Prime minister Narendra Modi attended the groundbreaking ceremony on Thursday (10) for a huge new Indian parliament, the centrepiece of a grand but contentious redevelopment of New Delhi's colonial-era core.
Critics say the 200 billion rupees ($2.7 billion) that the government is reportedly spending on the vast project could be better directed to fighting Covid-19 and repairing the pandemic-battered economy.
Modi performed Hindu rites to Sanskrit chants in a ceremony that was largely symbolic as India's top court has banned any construction work until a raft of legal petitions against the mega-project are dealt with.
The prime minister's decision to perform a Hindu ceremony drew fire from some critics as India's parliament is meant to safeguard the officially secular traditions of the multi-faith democracy of 1.3 billion people.
It also came as tens of thousands of farmers angry at new agricultural laws blockade the capital, in a major challenge to the authority of Modi and his reform agenda.
Due for completion in 2022 when India marks 75 years of independence, the much larger new parliament will replace an old building that Modi said Thursday "needs rest".
Designed by British architect Edwin Lutyens in the early 20th century as the commanding centrepiece of the Raj, the area also comprises the grand Rajpath boulevard, the president's residence, government offices, the national museum and the India Gate war memorial.
Modi's root-and-branch overhaul of the sweeping, tree-lined and lawned vista will see it enclosed by rows of imposing new government buildings and the prime minister's office shifted and enlarged.
Some of the old parliament will be "retrofitted" and continue to be used for government business, while other buildings will reportedly be turned into museums. Some will be demolished.
"Today is a historic day. It is a milestone in India's democratic journey," Modi, 70, said in a speech.
"The old parliament building has seen India's journey from colonial times to an independent nation... It is our responsibility to give 21st-century India a new parliament building."
But there has been a chorus of criticism, not just against the price tag, which is expected to be 9.7 billion rupees ($130 million) for the triangular parliament complex alone.
Tikender Singh Panwar, an opposition politician and an expert on urbanisation, told AFP the redevelopment was a "big scandal in the making".
"Curiously, for a project of this significance, size and cost, the details are sketchy... I see this as a fascist leader wanting to leave an imprint of his glory on Delhi," he said.
- 'One man's dream' -
Political commentator Arati Jerath said the redevelopment signalled the "making of a new India that will bear Modi's imprint".
"This money could have been well spent on healing and repairing the economy (and) creating jobs but instead of which it is being spent on fulfilling one man's grandiose dreams of what a new India should look like."
There have also been allegations the new parliament's architect was chosen because he is a close friend of Modi, accusations the government denies.
Some opposition parties criticised Modi's participation in a Hindu ceremony, flanked by saffron-robed priests chanting in Sanskrit, the classical language that his government wants to revive.
Hindus form the majority of India's population and many religious minorities, in particular the 200 million Muslims, fear that Modi wants to remould India as a Hindu nation.
But the inauguration was also attended by representatives of other faiths who offered prayers after Modi led the main ceremony live on national television.
The project has also run into legal trouble with several petitions in India's top court questioning its validity on the grounds of land and environmental rules.
The Supreme Court has allowed paperwork and other procedures -- including Thursday's ceremony -- to go ahead but construction cannot begin until a ruling.
THE US State Department on Monday said it was imposing visa restrictions on owners and staff of travel agencies in India who it says knowingly facilitate illegal migration to the United States.
An unspecified number of individuals associated with these travel agencies are being subjected to visa bans under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The action is based on information collected by the US mission in India, according to department spokesperson Tammy Bruce.
Washington often imposes such visa restrictions without naming the individuals involved.
"We will continue to take steps to impose visa restrictions against owners, executives, and senior officials of travel agencies to cut off alien smuggling networks," Bruce said. She did not provide details on how the travel agents had facilitated illegal migration.
The action is part of a broader effort under president Donald Trump's administration to curb migration to the United States and deport undocumented immigrants already in the country.
The US embassy in New Delhi has also issued repeated warnings on its social media platforms, advising Indian nationals visiting the United States not to overstay their authorised period of stay. It warned that overstaying could lead to deportation and a permanent ban from entering the country.
The Spain Airbnb crackdown has led to more than 65,000 holiday rental listings being removed from the platform, as the Spanish government takes firm action to address breaches in national regulations and respond to growing housing concerns.
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs ordered the mass delisting due to thousands of properties lacking valid licence numbers, having unclear ownership records, or showing discrepancies between listed information and official housing databases. The government said these violations warranted immediate removal from Airbnb’s platform.
This action is part of a wider effort to bring order to Spain’s short-term rental sector and alleviate the country's worsening housing affordability crisis, especially in major tourist destinations such as Madrid, Andalusia and Catalonia, where the volume of tourist rentals has surged.
Consumer Affairs Minister Pablo Bustinduy said the government aimed to end what he described as a “lack of control” and growing “illegality” in the holiday rentals market. “No more excuses. Enough with protecting those who make a business out of the right to housing in our country,” he said during a press briefing.
The decision follows a broader trend of local authorities in Spain cracking down on tourist rentals. In 2023, the city of Barcelona announced a plan to eliminate all 10,000 of its licensed short-term lets by 2028, arguing that housing must be prioritised for long-term residents rather than tourists.
The Spain Airbnb crackdown reflects rising pressure on public officials to act, as protests continue over high rents and property prices, particularly in cities with large tourism industries. Many residents and campaigners argue that the expansion of short-term rentals has significantly reduced the availability of affordable housing.
- YouTubeYouTube/ WGN News
According to official data, there were approximately 321,000 licensed holiday rental properties across Spain as of November 2023, representing a 15% increase compared to 2020. Authorities believe many more operate without licences, prompting the Consumer Affairs Ministry to open a formal investigation into Airbnb in December.
In response to earlier scrutiny, Airbnb said it requires hosts to confirm they have permission to rent their properties and that they follow local laws. However, the company also claimed the government had not provided a clear list of non-compliant listings. It added that not all owners are required to hold a licence and questioned whether the ministry had the authority to regulate digital platforms.
Airbnb has yet to issue a formal response to the latest action.
The Spain Airbnb crackdown aligns with similar efforts across Europe, including in Portugal, the Netherlands and parts of Italy, where governments are introducing stricter regulations on short-term rentals in a bid to balance tourism with long-term housing needs.
As Spain continues to grapple with housing shortages and rising costs, the government has made clear that further measures may follow to ensure platforms and property owners comply with national laws.
Keep ReadingShow less
The man stood up during a Teams call to adjust a cable behind his computer, without wearing any trousers.
A MANAGER was sacked from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) after accidentally flashing his genitals during a video call, an employment tribunal has ruled.
The digital production manager, referred to as DB in the tribunal’s ruling, was earning £58,580 a year when the incident occurred. He stood up during a Teams call to adjust a cable behind his computer, without wearing any trousers, The Telegraph reported.
The tribunal said: “During the call, after approximately three minutes 26 seconds, the claimant stood to adjust a cable behind the computer and revealed he was wearing nothing from the waist down. His genitals were visible.”
Two Capgemini consultants based in India, who were on the call, complained to the FSCS the following week. An internal investigation concluded the staffer was “inappropriately dressed” and “naked from the waist down.”
DB, born in India, in the employment tribunal’s ruling, told his line manager in an email that he did not realise his camera was on and closed his laptop when he noticed. He was dismissed in January 2024 for breaching FSCS rules requiring employees to be dressed appropriately.
He later filed a complaint for unfair dismissal and racial discrimination. The tribunal ruled the dismissal was lawful and said his discrimination claims were not well founded, The Telegraph reported.
Keep ReadingShow less
He was jailed in October after admitting to breaching an injunction that barred him from repeating false claims about a Syrian refugee who had successfully sued him for libel. (Photo: Getty Images)
STEPHEN YAXLEY-LENNON, also known as Tommy Robinson, is set to be released from prison within a week after the High Court reduced his 18-month sentence for contempt of court.
The far-right anti-Islam activist was jailed in October after admitting to breaching an injunction that barred him from repeating false claims about a Syrian refugee who had successfully sued him for libel.
The Solicitor General had taken legal action against Yaxley-Lennon for comments made in online interviews and a documentary titled Silenced, which was viewed millions of times and shown in Trafalgar Square in July.
The sentence was made up of a 14-month punitive element and a four-month coercive element. Mr Justice Jeremy Johnson had said the four-month part could be lifted if Yaxley-Lennon complied with the court order to remove Silenced and related content from social media and other platforms.
On Tuesday, Yaxley-Lennon appeared via video link from HMP Woodhill in Milton Keynes. His lawyer, Alex Di Francesco, told the court that Silenced had been removed from accounts under his control and that requests were made to remove other interviews where the false allegations were repeated.
Judge Johnson ruled that Yaxley-Lennon had “purged” his contempt. “The practical effect is that the defendant will be released once he has completed the punitive element, which I understand will be within the next week,” he said. The original release date had been set for 26 July, but it has now been moved up to 26 May.
The judge noted that while there was “an absence of contrition or remorse”, Yaxley-Lennon had given assurances that he would comply with the injunction in the future and understood the consequences of breaching it again. The court accepted that he had shown a “change in attitude” and had taken steps to comply with the order.
Yaxley-Lennon, 42, was jailed for 10 admitted breaches of the injunction after two contempt of court claims were brought against him by the Solicitor General. The injunction was first issued in 2021 after he falsely accused a Syrian teenager in a viral video of being violent. The teenager later won a libel case against him.
He was accused by some media and politicians of inflaming tensions that led to riots across Britain in July and August last year, following the murder of three girls at a dance workshop in Southport.
In January, a post from his social media account claimed that US billionaire Elon Musk was paying some of his legal fees. Musk has not confirmed this.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
The first lady described the law as a "national victory"
US First Lady Melania Trump has welcomed a new law criminalising the non-consensual sharing of explicit images, including AI-generated deepfake content, calling it a major step towards protecting children and families from online exploitation.
The Take It Down Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump, makes it a federal offence to post "intimate images", whether real or digitally fabricated, without the subject’s consent. Under the legislation, individuals found guilty of intentionally distributing such content could face up to three years in prison. The law also compels technology companies to remove the offending material within 48 hours of notification.
The bill, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, 409 votes to 2 in the House of Representatives and unanimously in the Senate in February, has been one of the most widely backed pieces of legislation during Trump’s second term in office. It marks the sixth bill signed into law since his re-election, with the administration often favouring executive orders to implement its agenda.
Melania Trump, who has largely kept a low public profile, played a key role in advancing the legislation. The first lady described the law as a "national victory" and stressed its importance in shielding children from harmful online behaviour.
“This legislation is a powerful step forward in our efforts to ensure that every American, especially young people, can feel better protected from their image or identity being abused,” she said. “It will help parents and families safeguard children from online exploitation.”
Melania Trump first appeared publicly in support of the legislation in March during a solo roundtable event on Capitol Hill, where she urged lawmakers to pass the bill. “It’s heartbreaking to witness young teens, especially girls, grappling with the overwhelming challenges posed by malicious online content, like deepfakes,” she said at the time.
The law addresses two main forms of abuse: revenge porn the non-consensual sharing of intimate real images and deepfake pornography, where AI is used to create fake explicit material by inserting someone’s face into pornographic content. These practices have become increasingly common, particularly targeting women and public figures.
Paris Hilton, businesswoman and DJ, publicly supported the legislation, calling it “a crucial step toward ending non-consensual image sharing online”. Major tech firms, including Meta, TikTok and Google, have also backed the new law.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the first lady was “instrumental” in rallying support for the bill and ensuring its passage through Congress.
Despite the strong support, the legislation has attracted criticism from some digital rights organisations. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) warned that the law’s broad scope could have unintended consequences for free speech and privacy.
“While protecting victims of these heinous privacy invasions is a legitimate goal, good intentions alone are not enough to make good policy,” the group said. “As currently drafted, the Act mandates a notice-and-takedown system that threatens free expression, user privacy, and due process, without addressing the problem it claims to solve.”
The Internet Society, another advocacy group for digital privacy, raised concerns that the law could undermine encryption and pose “unacceptable risks to users’ fundamental privacy rights and cybersecurity”.
Critics argue that the bill, while well-intentioned, lacks adequate safeguards to prevent misuse and could result in overreach, affecting legal online content, including LGBTQ+ material, adult entertainment, and political commentary.
Nonetheless, supporters maintain that the new law fills a critical gap in US legislation by targeting a growing form of online abuse and sending a strong message against digital exploitation.