2011年6月26日星期日

Egypt court sentences ex-trade minister to 5 years in jail (Reuters)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

CAIRO (Reuters) – An Egyptian court convicted former Trade Minister Rachid Mohamed Rachid in absentia on Saturday and sentenced him to 5 years in prison for profiteering and squandering public funds, the state news agency MENA said.

Rachid, a regular at the World Economic Forum in Davos, lost his job in late January and fled abroad, only days after the eruption of the mass uprising that later ousted Hosni Mubarak.

He was an important face for Egypt in the commodities market as former minister of trade overseeing global wheat prices in the world's biggest wheat-importing country.

The Cairo court ruled that Rachid unlawfully seized public money from a government export development fund, leading to a waste of public funds, MENA said.

The court also ordered him to pay 9.385 million Egyptian pounds ($1.57 million) in fines, MENA added. A judicial source told Reuters the court further ordered the former minister to return a similar amount.

Egyptian prosecutors filed formal charges against former officials and businessmen of abusing their position to enrich themselves and misusing public money after the uprising that toppled Mubarak in February.

Earlier this month, a Cairo court convicted former finance minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali in absentia and sentenced him to 30 years in prison for profiteering and abusing state and private assets.

Boutros-Ghali is widely viewed in Egypt as a public face of a government that enriched the wealthy at the expense of the poor.

The whereabouts of Rachid and Boutros-Ghali are unknown.

In another case brought against Rachid in February, prosecutors accused him of improperly giving production licenses to steel magnate Ahmed Ezz, chairman of Egypt's biggest steel maker Ezz Steel.

Ezz and Rachid have denied wrongdoing.

(Reporting by Sherine El Madany; Additional reporting by Omar Fahmy; editing by Mark Heinrich)


View the original article here

Kimberley grants Zimbabwe conditional diamond sale (AFP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

HARARE (AFP) – The Kimberley Process against "blood diamonds" will allow Zimbabwe to sell some diamonds from its controversial Marange fields, in a decision that left the watchdog sharply divided Friday.

Rights groups walked out of the Kimberley meeting Thursday in Kinshasa, where African countries, China and India supported the decision, which had been opposed by Western nations, rights groups and the industry.

"We have made a breakthrough," Zimbabwe mines minister Obert Mpofu told the state-run Herald newspaper in Harare.

The Kimberley Process had endorsed exports from the two mines operated by Marange Resources and Mbada Diamonds "with immediate effect without supervision," he said.

The decision taken by Mathieu Yamba of the Democratic Republic of Congo, who holds Kimberley's rotating chair, appears to allow sales from the two firms in Marange once a team of two monitors have signed off on the deal.

Currently five licensed firms operate in Marange, but only three are mining at full throttle, while the other two say they have only found minimal reserves after exploration.

US-based diamond group Rapaport Trade quickly advised members not to trade in the Marange gems.

"Marange goods (are) expected to be released shortly," Rapaport said in an advisory to members. "Responsible buyers should require supplier guarantee that they are not selling these diamonds to them."

Western companies fear the bad press that comes with "blood diamonds" -- gems sold to finance armed conflicts.

Western nations and rights groups pushed for the Kimberley Process (KP), originally meant to cut off financing for brutal rebellions in Liberia and Sierra Leone, to bar trade in any diamonds tainted by violence and abuses.

But companies in China, India and the Middle East do not face the same public pressure from their customers and have proved more eager to tap into what has been touted as Africa's biggest diamond find of the decade.

And other African nations have been reluctant to apply the same standard to a sitting government as to armed rebels.

Campaigning groups including Global Witness and Partnership Africa Canada walked out of the meeting in outrage at the decision, arguing that the ruling undermined the scheme's credibility.

In a joint statement, the groups said Kimberley's decision had failed to protect civilians living and working in Marange and so the scheme was not meeting its most basic commitment.

"It does not prevent diamonds from fuelling violence and human rights violations," they said.

Britain's Africa minister Henry Bellingham also criticised the move, contradicting the statement issued at the Kimberley Process meeting that there had been a consensus on the question.

"This is not the case as the proposals fell well short of offering a credible mechanism for ensuring that only Kimberley Process compliant diamonds could be exported from Zimbabwe," he said in a statement.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, in a more restrained statement, nevertheless also denied that the meeting had reached a consensus on the matter, so the decision "is not therefore valid under KP rules and procedures."

The Marange fields have been at the centre of a years-long controversy over abuses by Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe's military.

Monitors say the military seized control of the fields in late 2008, violently evicting tens of thousands of small miners and then beating and raping civilians to force them to mine the gems.

Zimbabwe conducted a KP monitored sale last year, although the move was opposed by countries including Canada and United States.

That sale raised $100 million dollars according to government figures, after selling 400,000 carats.


View the original article here

Egypt must 'scrap' Mubarak-era laws: Amnesty (AFP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

CAIRO (AFP) – Egypt must "scrap" the most reviled laws of former president Hosni Mubarak's era if it wants to ensure free and fair parliamentary elections in September, the secretary general of Amnesty International said on Saturday.

Speaking to reporters in Cairo, Salil Shetty expressed concern over the use of military courts to try civilians and the failure to lift a state of emergency after the ouster of Mubarak's regime in February.

These mechanisms alongside laws restricting freedom of the press and assembly could "distort the elections" and do not allow "a free and fair platform for the elections," Shetty said.

"We feel that all of these laws should be scrapped in order to have a proper election which allows all voices to be able to surface in an equal manner."

Amnesty International's secretary general said military courts had tried between 7,000-10,000 civilians since Egypt's Supreme Military Council took over power after Mubarak quit on February 11.

Military trials for civilians "are not in line with international fair trial standards," he said because they are not independent, provide no transparency and the system of defence is limited.

Emergency law, particularly provisions which for decades provided security forces and police great leeway to conduct arrests, "is simply not required," he said, adding that the existing penal code was enough to guarantee public order.

During his visit to Egypt, Shetty met representatives of the interior ministry and the foreign ministry as well as rights activists and relatives of those who died in the 18-day popular that toppled the Mubarak regime.

Later on Saturday he was due to meet Deputy Prime Minister Yehia al-Gamal and Arab League chief and presidential hopeful Amr Mussa.

Shetty said the toppling of Mubarak's authoritarian regime had paved the way for "significant changes" in Egypt including the release of the majority of political prisoners.

"If you talk to people there is no question it's much freer now to move, there is more media freedom. There is a big change and we have to acknowledge that."


View the original article here

Tea party reps split on war cash for US in Libya (AP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

WASHINGTON – The House's tea party caucus split on a major foreign policy vote Friday — whether to cut off money for air attacks in Libya — revealing a divide on the philosophical question of how often and under what terms the U.S. should intervene in foreign conflicts.

The tea party Republicans overwhelmingly oppose President Barack Obama's decision to participate in the NATO-led operation in Libya without consulting Congress. But 27 of the caucus' 59 members voted against a GOP-led bill to strip federal dollars from part of the American effort there.

The group's chairwoman, Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, was among those who voted no. The GOP presidential hopeful said she opposed the bill because it stopped short of halting all United States spending on the conflict.

"There was an opportunity today to limit funding to a Libyan operation, but I could not support it because it does not go far enough. Funds must be fully cut off to the president's involvement in Libya," she said in a statement.

Her role in the failure of the GOP bill was sorely noted by tea partiers outside the Beltway.

"We have no congressional authorization for military action in Libya, but our brilliant GOP leadership did not cut off funding," wrote Judson Phillips on a blog for one group, Tea Party Nation. "Could they possibly be any more gutless?"

The bill would have barred attacks by pilotless drones and other airstrikes but allowed the United States to continue actions in support of NATO. The full House defeated it, 238-180.

The 31-27 split among members of the caucus listed on Bachmann's website revealed that the populist movement committed to cutting federal spending is less united on foreign policy — even when the question is about federal spending.

The tea party caucus members split along the same arguments as the rest of the House over philosophical questions of when the U.S. should intervene in foreign conflict, when it should choose isolationism — and what to do when the president does not consult Congress before engaging.

On that last question, there was little debate. With one exception, the tea party caucus members voted to reject Obama's engagement in an earlier vote on whether to authorize it. That measure also failed, 295-123. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, was the only tea party caucus member to vote to authorize Obama's actions in Libya.

When the House moved on to the GOP-led measure to defund the conflict, the tea party caucus, like the rest of the chamber, sent mixed signals. After overwhelmingly rejecting Obama's engagement in Libya, the House defeated the GOP proposal to bar funding for drone attacks and other airstrikes, 238-180.

One reason for the unusual divide: Republican leaders did not lobby — or "whip"_ members on what they considered a vote of conscience. Another: The loosely affiliated tea party movement's preferences were apparently unknown to members of the caucus.

"I don't know, do they have a position?" asked Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., who voted against cutting off funding for Libya operations.

The caucus split on the second bill, with some members, like Rep. Todd Aiken, choosing an isolationist approach.

"While the human rights concerns in Libya are undeniable, there are dozens of countries around the world that are doing similar or worse things to their citizens," the Missouri Republican said. "We are not the world's police force, and we should not be sending our forces into combat without a clear connection to our national interests."

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., joined Bachmann and 25 other caucus members in voting no to stripping funding.

"Once American military personnel are engaged in hostilities, this Congress has an obligation to stand by our troops," Pence said.

Tea party caucus member Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., did not vote.


View the original article here

Ex-Egypt trade minister sentenced for embezzlement (AFP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

CAIRO (AFP) – Former Egyptian trade and industry minister Rashid Mohammed Rashid was sentenced in absentia on Saturday to five years in prison for embezzlement of public funds, state news agency Mena reported.

Rashid, who is the subject of an international search warrant, was also ordered to pay a fine of more than nine million Egyptian pounds (over a million euros).

Cairo's criminal court found Rashid guilty of embezzling funds from the export development fund.

Several businessmen and officials of Hosni Mubarak's regime, which was toppled February 11 by a popular uprising, are under investigation for embezzlement and corruption.

Uprooting corruption was and remains one of the central demands of the activist who pushed for Mubarak's departure.

Mubarak alongside his sons Alaa and Gamal is set to face trial on August 3 on charges of corruption and of ordering the killing of protesters during the uprising in January and February that toppled the veteran leader.

Former Egyptian finance minister Yussef Boutros Ghali was sentenced to 30 years in prison in absentia on corruption charges on June 4.


View the original article here

House rebukes Obama but won't halt funds for Libya (AP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

WASHINGTON – Challenging presidential power, a defiant U.S. House voted overwhelmingly Friday to deny President Barack Obama the authority to wage war against Libya. But Republicans fell short in an effort to actually cut off funds for the operation in a constitutional showdown reflecting both political differences and unease over American involvement.

In a repudiation of their commander in chief, House members rejected a measure to authorize the Libya mission for a year while prohibiting U.S. ground forces in the North African nation, a resolution Obama had said he would welcome.

The vote was 295-123 with 70 Democrats abandoning the president just one day after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had made an unusual appeal to rank-and-file members. A Senate committee is to consider the same resolution next Tuesday and is expected to support it, raising the prospect of conflicting messages from Congress.

Friday's votes showed lawmakers' concerns about an open-ended U.S. commitment to a civil war between Moammar Gadhafi and rebel forces looking to oust him — as well as growing weariness among Americans with drawn-out conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In addition, the resounding number rejecting the authority resolution was a clear sign of anger toward the president for failing to seek congressional consent for the operation within 60 days, as stated in the 1973 War Powers Resolution. Republicans and Democrats argued that an arrogant Obama had run roughshod over the Constitution, ignoring the authority of the legislative branch that the founding fathers had insisted has the power to declare war.

While Republican as well as Democratic presidents have often ignored the War Powers Resolution, a frustrated House voted earlier this month to rebuke Obama for failing to provide a "compelling rationale" for the Libyan mission and for launching U.S. military forces without congressional approval. They requested a report to Congress on the operation.

Obama further incensed lawmakers last week when he said he didn't need authorization because the operation did not rise to full-blown hostilities, a decision he reached by overruling some of his advisers.

It's not about Gadhafi, foes of the authorization said.

"I support the removal of the Libyan regime. I support the president's authority as commander in chief, but when the president chooses to challenge the powers of the Congress I, as speaker of the House, will defend the constitutional authority of the legislature," said Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Added Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Fla.: "The last thing that we want as Americans is for some president, whether it's this president or some future president, to be able to pick fights around the world without any debate from another branch of government."

The rejected money-cutoff bill, sponsored by Rooney, would have barred drone attacks and airstrikes but allowed the United States to continue actions in support of the NATO-led operation such as intelligence gathering, refueling and reconnaissance. The effort to cut off money was defeated, 238-180. While GOP leaders backed the measure, they didn't pressure Republicans to support it.

Supporting Obama, Democrats opposed to the votes argued that they would empower Gadhafi, aggravate NATO allies desperately needed in the fight in Afghanistan and send a dispiriting message to those who led the Arab spring uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere.

They reminded lawmakers of Gadhafi's role in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and said he had American blood on his hands.

"The message will go all over the world, the message will go to Moammar Gadhafi, the message will go to our NATO allies, the message will go to every nation of the world that America does not keep faith with its allies," said Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat in the House.

The authorization vote marked the first time since 1999 that either chamber had voted against backing a military action. The last time was to limit President Bill Clinton's authority to use ground forces in Kosovo. There will be no immediate effect on American involvement in the NATO-led mission in Libya, the same as in 1999.

Since NATO took command of the operation in early April, the U.S. role has largely been limited to support efforts such as intelligence and electronic warfare. However, the U.S. has launched airstrikes and drone attacks, flying more than 3,200 sorties. The effort has included 39 drone attacks and 80 strikes with jet fighters.

The bill to cut off funds failed, in part, because several Republicans feared that even a vote for limited authorization for a NATO support mission amounted to support for the war effort.

"By dictating to President Obama how he can use American military forces in support of the NATO effort in Libya, we would authorize him to continue the same mission he has been carrying out for the past three months without congressional approval," said Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J.

The votes Friday were not the last word in the House. Lawmakers plan to target money for Libya when the House considers the defense spending bill the week of July 4.

Reacting to the votes, Clinton said she would have preferred a different outcome on the authorization vote but was "gratified that the House decisively rejected" the bill to cut funds.

"We need to stand together across party lines and across both branches of government with the Libyan people and with our friends and allies and against Gadhafi," Clinton said.

In Benghazi, Libya, rebel spokesman Jalal el-Gallal, said he didn't know why the House voted against the authorization measure.

"America is the beating heart of democracy and should support the birth of a democracy in our time," he said. "I believe the American people will put the pressure on the government to change its mind."

White House spokesman Jay Carney said, "We think now is not the time to send the kind of mixed message that it sends when we're working with our allies to achieve the goals that we believe that are widely shared in Congress: protecting civilians in Libya, enforcing a no-fly zone, enforcing an arms embargo and further putting pressure on Gadhafi."

The authorization resolution mirrors a Senate measure sponsored by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and John McCain, R-Ariz. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider that resolution on Tuesday, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has indicated it has the panel's support.

___

Associated Press writers Jim Abrams, Lolita C. Baldor and Matthew Lee in Washington and Hadeel al-Shalchi in Libya contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Egypt withdraws request for IMF, World Bank loans (AFP)

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中,找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件,或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

CAIRO (AFP) – Egypt has withdrawn its loan request to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, an adviser to Finance Minister Samir Radwan told AFP on Saturday.

"We have decided not to have recourse to loans from the international financial institutions," Abdelfattah al-Gebali said.

He said the decision was taken in response to the "pressure of public opinion," which has been largely hostile to the loan request, and after the submission of a new draft budget for 2011-2012 that foresees a reduction in public spending.

"The government has a policy of budget reductions," he added, saying it had decided to turn to local loans, financial aid and grants to finance its deficit.

Earlier this month, the finance minister announced that the IMF had granted Egypt a loan of three billion dollars over 12 months to help put its economy back on track.

"Egypt announces the end of negotiations with the IMF and the clinching of an agreement with the fund to relaunch the Egyptian economy," Radwan told reporters on June 5.

The two parties agreed to a "three-billion-dollar loan over 12 months... with an interest rate of 1.5 percent," he said, adding that the loan would help partly offset a budget deficit of $28 billion.

The Egyptian economy, which depends in large part on tourism, has seen a dramatic drop in tourist arrivals and near zero economic growth during and after the revolt that ousted former president Hosni Mubarak in February.

Tens of thousands of Egyptian workers in Libya, who used to send money back to their families in Egypt, also had to flee the conflict in the neighbouring north African nation.

Egypt, which estimates it needs between 10 and 12 billion dollars in international funding to keep it going until mid-2012, was courting loans worth roughly $6 billion from the IMF and the World Bank.

Cairo has said two Gulf countries will also help boost Egypt's economy.

Saudi Arabia has pledged four billion dollars in assistance in the form of long-term loans and grants, while Qatar pledged to invest $10 billion, according to Egyptian authorities.


View the original article here