him in the US Senate in 2021.  USVI governor Albert Bryan congratulated Mr Warnock for that win citing that Mr Warnock was not only the first black to represent Georgia in the U.S. Senate, but was the first black Democrat from a southern state to be elected to the U.S. Senate.  

Governor Bryan did not pass up the opportunity to make the race connection, saying that his pride in Mr Warnock’s win was based on being, at the time, the “only Black governor in the United States.”  So important to the governor was the need to make the racial link that he was willing to overlook the fact that the USVI is not in the United States, but an unincorporated territory of the United States.

The aesthetics of race is used to connect blacks when it is convenient.  Culture, history, lineage, and geography separate black Americans from black Virgin Islanders.  That natural divide is quickly overlooked, however, where political points can be scored.

And speaking of politics, there is the irrational allegiance to political parties.  The USVI has a population of roughly 106,000 people.  In my opinion, that population cannot support or afford partisan politics.  During local elections in Atlanta, a city of almost 500,000, candidates do not run as Democrats or Republicans.  Why a smaller jurisdiction such as the USVI would resort to three political parties is beyond me.  Partisan politics only seeds more division in a resource-strapped jurisdiction where what is needed is more cooperation.

I can only argue that the USVI wants to take the opportunity to look more like the United States.

But wanting to look like the United States while espousing political allegiances with blacks with whom the territory’s blacks have no cultural, lineal, or historical ties results in a jurisdiction that has no identity of its own.  You need a self-identity in order to create a “state.”  The State is the source of a people’s philosophy and narrative.  The rules for how the people are governed spring out of the philosophy and narrative.  Without self-identity, the USVI settles for trying to be a carbon copy of the United States.

This lack of USVI self-identity works for the United States. The United States wishes to expand hegemony through its own Caribbean backyard.  The phrase on the license plate, “America’s Caribbean,” sums up the status of the USVI and signals that any self-identity that may lead to an independent State has to be regulated.  Fortunately for the United States, the inhabitants of the USVI are effectively regulating away any sense of self-identity.

No. The Virgin Islands of the Unted States will never be a “State.”

Alton Drew

8 December 2022

 For more of my writings, visit my author’s page at amazon.com/author/altondrew and purchase my latest book, “Take It from a Black Man. WASPs Need to Take Back Their Country. Essays on Capital, Democracy, and Political Narrative.”    

Continue Reading

Amid ongoing protests, Iran’s morality police ‘lies in ruins,’ analyst says

Activists in Iran have begun three days of strikes and demonstrations. Many shops in major cities are closed. Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei, the head of Iran’s judiciary, is blaming rioters for intimidating business owners and says protesters who have already been condemned to death will soon be executed. 

Unrest has gripped Iran since September, when 22-year-old Mahsa Amini died in police custody. Mahsa had been detained by Iran’s so-called morality police for allegedly violating a hijab dress-code rule. 

Ali Vaez, director of the International Crisis Group’s Iran Project, spoke with The World’s host Marco Werman about the continuing unrest. 

Marco Werman: Iranian officials say they’ll crack down even harder on these protests that have rocked Iran for nearly three months now. As far as you can tell, has this call for a general nationwide strike in Iran had much traction?

Ali Vaez: It’s very difficult to say from a distance and from images that we see on the internet. But the reality is there has been three months of sustained, persistent and determined protests in Iran. And we are in a situation where the regime’s iron fist really has not been able to quell them. I think neither the regime is able to dislodge the people from the streets and prevent strikes, nor the protesters have been able to dislodge the Islamic Republic. 

Aside from those facts, do you see any signs that the balance of power is actually shifting in Iran? Are the protests giving a boost to forces that might be interested in reform? 

Not yet. And, you know, there is a sense, after 25 years of repeated efforts at reforms, that the supreme leader has repeated the sabotage and stymied, that the door to reform is closed. And I think there is now a widespread demand for fundamental, political change within the Iranian society. The problem is there is no viable alternative to the regime internally, and the protesters are mostly young revolutionaries who are on the streets and have nothing but their courage and grit in facing a regime that is bereft of mercy. But they’re not yet joined by the great part of the middle class, which is increasingly middle-aged and reluctant to face the regime in the streets. And as long as that dynamic does not change, that we have, instead of tens of thousands, millions of people on the streets, it is unlikely that the regime will budge. And most importantly, it is unlikely that we see defections, which is the one thing that could potentially weaken the regime’s hand at repressing the people.

I want to ask you for your reaction to a vague statement made this weekend by Iran’s attorney general. It generated a lot of confusion, a statement about whether officials are indeed reining in the country’s so-called morality police. What do we know at this point? 

It remains unclear. There was another official today that talked about the possibility of modernizing the way that they enforce the hijab rules. But, you know, the reality is that the morality police right now lie in ruins. And I think they would be unable to roll back what has happened in the past three months, which is that an increasing number of Iranian women are no longer complying with the rules and regulations of the dress code. That train has left the station. There’s no way they can turn it back. And there might be a de facto loosening of the rules, regardless of what they say publicly. I think they can no longer effectively enforce that rule. 

So, the statement by the attorney general in Tehran, do you think it might have been a trial balloon of sorts set up by Iranian officials, or could it be a sign of internal divisions?

I think it’s a sign of internal debate and also admittance to the fact that status quo ante is no longer rhetorical and enforceable. But the problem, I think, is more fundamental than that, that the regime believes that if it makes concessions, fundamental concessions on the ideological pillars of the Islamic Republic, of which hijab is won, it will be perceived by the population as a sign of weakness.

This interview has been lighted edited and condensed for clarity. 

Continue Reading

IUEA to Hold Summit on Law and Technology on Monday


The International University of East Africa Faculty of Law will hold a summit on Monday, 5th December where technology enthusiasts will meet to discuss, compare notes, and share ideas around one of the most important questions of today – the intersection of technology and the law.

The IUEA Tech law summit will be happening for the second time at the institution aiming to be the ‘technological university of choice’, after the inaugural event was held last year in August themed “Uganda’s technology legal framework in the New Age.”

Now, this year’s IUEA Tech law summit expands the topic of discussion to encompass the East Africa region as well, thus the theme is; “The Fourth Industrial Revolution: East Africa’s Legal Framework in the New Age.”

– article continues after AD below-

Unlike last year’s event which featured speeches from law tech experts, this year’s IUEA Law Tech summit will get the experts and industry thought leaders to present their respective researches in the form of paper presentations.

The debate on technology and its relationship with society is trending globally and East Africa is not an exception.

Questions around whether our governments are ready to regulate and harness tech for the betterment of society are hovering all over in the minds of men and women of industry.

Indeed; “When new technology is created, it ordinarily causes immediate disruption so that by the time it is carefully understood by regulators it has become obsolete and newer technologies now exist. It is an overt characteristic of our written laws that they are slow to develop let alone evolve. Often, technological innovations – whether products or services – that require regulation are regulated retrospectively rather than prospectively.” A profile of the event reads.

– article continues after AD below-

For lawyers and law students, the importance of attending the IUEA Tech Law summit and other such events can not be overstated. This is because the legal profession is in the business of representation and giving advice and certainly you can’t advise or litigate on things you don’t understand.

” … Lawyers ought to be at par with all global shifts in technology and their legal implications. They must remain up-to-date with developments in these areas, recognizing that technology cuts through all sectors of the law ranging from contracts, employment and procurement to forensic evidence, criminal investigations and human rights enforcement, among others. Therefore, understanding the complex problems revolving around technology is essential for every lawyer in Africa in order for our legal systems to be at par with the rest of the developed world.” According to the event profile.

According to the organizers of the IUEA Law Tech Summit, the event will take a full day and shall be held purely online (so you can attend in your favorite coffee shop!).

The Tech Law summit will feature great speakers – industry captains, key stakeholders, academics, regulators, and policy makers.

Paper presentations will touch the following areas including; E-commerce & the Law, Fintech & the Law, Telemedicine & the Law, Data Protection and Privacy & the Law, Criminal Justice & the Law, Digital Surveillance & the Law, Artificial Intelligence & the Law, Telecommunications & the Law, Digital Media & the Law, LegalTech, Digital Trade & the Law, Ride-hailing & the Law, RegTech andRegional Integration and Technology.

The event is open to everyone and the organizers say participants include lawyers, law students, academics and the general public.

What can you do?

First of all, go to Twitter and Facebook and follow IUEA Law Faculty to get login information when it is shared.

You can also follow The Legal Reports on Twitter and Facebook and keep refreshing our homepage to stay updated on our coverage of the event (we are tech enthusiasts too!!).

– article continues after AD below-

Of course, BUY DATA!

Article corrects in Paragraph 9 to reflect event will last a full day not three hours as initially mentioned


Continue Reading

How Election Denial Lost the Midterms

Updated on November 17 at 11:47 a.m. ET

Outside the Maricopa County tabulation center last weekend, a few dozen outraged Arizonans paced single file along the sidewalk waving KARI LAKE flags. Through megaphones, some of them denounced imaginary corruption schemes and clamored for a “redo” election. Others chanted the Lord’s Prayer, like the musicians on the Titanic playing hymns to calm the passengers.

The noteworthy thing about the Maricopa protest, though, wasn’t the scene. It was its singularity. Two years ago, shouts of “Stop the steal!” could be heard across the country in nearly every state. This year, the refrain was largely limited to one block in downtown Phoenix, where at times reporters outnumbered the demonstrators.

If any state was going to devolve into chaos after a disappointing election for Republicans, it would have been Arizona—ground zero for election denial in 2020, and where this year, primary voters nominated an entire slate of fringe election cranks to all of the state’s major offices. Instead, the midterms delivered a sure blow to the election-denial movement, both there and everywhere else: The most prominent conspiracists, such as the Arizona secretary-of-state candidate Mark Finchem and Pennsylvania’s Doug Mastriano, lost by significant margins; some of these candidates even acknowledged their losses by—surprise!—actually conceding. On Monday night, Lake was declared the loser in her race for Arizona’s governorship, adding a final note to what has seemed like a comprehensive repudiation of the denialists. And where experts and reporters had anticipated widespread election-fraud mayhem, nothing close to it has yet emerged.

It would be foolish, though, to pronounce “Stop the Steal” dead. The movement may have fizzled without Donald Trump, but if he runs again in 2024, we haven’t seen the last of it. Even if Trump isn’t on the ballot, an entire swath of the Republican Party is now open to the idea that any narrow loss can be blamed on fraud. Trust in elections among rank-and-file GOP voters remains low, and in some respects has gotten worse, according to a recent survey from the Pew Research Center. The damage inflicted in 2020 endures. “He’s broken the seal,” Sarah Longwell, the publisher of The Bulwark, told me. Election denial “is part of our politics now.”

Things could have been so much worse.

Ahead of the election, poll workers in Arizona and beyond feared for their safety, and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law reported an uptick in calls to its Election Protection hotline. In the Phoenix suburbs, armed men were patrolling ballot drop-off sites. The day before the election, I watched a group of women stake out a ballot box, studying voters through binoculars for signs of cheating. The central counting facility in downtown Phoenix was fenced off with a ring of plastic Jersey barriers, and police patrolled the streets on horseback.

Election officials in Maricopa County, who appeared very tightly wound, held a press conference to get ahead of any potential claims of election chicanery. A time-consuming vote count does not indicate fraud, they reminded the room full of reporters; ballots are processed and reviewed by bipartisan teams; tabulation machines work.

Unfortunately, events on Election Day quickly undermined those careful efforts at reassurance. The sun had not yet risen when the first handful of tabulation machines stopped reading ballots. By midday, dozens of machines were malfunctioning at polling sites throughout the county. Voters at those sites were told to feed their ballots into “Door 3,” a regrettably sinister-sounding name for a secure slot that would sort the misread ballots to be counted later. And they would be counted later, as officials reassured voters in a series of follow-up press conferences.

Voters I spoke with were understandably confused and frustrated. And the malfunctioning machines had state GOP leaders immediately taking to Twitter to suggest wrongdoing. “They are incompetent and/or engaging in malfeasance just like in 2020,” GOP Chair Kelli Ward posted. Those complaints spiraled into partisan hysteria as the counting went on. Frustrated MAGA commentators suggested that Maricopa County officials had engaged in outright corruption and “CIVIC TERRORISM.” Finchem accused them of “screwing with the election counts.”

Still, despite those initial glitches and dark mutterings, Election Day unfolded mostly without threats or funny business. Poll workers weren’t harmed, and voters were, for the most part, not intimidated. Almost everyone on the America First Secretary of State Coalition slate lost last week, including Michigan’s Kristina Karamo, who’d described Democrats as having a “satanic agenda”; Finchem, the mustachioed Oath Keeper of Arizona; and the head of the coalition himself, Nevada’s Jim Marchant.

Parroting Trump’s election lies got many Republican candidates across the finish line in their primary. Finchem’s repeated election-fraud claims won him a regular spot on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast. The former president has praised Lake’s commitment to the bit, too, reportedly telling donors that even if asked about the weather, Lake would find a way to bring the conversation back to 2020. But these wild claims proved poisonous to moderates and swing voters—polling suggests that some went to the polls explicitly to vote against deniers. We know this because many Republicans who didn’t traffic in election lies performed well: Brian Kemp beat Stacey Abrams by almost eight points in the Georgia governor’s race. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis won reelection by nearly 20 points.

Fans of democracy can take heart that of the 141 “Stop the Steal” candidates who ran for positions that oversee elections, including secretary of state, attorney general, and governor, only 14 won, according to States United Action, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for election integrity. Of those 14, only five candidates were not incumbents. “The movement is still not gaining ground,” Joanna Lydgate, the CEO of States United Action, told me.

That things didn’t turn out worse is a relief, given the chaos of 2020. But the dynamic of this year’s election was different in a few important ways. Republicans were on the defensive back then: The general election was a national referendum on their president. This year, Trump himself wasn’t on the ballot—whereas, in 2020, he had spent months priming the base to blame polling fraud if he lost. It’s clear now that nobody does Stop the Steal like 45.

“The thing that gives you power as an election denier is that people believe you, and Trump was able to make people believe him,” Longwell told me. Few other candidates have that power, and none in this midterm election could nationalize the issue as he did in the presidential contest. This time, the GOP had no central character over whom Trump supporters could feel outraged.

Yet the election-fraud fires that Trump and his allies have fanned for so long will not be easily extinguished. If repeated audits and cold evidence haven’t done enough to deter conspiracists these past two years, then a disappointing midterm cycle won’t dissuade them either.

Election deniers didn’t win in swing states, but elsewhere they did. Four of them will oversee elections in Indiana, Wyoming, Alabama, and South Dakota. More than 200 Republicans running for Congress and statewide positions who’d questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election won or retained their office last week, including more than 180 in the House. Other election deniers won at the state level in ultraconservative districts across the country. These ruby-red areas might sink deeper into denial, creating islands where both voters and officials are debilitatingly distrustful of elections.

Take Cochise County, Arizona. There, 170 miles southeast of Phoenix, some GOP election officials have been hankering to do a full hand-count audit in the election. Paradoxically, Republican candidates won handily there both this year and in 2020, so no obvious motive for distrusting the results is apparent. But the years-long drumbeat of misinformation from the state GOP chair, Ward, and her allied band of election-fraud kooks have nurtured a deep suspicion of the whole process.

Republican leaders in Arizona don’t believe in machine tabulation and view hand counts as the purest, most accurate way to tally votes—never mind the extensive evidence that the opposite is true. This year, Cochise County tried to forge ahead with a full hand-count audit, even after a judge ordered local officials not to. Only a timely ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court last week kept them from carrying one out. “What I’ll be doing over the next two years is looking at these counties that have gone really hard to the right,” Jessica Huseman, the editorial director of Votebeat, a nonpartisan election-news outlet, told me. “Because there’s no one to push back.”

Even in states where election deniers lost, voters have been primed to suspect outcomes they don’t like, glitches they don’t understand, and delays in counting. “If [Lake] doesn’t announce that she’s going to win tonight, we might have to go through like a week or so of shenanigans—the same shenanigans that they pulled in 2020,” Stephen Tenner, a former actor from New York, told me at a lavish GOP Election Night party in Scottsdale. “We’re waiting for it this time; we weren’t ready last time. So we’re going to catch the fraud.”

Other Republicans I interviewed were less persuaded of the likelihood of fraud, but were comfortable entertaining the idea. “I’d like to go back to same-day voting and paper ballots. There are problems with machines,” a man named William from Phoenix, who declined to give his last name, told me at the party. Would he blame fraud if Republicans lost? I asked. “Well, there were problems with the elections two years ago,” he said, adding that, this time around, Secretary of State Katie Hobbs should have recused herself from official duties during the election. “I would be hesitant to say I thought [this one] was completely honest.”

The thing about trust is that it’s painstakingly hard to build and relatively easy to demolish. Election denial is now a chronic wound in America’s body politic, only partially healed, and ready to reopen—red and raw—whenever circumstances permit. Those circumstances may arise sooner rather than later if Trump is on the ballot again in 2024. Even if he isn’t, the former president has already broken the tradition of gracious presidential concessions and peaceful transfers of power. He’s encouraged a populist animus toward institutions that will likely remain a litmus test for future Republican candidates. And more than anything, Trump has created a blueprint for exploiting the messiness and complexity of America’s elections. An audience for this type of exploitation is still out there, if Republicans want to take advantage of it.

On Monday, after Maricopa County released a decisive batch of ballots that led all major news networks to declare Hobbs the next governor of Arizona, a few members of Team Lake sprang into action to ensure that any ballots with errors were quickly cured. That’s a standard and legitimate procedure in elections, and can be helpful in especially close ones. But other Republicans continued to follow the denialist script. Ward accused Maricopa County of voter suppression. Finchem, the failed secretary-of-state candidate, began to do the impossible calculations. “I should win by 3% and @KariLake should win by 11%,” he tweeted. “If that doesn’t happen you know the real story.”

Lake’s own account was silent for more than an hour after the networks had called the race. After all of this, would this cycle’s Stop the Steal standard-bearer actually concede? The answer came at 10:30 p.m. eastern, with a simple tweet: “Arizonans know BS when they see it,” Lake wrote.


This article originally misstated the number of election deniers who ran for office.

Continue Reading