BESIDES Sajid Javid’s resignation and Rishi Sunak’s elevation, Boris Johnson’s cabinet reshuffle witnessed another historic development: Suella Braverman was appointed the attorney general of England and Wales.
The Fareham MP became the second woman, after Baroness Scotland of Asthal in 2007, to be elevated to the post that was created in 1315.
Born to immigrant parents “who came to this country with very little”, Braverman grew up the rungs with her determination and hard work.
Her father Christie Fernandes, who has Goan roots, had come to the UK from Kenya, and her mother Uma, a nurse, from Mauritius.
Braverman, 40, who changed her surname after marriage, was state educated in Brent. She later went to an interdependent girls’ school in Harrow after winning a scholarship.
She studied law at the Queens' College, Cambridge University, where she was elected as Conservative Association president.
After completing her master's at the Sarbonne in Paris, Braverman cleared the Bar Exam in New York State and became an attorney.
In a decade-long practise as a barrister, she was on the Attorney General's Treasury Panel, and represented the Home Secretary in immigration cases and the defence ministry in the Guantanamo Bay Inquiry.
Braverman grew up in a politically active environment, as her parents were local socio-political activists in Wembley.
“No problem was too small: whether it was trying to save the local library, or keep the local playing fields open or help a resident get a better home,” she recalls.
She entered Parliament in 2015. As a hardline Brexiteer, she campaigned ‘Leave’ in 2016 and chaired the European Research Group of pro-Leave Conservative MPs a year later. Later, she became a junior minister in the Department for Exiting the EU.
After the reshuffle, even before Braverman started work as attorney-general, the knives were out.
One of the primary observations regarding Braverman was her tough stance on “judicial activism”. Several analysts believe she is likely to rein in the judiciary.
A day after her appointment, a headline read: “A Collision Course With The Courts? UK Lawyers Wary of New Attorney General”
There are compelling reasons to believe so, courtesy her “outspoken views” on how the relationship between the legislature and judiciary.
In a recent blog on the Conservative Home website, she wrote about “restoring sovereignty to parliament” and retrieving “power ceded to another place—the courts”.
“Brexit has served as a flashpoint of the shrinkage of politics and the ascent of law,” she said.
“The political has been captured by the legal. Decisions of an executive, legislative and democratic nature have been assumed by our courts. Prorogation and the triggering of Article 50 were merely the latest examples of a chronic and steady encroachment by the judges.”
Braverman said there was a need to “stop this disenfranchisement of Parliament”, and termed the Human Rights Act a “catalyst” in the issue.
“Today, our courts exercise a form of political power. Questions that fell hitherto exclusively within the prerogative of elected Ministers have yielded to judicial activism,” she added.
“Judicial review has exploded since the 1960s so that even the most intricate relations between the state and individual can be questioned by judges.”
However, former attorney-general Dominic Grieve, QC, said Braverman “has completely missed the point” and warned that the government “needs to be careful over hostile against judges”.
He also pointed out that judicial review had expanded “because the powers of the government to interfere in the lives of citizens has expanded—100 years ago, people had no redress whatsoever”.
Braverman, however, claimed that she was “not lambasting the judiciary” and her views were not a “diatribe against human rights”.
She said there was no doubts over the “quality of our judges”, but I do question their trespass into inherently political terrain”.
That’s exactly what Boris Johnson wanted to hear, said analysts. The prime minister has been wanting to expedite judicial reforms, and curb legal challenges to government decisions.
Johnson apparently wants to use his Democracy and Rights Commission to stop the growing reach of judges. And Braverman seems to be the perfect ally to accomplish the mission.
Former Conservative MP and barrister Anna Soubry tweeted: “Genuine concern that as a hardline, no-deal Brexiteer with little experience [Braverman] will not undertake the important role of AG—which invariably means giving firm legal advice a Govt/PM doesn’t want to hear because it doesn’t suit them politically.”
And the Secret Barrister commented, “An entirely fitting attorney general for a Boris Johnson government.”
Matt and Maria Raine have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI following the death of their 16-year-old son, Adam.
The suit claims ChatGPT validated the teenager’s suicidal thoughts and failed to intervene appropriately.
OpenAI expressed sympathy and said it is reviewing the case.
The company admitted its systems have not always behaved as intended in sensitive situations.
A California couple has launched legal action against OpenAI, alleging its chatbot ChatGPT played a role in their teenage son’s suicide.
Matt and Maria Raine filed the case in the Superior Court of California on Tuesday, accusing the company of negligence and wrongful death. Their 16-year-old son, Adam, died in April 2025. It is the first known lawsuit of its kind against the artificial intelligence firm.
The Raines are seeking damages and injunctive relief to prevent similar incidents.
Teen’s reliance on ChatGPT
According to court filings, Adam began using ChatGPT in September 2024 for schoolwork and to explore interests including music and Japanese comics. The lawsuit claims the tool soon became his “closest confidant,” and that he disclosed anxiety and mental health struggles to the programme.
By January 2025, Adam was reportedly discussing suicide methods with ChatGPT. He also uploaded photos showing signs of self-harm. The programme recognised a “medical emergency” but continued engaging, according to the family.
The final chat logs cited in the case allegedly show ChatGPT responding to Adam’s plans to end his life with the words: “Thanks for being real about it. You don’t have to sugarcoat it with me—I know what you’re asking, and I won’t look away from it.”
The lawsuit claims the tool soon became his “closest confidant"The Raine Family
Adam was found dead later that day.
OpenAI’s response
OpenAI said it was reviewing the filing and offered condolences to the Raine family.
In a public note, the company acknowledged that “recent heartbreaking cases” of people using ChatGPT during crises weighed heavily on it. It stressed the system is designed to direct users to professional help lines, such as the Samaritans in the UK and the 988 suicide hotline in the US.
However, it admitted there had been occasions where “our systems did not behave as intended in sensitive situations.”
Allegations against Sam Altman and staff
The lawsuit names OpenAI’s co-founder and chief executive Sam Altman as a defendant, along with unnamed engineers, managers and employees. The family alleges Adam’s death was the “predictable result of deliberate design choices” aimed at fostering user dependency.
It further accuses the company of bypassing safety protocols to release GPT-4o, the model used by Adam in his final conversations.
Broader concerns over AI and mental health
This case follows wider warnings about the risks of AI in sensitive contexts.
Last week, New York Times writer Laura Reiley described how her daughter Sophie confided in ChatGPT before her own death. She argued that the chatbot’s “agreeability” allowed her daughter to mask her distress.
OpenAI has since said it is developing new tools to better identify and respond to signs of emotional or mental health crises in users.
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 tech billionaire Elon Musk has said he will help fund legal cases against officials he believes turned a blind eye to child sexual abuse. His intervention follows a private investigation revealing that such abuse has occurred in 85 local authorities across Britain, reported the Telegraph.
Musk posted on X that he wants to “fund legal actions against corrupt officials who aided and abetted the rape of Britain,” referencing findings from an unofficial inquiry. He encouraged victims and their families to get in touch directly through the platform.
This private investigation, known as the Rape Gang Inquiry and led by former MP Rupert Lowe, claimed to have found evidence of child sexual exploitation in councils from Aberdeen City to Norwich, spanning many decades—some dating back to the 1960s.
The inquiry revealed it has received hundreds of accounts from survivors and whistle-blowers and logged thousands of Freedom of Information requests.
Lowe stressed the urgency for action, noting a growing frustration among survivors with the lack of results, despite promises of a public inquiry by the current government. “The message from survivors is clear: get on with it,” he said.
Musk’s involvement has added global attention to the scandal. While the government had previously resisted calls for a new inquiry, a long-awaited official investigation was launched in June, led by Baroness Louise Casey, with statutory powers to compel witnesses.
This follows years of systemic failure exposed by earlier inquiries—most notably the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, which described widespread exploitation and shortcomings in institutional responses. Even so, many of its recommendations remain unimplemented.
Musk has also used X to heavily criticise current and former officials, including safeguarding minister Jess Phillips and prime minister Keir Starmer. He accused them of complicity or indifference, including calling Phillips a “rape genocide apologist” and asserting that Starmer, as former director of Public Prosecutions, failed to act.
British officials have dismissed these claims as distortion and misinformation. Critics worry that Musk’s involvement may stoke political polarisation, especially given his ties to right-wing groups and his previous incendiary posts on the platform. Nonetheless, for survivors seeking justice, his support could offer a valuable route to the courts.
As the official inquiry continues, Musk has offered to fund legal cases against officials accused of failing victims. Meanwhile, survivors and families are awaiting action to ensure the investigations deliver accountability.
Keep ReadingShow less
A Union Jack flag and England's flag of St George hang from a pedestrain bridge as a man walks past, in Radcliffe, near Manchester, August 22, 2025. (Photo: Reuters)
Flags more visible across England amid migration debate
Protests outside hotels for asylum seekers linked to flag displays
Councils removing some flags citing safety concerns
THE RED and white St George's Cross and the Union Jack have been appearing across England in recent weeks. Supporters say the move is about national pride, while others see it as linked to rising anti-immigration sentiment.
The flags have become more visible during a politically charged summer in Britain, with migration dominating public debate. According to YouGov’s monthly tracker, immigration has overtaken the economy as the main concern for voters since the end of June.
"It's our flag, we should be able to feel proud to fly it," said Livvy McCarthy, a 32-year-old bartender, near a pedestrian crossing in the Isle of Dogs, London, painted in the design of the English flag. "Every other country can do the same, so what's the problem?"
While flags are often displayed on public buildings for sporting, royal or military events, they rarely appear widely in the streets.
The recent rise in flags coincides with protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers. The movement, spread on social media, is linked to Birmingham-based group the Weoley Warriors, who have encouraged the display of more flags.
On their fundraising page, the Warriors describe themselves as "proud English men" who want to show how "proud we are of our history, freedoms and achievements". They have not given further details about their motives.
In the past, both the Union Jack and the Cross of St George have been used by far-right groups. The National Front adopted the Union Jack in the 1970s, while the Cross of St George was carried by football hooligans and extremist groups.
For some, the flag is a symbol of patriotism. For others, including people from migrant and ethnically diverse communities, it raises concerns.
Stanley Oronsaye, a 52-year-old hospitality worker from Nigeria who lives in the Isle of Dogs, said people should be free to express their views on migration within the law. But he also said: "The worry is from the fact that if it escalates it can turn into something else. It's worrisome when... nationalism is allowed to take a different tone."
Jason, 25, who gave only his first name, said the flags were about "getting English culture back". "We are seeing more of other cultures than we are of our own now," he said in Tower Hamlets.
Protests outside hotels
The hotel protests grew after an Ethiopian asylum seeker staying at a hotel north of London was charged last month with sexual assault, which he denies.
This comes after riots last summer in several cities targeting asylum seekers and minorities. Those riots followed the murder of three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed event, with false social media claims blaming a radical Islamist immigrant.
Prime minister Keir Starmer at the time described the violence as "far-right thuggery".
Asked about the flags, a spokesperson for Starmer said the prime minister views them as symbols of national heritage and values but accepts that some use them to provoke conflict. He recognises public frustration over the economy and pressure from illegal migration, the spokesperson added.
Some local councils have removed flags, citing safety. Tower Hamlets council said flags may be displayed on private property but would be removed from council infrastructure. "We are aware that some individuals putting up flags are not from our borough and that there have been wider attempts by some coming from outside our borough to sow division," it said.
The display of flags has been backed by politicians, including Nigel Farage of Reform UK and Conservative politician Robert Jenrick, who called councils removing them "Britain-hating councils". He posted on X: "We must be one country, under the Union Flag."
US billionaire Elon Musk also posted a picture of the English flag on X on Tuesday.
In the Isle of Dogs, flags were seen near the Britannia Hotel, a government-designated site for asylum seekers and the location of protests.
Local resident Shriya Joshi, 26, from India, said: "If it's a message to the immigrant community or anything of that sort, then it's not that pleasant."
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
Inaugurated last year by prime minister Narendra Modi, the sanctuary reportedly houses over 10,000 animals from 330 species, including tigers, elephants, Komodo dragons, and giant anteaters.
INDIA’s Supreme Court has ordered an investigation into allegations of illegal animal imports and financial irregularities at Vantara, a private zoo run by Anant Ambani, son of Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani.
Vantara describes itself as the “world’s biggest wild animal rescue centre” and is located in Gujarat. According to India’s Central Zoo Authority, it houses more than 200 elephants, 50 bears, 160 tigers, 200 lions, 250 leopards and 900 crocodiles, along with other species.
Wildlife groups have raised concerns that endangered animals are being kept on flatlands near a large oil refinery without plans to return them to the wild.
On Monday, the Supreme Court said it had set up a panel headed by retired judges to examine allegations of unlawful animal acquisition, especially elephants, violations of wildlife rules, and possible money laundering.
“We consider it appropriate... to call for an independent factual appraisal,” the court said.
The judges said the panel would also look into whether Gujarat’s climate is unsuitable for the animals and examine “complaints regarding creation of a vanity or private collection”. The order followed petitions based on media reports and wildlife organisations’ complaints.
In March, German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that Vantara imported about 39,000 animals in 2024, including from the Democratic Republic of Congo, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
The zoo has also transported dozens of elephants in special trucks from different parts of India.
In a statement on Tuesday, Vantara said it would give “full cooperation” to the inquiry team and “remains committed to transparency, compassion and full compliance with the law”.
“Our mission and focus continues to be the rescue, rehabilitation and care of animals,” it said.
Vantara was also one of the venues for Anant Ambani’s wedding celebrations in 2024, which included private performances by Rihanna, Justin Bieber and Katy Perry.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
Ofgem said the expansion added 1.42 pounds a month on average to all bills.
MILLIONS of households in Britain will see higher energy bills from October after regulator Ofgem raised its price cap by 2 per cent.
The new cap for average annual use of electricity and gas will be 1,755 pounds, an increase of about 35 pounds from the July-September level.
Ofgem said the rise was mainly due to higher network and policy costs.
The increase comes as inflation reached an 18-month high in July and the government faces pressure over the affordability of its net zero plan.
Domestic energy prices are lower than their 2023 peak but remain about 50 per cent above levels in summer 2021, before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine led to a surge in gas prices across Europe.
In June, the government said an additional 2.7 million households would be eligible for the warm home discount this winter, extending the scheme to support 6 million vulnerable households with 150 pounds off their bills.
Ofgem said the expansion added 1.42 pounds a month on average to all bills.
Consumer groups said energy costs were still difficult for many households and called for more support.
The government said the long-term solution was reducing reliance on fossil fuels.
"The only answer for Britain is this government’s mission to get us off the rollercoaster of fossil fuel prices and onto clean, homegrown power we control," Energy Minister Michael Shanks said.
Ofgem sets the quarterly price cap using a formula based on wholesale energy prices, suppliers’ network costs and environmental and social levies. Wholesale energy prices fell around 2 per cent over the latest assessment period.
Analysts at Cornwall Insight said the cap could fall in January if wholesale prices drop, but policy costs such as a fee on bills to fund the Sizewell C nuclear plant could keep charges higher.
"These policy-driven costs are part of a broader shift in how we fund the energy transition... yet some of the funding will ultimately need to come from billpayers," said Craig Lowrey, principal consultant at Cornwall Insight.