Human Rights Groups Blast White House For Modi Visit: ‘Shame On You’

Human rights groups are blasting the White House for rolling out the red carpet for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is set to meet with President Joe Biden and address Congress during his visit to Washington, D.C., next week.

The Indian government called the trip “historic,” and the White House noted that “the visit will strengthen our two countries’ shared commitment to a free, open, prosperous, and secure Indo-Pacific.”

But critics want Biden to press Modi about human rights violations in India related to the steep rise of Hindu nationalism — a political and extremist ideology that seeks to transform a secular and diverse India into an ethnoreligious Hindu state that targets minorities. Religious minorities in India are at risk of continued state-sanctioned violence and harassment if the U.S. continues to overlook Modi’s role in it, they say.

“For almost a decade now, human rights activists and others have regularly brought to the White House — Democrats or Republicans — that Modi’s regime is authoritarian, it’s right-wing, it’s anti-Muslim and it’s anti-minority,” said Suchitra Vijayan, the author of “Midnight’s Borders: A People’s History of Modern India.”

“The fact that they continue to whitewash him by giving them a platform is very worrying,” she added.

Modi was banned from the U.S. in 2005, before he became prime minister, for supporting Hindu extremist groups who rioted and targeted Muslims. But this will be Modi’s third White House visit at least, and the second time he addresses a joint session of Congress. He first did so in 2016 under former President Barack Obama.

This will be the third official state dinner Biden has hosted. The White House previously hosted the president and first lady of South Korea for a state dinner in April and the president and first lady of France last December.

When pressed about human rights concerns in India, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre defended the visit, adding that the president believes “this is an important relationship that we need to continue and build on as it relates to human rights.”

The White House did not respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.

“Despite who is in the White House, the U.S. has a long history of propping up authoritarian regimes for its own personal ends.”

– Suchitra Vijayan, author of “Midnight’s Borders: A People’s History of Modern India”

India continues to be a powerful ally to the U.S. as the world’s most populous country and largest democracy. But inviting Modi to the White House sends a dangerous message to religious minorities across the globe, critics argued.

“What happens in a country of a billion people will have global ramifications,” said Vijayan.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have scheduled a private screening next week of a BBC documentary on Modi and his role in the 2002 Gujarat riots where at least 1,000 people were killed, most of them Muslim. During the pogrom, Hindu mobs torched Muslim homes and businesses, killed Muslim women and children, and demolished mosques and graves. The Indian government has since blocked the documentary on social media, including Twitter.

“The screening of the film provides an opportunity to demonstrate what, in practice, freedom of expression and what dissent looks like and also educate the public and remind people of the horrific acts of violence and killings against Muslims in Gujarat,” said Amanda Klasing, the national director of advocacy at Amnesty International USA.

Biden is hoping to secure a package for India to buy dozens of U.S.-made armed drones worth billions of dollars in an effort to strengthen U.S.-India ties amid China’s growing influence.

“Despite who is in the White House, the U.S. has a long history of propping up authoritarian regimes for its own personal ends,” said Vijayan.

Critics of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party-led government in India, including journalists and activists, have faced targeted harassment and prosecutions. The rights of religious minorities, especially Muslims, continue to deteriorate. BJP supporters and Hindu nationalist groups commit violent attacks against Muslims and government critics with impunity. At least 50 anti-Muslim hate rallies took place in the span of four months last year starting in November 2022.

In fact, a 2022 religious freedom report by the U.S. State Department recorded a rise in violence against religious minorities in India, including incidents of the government bulldozing Muslim-owned homes and shops and reports of Christians being attacked, arrested and detained by police. Christian groups said police sometimes aided crowds in disrupting their worship services, according to the report.

“Biden should be listening in to his own State Department and articulating all this publicly and clearly on the record about human rights abuses,” said Klasing. “The failure to do that doesn’t reflect well on what the strength of the relationship is. This is a crucial test.”

As of 2020, about 15% of Indians are Muslim, while Christians make up between 2% and 3% of the country’s population. Last month, ethnic violence broke out in Manipur, a remote state in India’s northeast, where churches were burned down and dozens of people were killed, most of them Christians.

John Prabhudoss, the chairman of the Federation of Indian American Christian Organizations, told HuffPost that he has been communicating with dozens of Indian pastors and that most of them are terrified for their families back in India.

“Their family could be jailed or even the worst, killed. The fear is real,” said Prabhudoss.

Prabhudoss, who visited India alongside lawmakers in 2002 after the Gujarat riots and saw the impact of the violence firsthand, called Modi’s visit “unforgivable.”

“For the president to bring him to the White House … is shameful,” said Prabhudoss. “Mr. Biden, shame on you.”

Share Button

Chris Christie Says Trump Is A ‘Petulant Child’ When Someone Disagrees With Him

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on Sunday that fellow 2024 GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump is a “petulant child” when it comes to those, particularly his former allies, who disagree with him.

The indicted former president recently went on his Truth Social platform to rip his former staff and allies who have criticized him for knowingly keeping classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House, and trying to prevent the National Archives from obtaining those documents. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges ― some of which fall under the Espionage Act ― handed by a federal grand jury.

Among those he went after were former White House chief of staff John Kelly and former Attorney General Bill Barr, both of whom have recently criticized Trump for mishandling top secret government documents. In one post, the ex-president said that Kelly is weak and has a “very small brain.” In another post, Trump called Barr a “gutless pig,” “lazy” and “totally ineffective.”

Speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Christie pointed out that the very people Trump is berating are the same officials he gave high praise to when he hired them during his presidency.

“Now look, either Donald Trump ― if you believe what he said when [the officials] left ― that means he didn’t pick the very best people and doesn’t know how to pick personnel. If you believe, about them, what he said at the beginning, the great stuff, then this guy is the worst manager in the history of the American presidency,” the presidential candidate said.

“Either way, Republicans should listen to what he says. He’s a petulant child when someone disagrees with him. And whether it’s Bill Barr or John Kelly or [former Defense Secretary] General [James] Mattis, whether it is [former White House official] Mick Mulvaney or whether it’s … [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] General [Mark] Milley ― if you disagree with Donald Trump, the petulant child comes out and he calls you names like the ones you just mentioned and the ones I mentioned.”

Christie was one of over a dozen Republicans running for the presidential nomination in 2016, and after dropping out became the first major endorser of Trump. The New Jersey Republican supported Trump through all of his controversies while in the White House, even after the former president infected him with COVID-19 at a 2020 debate prep session. As a result, Christie spent a week in intensive care at the hospital.

The former New Jersey governor withdrew his support for Trump after the ex-president lied about voter fraud in the 2020 election, and incited a mob of followers to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Christie, who is now running for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, was one of the first of Trump’s GOP rivals to go after him for the Justice Department’s special counsel indicting him with 37 felony counts related to the classified documents.

The Republican National Committee announced this year that all GOP candidates must sign a pledge to support the eventual nominee in order to participate in the primary debates, regardless of whether the nominee is a convicted felon. When asked if he would support Trump should he be the nominee, Christie called the idea of a pledge “useless.”

“I’m going to take the pledge just as seriously as Donald Trump took it in 2016. As you will remember, [former RNC chair] Reince Priebus had to go up to Trump Tower to get him to sign [the pledge], to ask him to do so. He did,” the New Jersey Republican said.

“And then we went to a subsequent debate, and we were all asked if we would reaffirm our support of whoever the nominee was going to be by raising our hand. There were 10 of us on the stage ― nine of us raised our hands. The one who didn’t was Donald Trump. And so I will take the pledge in 2024 just as seriously as Donald Trump took the pledge in 2016.”

Share Button

Guto Harri Suggests Boris Johnson ‘Deprived Of Livelihood’ By Partygate Report

Guto Harri has suggested the MPs who pronounced Boris Johnson misled parliament have deprived him of a livelihood.

Appearing on BBC Question Time, Harri, a former Johnson aide, indicated he thought the privileges committee was not “beyond reproach”, citing the fact one-time Labour leader chaired the group.

Harri argued the “quasi-judicial process” was beyond the remit of the Commons – a talking point put forward by a number of Johnson loyalists.

But this has been countered repeatedly by the argument that the Conservative Party holds a majority of MPs on the committee, and Johnson has been represented by Lord Pannick, one of the country’s leading lawyers, at the public’s expense.

On Thursday, the privileges committee found Johnson deliberately misled parliament over partygate.

It recommended a 90-day suspension for the ex-prime minister, which he will escape after resigning as an MP, and said he should not receive a pass granting access to parliament which is normally given to former members.

Johnson has been making serious money from speeches since being forced out of Downing Street last year – with one entry in the register of members’ interests in February stating he was paid almost £2.5 million for speeches he hadn’t even made yet.

Question Time’s first debate on Thursday was over whether Johnson’s political career was “dead and buried”.

Harri said: “If you can deprive people of their livelihood, you need to be beyond reproach.

“And the idea that the former leader of the Laboor party can decide essentially on the process and the outcome that drives out a Conservative prime minister from parliament for me, whether you like Boris or not, does not look like due process.”

On the panel, SNP MP David Linden claimed Johnson has voted just three times in the Commons and earned £5 million since he left office. “Boris Johnson probably isn’t going to go hungry as a result of leaving parliament,” he added.

It’s the latest defence of Johnson from loyalists.

Lord Stewart Jackson, a former Conservative MP and another ally of Johnson, suggested the devastating report is “revenge for Brexit”.

Conservative MP Brendan Clarke-Smith told the BBC that the report was “vindictive, spiteful and an over-reach”, adding: “90 days and taking their pass off them is the equivalent of putting somebody in the stocks and touring them round the country.”

Former Cabinet minister Simon Clarke said “this punishment is absolutely extraordinary to the point of sheer vindictiveness”.

Johnson was said to have deliberately misled MPs with his partygate denials and accused of being complicit in a campaign of abuse and intimidation, with the former prime minister hitting out at the “deranged conclusion”.

Share Button

‘You Sound Crackers’: Boris Johnson Ally Called Out For Claiming Downfall Is ‘Revenge For Brexit’

An ally of Boris Johnson has been labelled “crackers” for suggesting the devastating report that could end the former prime minister’s political career is “revenge for Brexit”.

On Thursday, the privileges committee of MPs found Johnson deliberately misled parliament over partygate.

It recommended a 90-day suspension for the ex-prime minister, which he will escape after resigning as an MP, and said he should not receive a pass granting access to parliament which is normally given to former members.

MPs are expected to have a free vote on the proposed sanctions.

On the BBC’s Politics Live soon after the report was published, Lord Stewart Jackson, a former Conservative MP, echoed Johnson’s words by describing the process as “a sham court” and “a kangaroo court”, and said the MPs had conducted a “quasi-judicial process”.

He added: “And there are people there who were out to get him, and what this is effectively is revenge for Brexit dressed up as a judicial process.”

After Jackson insisted the majority of parliament was “hostile to his position on Brexit”, he faced pushback from Ellie Mae O’Hagan from the Good Law Project, which has launched a number of legal challenges against the government.

She said: “I’m sorry, I really don’t like being rude to fellow guests. But you sound crackers … the things you are saying are just crackers … it as like the idea that this is about Brexit, the idea that Britain is now a banana republic …”

You can watch the full exchange below.

Other Johnson loyalists have taken to the airways to defend Johnson.

Conservative MP Brendan Clarke-Smith told the BBC that the report was “vindictive, spiteful and an over-each”, adding: “90 days and taking their pass off them is the equivalent of putting somebody in the stocks and touring them round the country.”

Former Cabinet minister Simon Clarke was also among Johnson’s allies to indicate they would vote against the report, saying “this punishment is absolutely extraordinary to the point of sheer vindictiveness”.

Johnson was said to have deliberately misled MPs with his partygate denials and accused of being complicit in a campaign of abuse and intimidation, with the former prime minister hitting out at the “deranged conclusion”.

Share Button

Nadine Dorries Says She Wants Answers To Peerage Snub Before Resigning

Nadine Dorries is to conduct her own investigation into why she did not get a peerage before actually resigning in the latest twist to the Boris Johnson honours list saga.

The move is in stark contrast to her tweet on Friday, which said: “I have today informed the chief whip that I am standing down as the MP for Mid Bedfordshire, with immediate effect.”

The list of new additions to the House of Lords lacked the names of Dorries and another Johnson loyalist, Nigel Adams.

The former prime minister then dramatically announced his Commons exit, as the privileges committee of MPs prepared to report that he lied to parliament over partygate, with Dorries and Adams following suit.

Both Johnson and Adams have triggered the arcane process to officially resign – but Dorries has not, with reports suggesting the former culture secretary is delaying a by-election for her Mid Bedfordshire seat to inflict pain on Rishi Sunak.

The PM is blamed by Dorries for blocking her move to the upper house, though he maintains he only refused to intervene with Lords officials when pressed by Johnson.

On Wednesday night, Dorries broke her silence on the issue – tweeting she will not formally resign until after she gets answers from the government about why she did not get her peerage.

She insisted it is “absolutely my intention to resign” but said her requests for documents from the House of Lords appointments commission “is now sadly necessary” as she accused No 10 of “varying and conflicting statements” over her absence from Johnson’s resignation honours list.

She also vowed to “continue to serve my constituents of Mid Bedfordshire”, after Sunak earlier said her constituents “deserve proper representation”.

With her demands for documents likely to take time, the three by-elections will almost certainly have to take place over separate days.

The move could prolong the misery for the prime minister as he faces a battle to defend three Conservative seats at a time of dire polling as he publicly scraps with Johnson.

Downing Street has expressed bewilderment at her delay in officially quitting. Sunak’s press secretary said: “It’s obviously unusual to have an MP say they will resign with immediate effect and for that not to take place.”

In another Tory fit of pique, Johnson on Wednesday called for a Tory MP to step down from the partygate probe amid extraordinary claims he attended a gathering during lockdown.

The former prime minister wants Bernard Jenkin to resign from the privileges committee, which has been investigating whether he misled MPs over the lockdown scandal. The claim came on the eve of the report’s publication.

Share Button

Why Is Donald Trump Facing Criminal Charges Over Classified Documents?

Donald Trump has appeared in a Miami courtroom to face criminal charges over national security documents he kept when he left the presidential office, and lied to officials who sought to recover them.

Here’s a summary of what’s happened so far.

What are the charges?

On Tuesday, the former US president pleaded not guilty as he was charged on 37 criminal counts relating to keeping classified documents at his Florida home – including in his ballroom and shower, and involving nuclear weapons and foreign adversaries.

The charges include violations of the Espionage Act, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements to investigators.

It’s the first time a former president has been indicted by the federal government.

What did he do?

The charges are less to do with taking the documents – some of which were top secret, the classification level reserved for the country’s most closely held secrets – and more to do with not handing them back when asked.

In January 2022, Trump agreed to return 15 boxes of records to the US National Archives and Records Administration, and officials discovered in them more than 700 pages of records marked as classified.

<img class="img-sized__img landscape" loading="lazy" alt="Stacks of boxes in a bathroom and shower in former US president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.” width=”720″ height=”636″ src=”https://www.wellnessmaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/why-is-donald-trump-facing-criminal-charges-over-classified-documents-4.jpg”>
Stacks of boxes in a bathroom and shower in former US president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.

Handout via Getty Images

The Justice Department issued a grand jury subpoena in May 2022 asking Trump to return any other classified records. Trump’s attorneys later turned over 38 pages marked as classified and attested that all records with classified markings had been returned to the government – a claim that later proved to be false.

In August, the FBI conducted a search of Trump’s Palm Beach home and seized approximately 13,000 more records, about 100 of which were marked as classified.

What about other document cases?

Sitting US president Joe Biden and former vice president Mike Pence have not been charged after it was discovered that both men retained classified records after leaving office. The Biden documents stem from his time as a vice president and senator.

Unlike Trump, Biden and Pence immediately returned the records and cooperated with efforts to search for additional documents. The Justice Department is investigating the Biden matter and dropped a separate probe of Pence on June 1.

What has Trump said?

Trump has resorted to his usual playbook – calling the charges an attempt to stop him from being president again and labeling them a witch hunt.

Trump announced his indictment on his personal social media platform last week after having been informed of it by his lawyers. He has spent the subsequent four days attacking special counsel Jack Smith, calling him a “thug”, “deranged”, a “Trump hater” and a “maniac”.

Even during his motorcade trip to the courthouse – complete with highway travel lanes closed down during its passage – Trump continued posting messages. “ON MY WAY TO COURTHOUSE. WITCH HUNT!!! MAGA”, he wrote.

What are Trump’s other legal troubles?

In April, he pleaded not guilty to state charges in New York stemming from a hush money payment to a porn star. Tuesday’s appearance in Miami was on federal charges.

In May, Trump was found liable of sexually abusing and defaming journalist E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and was ordered to pay her $5 million.

But there’s more to come with further investigations into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

<img class="img-sized__img landscape" loading="lazy" alt="Donald Trump waves as he makes a visit to the Cuban restaurant Versailles after he appeared for his arraignment in Miami.” width=”720″ height=”480″ src=”https://www.wellnessmaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/why-is-donald-trump-facing-criminal-charges-over-classified-documents-5.jpg”>
Donald Trump waves as he makes a visit to the Cuban restaurant Versailles after he appeared for his arraignment in Miami.

Alon Skuy via Getty Images

How does it affect Trump’s political future?

Trump is currently the frontrunner to be the Republican nominee for next year’s presidential election – and is currently leading his rivals by wide margins in polling. His previous legal problems have even boosted his poll rating.

The case is unlikely to conclude before the vote in November next year – so will cast a long shadow over the primaries and election campaign.

Tellingly, Trump’s main rivals for the Republican presidential nomination have condemned the Justice Department for its move to charge him, underscoring their fear of upsetting his core supporters.

Is Trump going to jail?

Most of the charges carry prison terms as long as 10 years if convicted, but the obstruction charges have 20-year maximums.

Even if he does go to jail, there’s nothing stopping Trump from being president from behind bars.

Share Button

Boris Johnson Urges Privileges Committee To Publish Their ‘Nonsense’

Boris Johnson has called on the MPs investigating whether he lied to parliament over partygate to publish their “nonsense” straight away.

The former prime minister’s latest outburst came as it emerged publication of the privileges committee’s report had been delayed.

It had been expected that their findings would be released tomorrow and confirm that they had found Johnson guilty.

But it emerged this afternoon that the report may not now see the light of day until Thursday after Johnson – who quit as an MP on Friday after seeing an initial copy of the report – sent a letter to the committee on Monday night.

In a statement this evening, he said: “The privileges committee should publish their report and let the world judge their nonsense. They have no excuse for delay.

“Their absurdly unfair rules do not even allow any criticism of their findings.

“I have made my views clear to the committee in writing – and will do so more widely when they finally publish.”

Johnson has previously described the committee as a “kangaroo court” and accused them of carrying out a “witch hunt”.

In a lengthy statement, he said the committee’s report was “riddled with inaccuracies and reeks of prejudice” while providing him with “no formal ability to challenge anything they say”.

He said the panel of MPs had “still not produced a shred of evidence that I knowingly or recklessly misled the Commons”.

But he said he thought their “purpose from the beginning has been to find me guilty, regardless of the facts”.

“They know that I corrected the record as soon as possible; and they know that I and every other senior official and minister – including the current prime minister and then occupant of the same building, Rishi Sunak – believed that we were working lawfully together,” he said.

“I did not lie, and I believe that in their hearts the committee know it.”

As he is no longer an MP, the committee cannot suspend him from the Commons. However, they could recommend that he be denied a parliamentary pass, which is ordinarily given to former MPs.

It has also emerged that members of the committee have had to be given security after receiving abuse from Johnson supporters.

Share Button

Trump Arrives In Miami For First Court Appearance Over Documents Charges

Former President Donald Trump arrived in Miami on Monday, a day ahead of his first court appearance on 37 felony charges accusing him of illegally taking highly classified documents from the White House to his Florida club and refusing to return them.

Upon arrival, he headed to Miami’s Trump National Doral, where he’s expected to spend the night before his court appearance. A crowd of about 40 supporters lined the route to his golf club, reporters on the scene said, but Trump did not roll down his window or acknowledge them.

Trump has said that Tuesday’s court session will take place at 3pm (8pm UK time) and he will plead not guilty on all charges. It’s not yet clear whether the former president will appear before Judge Aileen Cannon, the federal judge assigned to the case, or a magistrate judge, as often happens in this kind of initial hearing.

Trump is expected to go through an arraignment ― the formal reading of charges before a defendant ― and enter his not guilty plea on Tuesday, though it’s possible the judge may save that for a later date.

The ex-president is expected to head to Miami’s Wilkie D. Ferguson Courthouse ahead of his appearance before the judge, for processing and ― most likely ― electronic fingerprinting. But reporters covering Miami courts say it’s unlikely Trump will be visible to the public.

“The public won’t see him,” Jay Weaver, who covers federal courts for the Miami Herald, told NPR on Sunday. “I mean, the reality is that when he surrenders, it’ll probably be done through an underground garage.”

Despite that, large crowds are expected at the courthouse on Tuesday.

“Make no mistake about it, we’re taking this event extremely serious,” the city’s police chief, Manny Morales, said during a press conference. “We’re ready. Ready for it to be over and done.”

There was a chaotic scene outside of Trump’s arraignment on separate state charges in April. That event, in New York City, drew hundreds of supporters and detractors, some dressed in orange jumpsuits and Trump masks. Republican representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and George Santos showed up outside the courthouse to support Trump.

Cameras are generally not allowed in federal courts, so the public likely won’t get a glimpse of Trump in court for this indictment.

After the court hearing, Trump is expected to fly to his club in Bedminster, New Jersey, where he’s said he will deliver remarks at 8.15pm (1.15am UK time).

Share Button

Nadine Dorries Evokes Class Struggle In Attack On ‘Posh Boys’ Amid Peerage Row

Nadine Dorries has drawn from her working-class upbringing as she claimed “posh boys” blocked her from taking a seat in the House of Lords.

The outgoing Tory MP hit out at prime minister Rishi Sunak and one of his closest advisers, James Forsyth, after she did not appear on ally Boris Johnson’s resignation nominations, prompting the former cabinet minister to announce she was quitting parliament.

Johnson also dramatically announced on Friday he was resigning after Dorries and others had apparently been shorn from the list.

The row has since descended into a public slanging match between Sunak and his predecessor in Downing Street, with the current PM making clear the decision was made by the House of Lords appointment commission and that he refused Johnson’s request to intervene.

On Monday, Dorries added to the din when she spoke to Piers Morgan on TalkTV, and said she was “broken-hearted” that a woman from her background had had the appointment taken away from her.

She told Morgan “This story is about a girl from Breck Road in Liverpool who worked every day of her life since she was 14 years old, had something offered to her … people from that background don’t get offered … removed by two privileged posh boys who went to Winchester and Oxford, and taken away duplicitously and cruelly because they have known for months that it wasn’t the case. And yet they let me and they let Boris Johnson continue to believe that was the case.”

She added: “It was upsetting and it’s upsetting for everybody who thinks that one day they could be that person because you know what if you come up against someone like Rishi Soak and James Forsyth, from privileged backgrounds, who have it all very easily, given to them on a plate … you’re in trouble.”

Johnson’s own background is not a fair comparison because he attended Eton on a scholarship and has “no money”, she claimed.

Dorries also claimed she had been “bullied” by No. 10 and decided she “can’t allow that to happen”.

She denied “knifing the party” by triggering a by-election in her constituency, telling TalkTV: “I think you come to a point in life when you have to stop, when you can’t just be pushed around, when you can’t allow people to bully you, as I’ve just been bullied by No 10. You can’t allow that to happen, you have to stand up for yourself, and that’s what I did.”

The former culture secretary added: “It was a painful decision … I didn’t want to cause a by-election.”

Dorries was born in 1957 in Liverpool and grew up on a council estate.

She has previously referred to David Cameron and George Osborne as “arrogant posh boys”, while describing herself as “a normal mother who comes from a poor background and who didn’t go to a posh school”.

Share Button

Nicola Sturgeon Says She Is ‘Innocent Of Any Wrongdoing’ Following Arrest

Nicola Sturgeon has insisted she is “innocent of any wrongdoing” following her arrest as part of a police probe into the SNP’s finances.

The former first minister was quizzed by detectives for seven hours before being released without charge.

Police Scotland have launched an investigation into the whereabouts of £660,000 donated to the SNP for a second independence referendum campaign

Sturgeon’s husband, former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, and the party’s former treasurer, Colin Beattie, have previously been arrested as part of the probe, known as Operation Branchform.

Following her release this evening, Sturgeon issued a statement on Twitter in which she said it was “beyond doubt” that she was innocent.

She said: “To find myself in the situation I did today when I am certain I have committed no offence is both a shock and deeply distressing.

“I know that this ongoing investigation is difficult for people, and I am grateful that so many continue to show faith in me and appreciate that I would never do anything to harm either the SNP or the country.”

Ms Sturgeon went on: “Obviously, given the nature of this process, I cannot go into detail.

“However, I do wish to say this, and to do so in the strongest possible terms. Innocence is not just a presumption I am entitled to in law. I know beyond doubt that I am in fact innocent of any wrongdoing.”

Sturgeon thanked “the many people who have sent messages of support over these past difficult weeks – including since today’s news broke”.

She added: “Thank you also to my close circle of family and friends who are giving me much-needed strength at this time.”

Police Scotland are investigating claims that the donations from activists to support the campaign for a second independence referendum were used for other purposes.

The inquiry was launched following allegations that the money, which was meant to be in a ring-fenced fund, had been misappropriated.

An SNP spokesperson said: “These issues are subject to a live police investigation.

“The SNP have been co-operating fully with this investigation and will continue to do so, however it is not appropriate to publicly address any issues while that investigation is ongoing.”

Share Button