THE Queen on Tuesday (29) made her first major public appearance in months, at a thanksgiving service for her late husband, Prince Philip, who died last year aged 99.
The monarch, who turns 96 next month, has not attended a high-profile event outside her homes since she spent a night in hospital last October.
The Queen's health, including a bout of Covid, and difficulties walking and standing forced her to pull out of the Commonwealth Day service at the last minute on March 14.
Buckingham Palace only confirmed her attendance at Prince Philip's memorial service around two hours before it was due to start at Westminster Abbey in central London.
Unlike other members of her family and guests, she arrived by a side entrance and used a walking stick as she was helped to her seat by her second son, Prince Andrew, 62.
It was Andrew's first public appearance since settling a US civil claim for sexual assault, and after public outrage at his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Andrew took up a seat in the front row alongside his younger brother, Prince Edward. His elder brother Prince Charles, sister Princess Anne, and the Queen sat opposite.
The Duke of Edinburgh died on April 9 last year, just a few weeks short of his 100th birthday, after treatment for a heart condition.
Coronavirus restrictions at the time meant long-rehearsed plans for his funeral were hastily revised, and just 30 mourners attended.
- Health issues -
The sight of her alone at the service has become an enduring image of the pandemic.
Tuesday's event in front of the 1,800-strong congregation was a chance to include elements of the original plan, including sermons, prayers and music he chose himself.
Much of the focus was on the straight-talking former naval officer's charity work, particularly his Duke of Edinburgh Awards scheme for young people around the world.
The sight of royals and their foreign counterparts, dignitaries, a traditional Church of England service, plus crowds outside the abbey, gave the impression of a return to business as usual.
A spokesman for prime minister Boris Johnson said it was "welcome to see Her Majesty out today, continuing her incredible decades of service to the country".
But it has been an eventful year in the storied history of the royal family, with the growing sense of the end of an era.
Much of the focus has been on the Queen and her health since her unscheduled hospital stay was revealed, soon after she hosted world leaders at Windsor Castle and made a speech at the opening of the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff.
Doctors ordered her to rest and she cancelled a string of high-profile engagements, including hosting world leaders at the UN climate change summit in November.
She has held private audiences from her Windsor Castle home, mostly by video-conference.
On February 5, she met some members of the public at her Sandringham estate in eastern England, a day before the 70th anniversary of her accession to the throne.
- Andrew and Harry -
She has complained of mobility issues, with reports she has been using a wheelchair - and even a golf buggy - in private.
Speculation has also been rife that she could soon spend more time at her Balmoral estate in Scotland, after claims that a stair lift has been installed.
Andrew's lengthy legal battle has overshadowed the royal family, which has also faced claims from the queen's grandson, Prince Harry, of racism.
He and his wife Meghan Markle quit frontline duties in 2020 and moved to the United States.
Harry, 37, who also criticised his father Prince Charles and brother Prince William in an explosive television interview last year, is currently battling the UK government in the courts over his security arrangements.
He stayed away from his grandfather's service but has confirmed he will be at his Invictus Games for disabled veterans in the Netherlands in the coming weeks.
With eyes increasingly on the succession, there have been clear signs future issues loom, when William toured Belize, Jamaica and The Bahamas last week.
The visit was criticised for being a throwback to colonialism and afterwards William acknowledged calls for the British monarch to be replaced as head of state.
That has been seen as potentially fuelling similar movements in other Commonwealth countries, with Edward due to visit other Caribbean nations next month.
Relatives carry the coffin of a victim, who was killed in the Air India Flight 171 crash, during a funeral ceremony in Ahmedabad on June 15, 2025. (Photo: Getty Images)
AT LEAST 190 victims of last week's Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad have been identified through DNA tests, and 159 bodies, including 32 foreign nationals, have been handed over to their families, officials said on Wednesday.
The London-bound Air India flight AI-171, carrying 242 passengers and crew members, crashed in Ahmedabad on June 12. All but one on board died, along with nearly 29 people on the ground, when the aircraft struck a medical complex.
Authorities are using DNA tests to identify the victims, as many bodies were charred or damaged.
“Till Wednesday morning, 190 DNA samples have been matched, and 159 bodies have already been handed over to the respective families. The process of matching (DNA samples of) other bodies is still on,” said Ahmedabad Civil Hospital's medical superintendent Dr Rakesh Joshi.
Victims include foreign nationals
Of the 159 victims whose bodies were returned to their families, 127 were Indians, four Portuguese, 27 British and one Canadian, Joshi said.
Among the 127 Indian victims, four were killed on the ground and 123 were on board the flight, he added.
Following the crash, 71 injured people were admitted to various hospitals. “Of them, only seven are currently undergoing treatment at the Civil Hospital, while 12 other patients are admitted to private hospitals in Ahmedabad and Dahod. Three patients lost their lives during treatment here (civil hospital),” Joshi said.
The state government had earlier said DNA samples from 250 victims — including those on board and those on the ground — were collected for identification.
No major safety issues found in Boeing 787 fleet, says DGCA
India’s aviation regulator said on Tuesday that surveillance of Air India’s Boeing 787 fleet had not revealed any major safety concerns.
“The aircraft and associated maintenance systems were found to be compliant with existing safety standards,” the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) said in a statement.
The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was headed to London with 242 people on board when it crashed seconds after take-off in Ahmedabad, hitting nearby buildings. All but one person on the flight died, along with about 30 people on the ground.
The DGCA said 24 of Air India’s 33 Boeing 787 aircraft had undergone an “enhanced safety inspection” ordered by the regulator.
In a meeting with senior officials from Air India, the DGCA raised concerns over recent maintenance-related issues. It advised the airline to “strictly adhere to regulations”, improve coordination across its operations, and ensure the availability of spare parts to reduce passenger delays.
The regulator had also met senior officials from Air India and Air India Express to review operations amid growing flight volumes.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
US president Donald Trump and Indian prime minister Narendra Modi meet in the Oval Office at the White House on February 13, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
INDIA's prime minister Narendra Modi told US president Donald Trump late on Tuesday (17) that a ceasefire between India and Pakistan after a four-day conflict in May was achieved through talks between the two militaries and not US mediation, India's senior-most diplomat said.
Trump had said last month that the south Asian neighbours agreed to a ceasefire after talks mediated by the US, and that the hostilities ended after he urged the countries to focus on trade instead of war.
India has previously denied any third-party mediation and Tuesday's phone call between Modi and Trump on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada, which Modi attended as a guest, is their first direct exchange since the May 7-10 conflict.
"PM Modi told president Trump clearly that during this period, there was no talk at any stage on subjects like India-US trade deal or US mediation between India and Pakistan," Indian foreign secretary Vikram Misri said in a press statement.
"Talks for ceasing military action happened directly between India and Pakistan through existing military channels, and on the insistence of Pakistan. Prime minister Modi emphasised that India has not accepted mediation in the past and will never do," he said.
Misri said the two leaders were due to meet on the sidelines of G7 summit but Trump left a day early due to the situation in the Middle East.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the Modi-Trump call.
The heaviest fighting in decades between India and Pakistan was sparked by an April 22 attack in Indian Kashmir that killed 26 people, most of them tourists. New Delhi blamed the incident on "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, a charge denied by Islamabad.
On May 7, Indian jets bombed what New Delhi called "terrorist infrastructure" sites across the border, triggering tit-for-tat strikes spread over four days in which both sides used fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery.
Misri said that Trump expressed his support for India's fight against terrorism and that Modi told him India's Operation Sindoor under which it launched the cross border strikes was still on.
Trump also asked Modi if he could stop by the US on his return from Canada, Misri said, but the Indian leader expressed his inability to do so due to a pre-decided schedule. He invited Trump to visit India later this year for the summit of the leaders of the Quad grouping, which Trump accepted, Misri said.
(Reuters)
Keep ReadingShow less
Protesters from pro-choice group 'abortion rights' gather near parliament, where MPs were voting on the decriminalisation of abortion on June 17, 2025 in London. (Photo: Getty Images)
UK MPs have voted in favour of ending the prosecution of women in England and Wales for ending their own pregnancies, marking a significant step towards changing how abortion laws are applied.
Under current laws, women can face criminal charges if they terminate a pregnancy after 24 weeks or without the approval of two doctors. These laws still carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
The vote follows public attention on the issue after recent court cases, including one where a woman was acquitted at trial and another who was released from prison on appeal.
On Tuesday, MPs backed an amendment by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi by a majority of 242. The amendment would ensure that women cannot be criminally prosecuted for ending their own pregnancies at any stage. However, it does not alter the existing abortion laws themselves.
The wider crime and policing bill must now go through a full parliamentary vote and then be passed by the House of Lords to become law.
Existing laws under scrutiny
“Women are currently being arrested from hospital bed to police cell and facing criminal investigations on suspicion of ending their own pregnancy,” Antoniazzi told AFP.
“My amendment would put a stop to this,” she said, calling it “the right amendment at the right time”.
In England and Wales, abortion remains a criminal offence under the Offences Against the Person Act of 1861, which still carries the potential for life imprisonment.
The Abortion Act of 1967 legalised terminations in certain circumstances, including up to 23 weeks and six days of pregnancy, when performed by authorised providers.
Abortions beyond that time are permitted only in limited situations, such as when the mother’s life is at risk or if there is a “substantial risk” the child may be born with a serious disability.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the law was updated to allow women to take abortion pills at home up to 10 weeks into pregnancy.
Recent court cases
In May, Nicola Packer was acquitted after taking prescribed abortion medicine when she was about 26 weeks pregnant, beyond the legal limit for home use.
The 45-year-old told jurors during her trial — which followed a four-year police investigation — that she had not realised how far along her pregnancy was.
“It was horrendous giving evidence, absolutely awful,” she told The Guardian last month.
Concerns and support
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children has described the proposed amendment as “the greatest threat to unborn babies in decades”.
Antoniazzi’s amendment does not change laws concerning how abortion services are provided or the time limits involved. Medical professionals who assist in abortions outside of legal provisions will still face prosecution.
Around 50 organisations, including abortion providers, medical bodies and women’s rights groups, support the amendment.
They note that six women in England have been taken to court in the past three years for ending or attempting to end their pregnancies outside legal frameworks.
Carla Foster was jailed in 2023 after taking abortion pills to end her pregnancy between 32 and 34 weeks. Her sentence was later suspended by the Court of Appeal.
Antoniazzi told the BBC that police had investigated “more than 100 women for suspected illegal abortion in the last five years including women who’ve suffered natural miscarriages and stillbirths”.
“This is just wrong. It's a waste of taxpayers money, it's a waste of the judiciary’s time, and it's not in the public interest,” she said.
Responding to the vote, prime minister Keir Starmer said on Tuesday that women have the right to a “safe and legal abortion”.
Northern Ireland decriminalised abortion for women in 2019. Scotland is currently reviewing its abortion laws.
A FORMER Green Party health spokesperson has accused the party of shifting away from its core values and trying to silence members with gender-critical views.
Dr Pallavi Devulapalli, a general practitioner and local councillor in King’s Lynn and West Norfolk, was expelled from the Green Party this month. She claimed her removal was linked to her views on transgender rights, not to a rule violation as stated by the party. “They didn’t come out and say it was about gender. So they expelled me on a technicality,” she was quoted as saying.
Dr Devulapalli had been suspended since September after disagreeing with the party’s policy supporting gender self-identification during a public debate. She was later expelled for attending what she believed was a casual gathering but was ruled to be an official party event, which she was barred from attending due to her suspension, the Guardian reported.
“It feels like a purge,” she said. “The party is no longer about open debate or green politics. It’s becoming a leftwing authoritarian space. Say the wrong thing and you're out. That’s worrying.”
She is now part of a group calling themselves “Greens in Exile” – former members who say they were pushed out for holding gender-critical beliefs. Devulapalli argued the party’s stance on trans rights ignores biological facts and alienates everyday voters. She added, “Trans women are not women – this is about science and reality.”
Her removal has sparked debate within the party, especially as a new leadership election approaches. She believes if leadership hopeful Zack Polanski wins, more members will leave. “People are trying to bring back the Greens’ commitment to science and free speech,” she said.
Devulapalli says she has received strong support from within the party, including from former Green leaders and health spokespeople who have urged dialogue over division.
LONDON mayor Sadiq Khan has confirmed that Oxford Street will be pedestrianised “as quickly as possible” following strong backing in a public consultation. The move comes as part of wider efforts to revive the West End’s shopping appeal.
The consultation, which gathered over 6,600 responses from businesses, residents and organisations, showed two-thirds support for the mayor’s proposal to ban most traffic from a 0.7-mile stretch of Oxford Street, the Guardian reported. The plan includes space for outdoor cafés, events and improved public areas.
“Oxford Street has suffered over many years, so urgent action is needed to give our nation’s high street a new lease of life,” Khan was quoted as saying. “It’s clear that the vast majority of Londoners and major businesses back our exciting plans.”
The Labour government has agreed to back the creation of a mayoral development corporation (MDC) to drive the project forward. This comes after earlier efforts to pedestrianise the street were blocked by Westminster city council, which is now Labour-led but still cautious about the move.
Council leader Adam Hug said that while the mayor’s decision was not their preferred choice, they would now work together to help shape Oxford Street’s future. “Since 2022 the street has roared back to life after the pandemic,” he added.
Not everyone welcomed the plan. Black cab drivers warned of increased congestion on nearby streets. “Putting this traffic down surrounding streets will cause chaos,” said Steve McNamara of the LTDA.
Detailed plans for rerouting buses and banning traffic will be released later this year.
Retailers including Ikea and Selfridges expressed strong support. Ikea’s UK boss said the change would make the area more welcoming, while Selfridges described the project as “hugely energising”.