Nepal floods LIVE: A Nepal Army soldier works during a search and rescue operation near the Trishuli Hydropower Project site, following deadly flash floods and mudslides, in Rasuwa district.

From A Distance The Globe looks Like an All Tranquil Ball.

From that distance, apart from the pull of thinking about his own family back home, borders, passports and nationalities became irrelevant.

It was just one small planet, calm and connected, the divisions we create on the ground looking totally inconsequential from above. It’s the same image by Julie Gold earlier in the song ‘From a Distance’ made famous by Bette Midler, where the world seen from far off looks like nothing but blue and green, peaceful and whole, none of our man-made lines visible at all.

That is the same lens through which we should look at the disasters unfolding right now.

Jamaica, the Philippines, Haiti, Nepal, Spain, Portugal, France, and the UK too. What do these countries have in common?

Floods, disasters, fires, landslides and earthquakes, and they’re becoming more frequent and more life costing, with more infrastructure destruction. Roads, bridges, schools and hospitals gone, thousands upon thousands missing, homes destroyed.

It’s arguably clear this is interconnected and not restricted to one side of the world, and it shows that our world is Not only geographically connected, as if that needed pointing out. And so we need a more coordinated action.

Environmental hazards don’t recognise political boundaries.

A shift in one region impacts the next. From extreme sides of the weather to extreme winters and extreme summers, these nations suffer mass losses of life, thousands missing and critical infrastructure left in ruins.

Nepal

Nepal, sandwiched between China and India, with the Himalayas dipping through it, is one of the most fascinating tourist and geological destinations in the world.

But in times like this, that same location makes it one of the most unreachable places on earth for rescue.

On the morning of August 26, 2026, a massive glacier avalanche near the Nepal China border sent tons of rock, mud and ice into nearby rivers, triggering flash floods and landslides that registered as a magnitude 5.2 event.

Entire villages were wiped out.

By late August the losses of lives stood at nearly 800, with over 3,000 still missing and around 90,000 people affected, roughly 17,000 of them children.

Water in the Trishuli River rose by up to 9 metres in just 30 minutes. Major roads, bridges, hydroelectric plants and electricity systems were destroyed, and scientists say climate change likely helped trigger the collapse.

Jamaica

Hurricane Melissa made landfall in Jamaica on October 28, 2025, the strongest hurricane ever recorded to hit the island, a Category 5 storm with 185 mph winds. It brought up to 30 inches of rain and storm surges of 9 to 13 feet. In Jamaica 45 people were confirmed dead, around 120,000 buildings lost their roofs, over 450 schools were damaged and losses topped US$8.8 to 12 billion.

Haiti

Haiti, which wasn’t hit directly, still suffered days of torrential rain and catastrophic river flooding as the storm passed nearby, and it paid the heaviest price of all in lives lost, with at least 43 people killed and dozens more reported missing in the country’s south.

The tragedy is that Haiti’s fragile infrastructure and already stretched emergency services meant a storm that never made landfall there still overwhelmed the country. Combined, more than 5 million people across the Caribbean were affected.

Philippines

In the Philippines, a garbage landslide at the Binaliw landfill in Cebu City killed 36 people in January 2026, and a tropical storm in February 2026 killed 8 and displaced more than 28,000, on top of the typhoon seasons that batter the archipelago’s thousands of islands.

Europe Summer of Hot Discontent 2026

Across southern Europe this summer, Spain, Portugal and France faced what officials are calling record breaking wildfire seasons.

By late August 2026 more than 634,000 hectares had burned across Europe. Spain alone lost over 150,000 hectares, six times the area burned over the same period the year before, with the Ávila blaze near Madrid becoming the largest fire in the country’s recorded history and forcing the evacuation of around 100,000 people.

A wildfire near Los Gallardos in Almería killed at least 14 people, the deadliest Spanish wildfire in about two decades.

France recorded around 115,000 hectares burned, a national record, with the Gironde fire alone burning about 42,000 hectares and over 220,000 people evacuated.

Portugal lost more than 63,000 hectares to over 6,600 rural fires, all through Spain’s hottest summer on record.

United Kingdom

The UK had its own brush with this in 2026, with wildfires across England and Wales surpassing the previous year’s record, more than 23,000 hectares burned by mid-August, and temperatures hitting 38.1°C in London, one of the hottest day on record.

The government issued an emergency wildfire alert, homes were destroyed, there were evacuated, a major motorway was closed and rail services were disrupted, while people faced drought and water restrictions.

And the list goes on and on.

Nepalese UK Personal Human Connections

This hits almost everyone, especially here in Britain, London in particular and parts of Surrey where the Nepalese community is part of the fabric of British society and its institutions. The Ghurkas too are a well known fighting force within the British Army.

At a personal level, they are our friends, our neighbours, our workmates, colleagues in offices and establishments across every sphere of life, entertainment, hospitality and beyond.

Almost everyone in the community Possibly knows someone from Nepal, and that connection runs deep, through the Gurkhas’ long contribution to this country and to British society more broadly.

Nepal itself is a country very well known for its hospitality and its tourism.

But even without that personal connection, our common humanity alone should be enough to demand that we act, that we save life and find the missing.

Above all, the reach of the victims makes the point even sharper as many of those missing are reportedly tourists from around the world, which turns this from a Nepalese disaster into a genuinely global one.

It’s a reminder that geography, as a place in a globalised world, still matters, and that what happens in one corner of it reaches into all the others.

The message throughout this summer, Jamaica, the Philippines, even last year Haiti, Spain, Portugal, France, the UK and now Nepal, is just that the environment is real, it has no borders and we need coordinated action, and fast.

There needs to be a more coordinated, quicker response to save lives and treat those who’ve been injured and find those who are missing.

So what does international law actually say about all this?

Under customary international law and the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters, the primary duty to protect citizens and direct relief lies with the host state. But when national capacity is completely overwhelmed, states are obligated to seek international support, and international law says host governments cannot arbitrarily withhold consent when civilian survival is at stake.

IDRL

IDRL, International Disaster Response Law, comes from the 2007 IFRC Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance.

These are the rules that guide governments on waiving customs duties, expediting relief visas and granting legal access to foreign personnel.

Sendai

Then there’s the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, running 2015 to 2030 and adopted under the United Nations.

It sets international standards for understanding risk, strengthening disaster governance, investing in resilient infrastructure and enhancing preparedness to build back better during recovery.

Domestic capacity dictates a lot of the outcome. Jamaica relies on the regional Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency, CDEMA, to pool resources against coastal storms.

Haiti’s fragile infrastructure creates severe bottlenecks that stall global aid at the ports.

The Philippines has a structured national framework, yet its geography across thousands of islands makes immediate cross island access difficult.

While Nepal, landlocked and sandwiched between China and India, saw destroyed mountain roads and bridges cripple both domestic and foreign response.

This is why there’s a strong case for a bigger regional United Nations presence across known hotspots such as the Himalayan corridor, the Caribbean basin and the Pacific Ring of Fire.

Pre positioning relief supplies, communications equipment and emergency medical teams within regional UN hubs drastically reduces response times compared to shipping aid from distant depots, and it helps keep emergency assistance neutral near sensitive borders.

The execution of all this depends on organisations acting under established mandates.

ICRC and other Agencies

The International Committee of the Red Cross, grounded in the Geneva Conventions for armed conflict, also deploys its Central Tracing Agency during natural disasters to restore family links and track missing persons when local communications fail.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, working alongside local Red Cross and Red Crescent national societies including the Red Crescent, holds statutory auxiliary status to public authorities and leads operational standards under IDRL.

UN

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, mandated by UN General Assembly Resolution 46/182, deploys UNDAC teams, United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination, to align foreign civilian and military assistance with local ministries.

While the 1945 UN Charter doesn’t explicitly mention climate hazards, Article 1(3) establishes the legal basis for international cooperation to solve economic, social and humanitarian problems.

Modern jurisprudence adds the customary rule against transboundary harm, meaning states must prevent activities within their borders from causing environmental degradation elsewhere.

The Paris Agreement connects directly with the Sendai Framework, reinforcing that protecting shared mountain, lakes, oceanic and river ecosystems is a legally recognised global urgent imperative.

While a single unified global protocol, doesn’t fully exist a patchwork of The IDRL non bindinguidelines are widely recognised.

For emphasis, the Sendai Framework is a policy framework, not a treaty while the ILC’s draft articles haven’t become a convention.

Paris Fit For Purpose?

Notably, while the Paris Agreement bears on the climate drivers and the legal foundation for cooperation is there, there is a dearth of equivalent velocity between the law existing and the response. Whether these are relevant to actually reaching a family in London, Jamaica or Haiti still waiting to hear whether their loved one made it out.

Evidenly, the ubiquitous nature of recent events indicate that climate, the environment and the detriment impact has no borders.

The globe, as from a distance by an astranout as one tiny globe, one a tightly knit structure connected by oceans with a common experience the same way Julie Gold heard it.

From a distance, it all looks calm and peaceful. The world needs to remain connected whether we like it or not, beyond passports, beyond nationalities.

Because Nature Has No Borders, and that’s the message.

And on that note we should also take the opportunity to wish those visiting London Carnival to Enjoy the Bank Holiday.

References

CNN, “About 2,500 still missing after catastrophic flooding at Nepal-China border” — https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/28/world/live-news/nepal-china-flood

Al Jazeera, “Nepal-Tibet floods: What happened, what caused them and who is missing?” — https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/27/nepal-tibet-floods-what-happened-what-caused-them-and-who-is-missing

Project HOPE, “Flash Floods Devastate Nepal” — https://www.projecthope.org/news-stories/responses/flash-floods-devastate-nepal-how-to-help/

Al Jazeera, “Death toll from Hurricane Melissa climbs to 49, with many still missing” — https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/10/31/death-toll-from-hurricane-melissa-climbs-to-49-with-many-still-missing

NOAA National Hurricane Center, Tropical Cyclone Report, Hurricane Melissa (AL132025) — https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/AL132025_Melissa.pdf

Center for Disaster Philanthropy, “Hurricane Melissa” — https://disasterphilanthropy.org/disasters/hurricane-melissa/

Cebu Daily News / Inquirer, “Explainer: What led to the deadly Binaliw landfill landslide” — https://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/688090/explainer-what-led-to-the-deadly-binaliw-landfill-landslide

CBS News, “Mountain of garbage collapses at Philippines landfill, killing 1, burying dozens” — https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/philippines-landfill-mountain-garbage-collapse

PBS NewsHour / Associated Press, “Tropical storm leaves 8 dead, thousands displaced in Philippines after flooding and landslide” — https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/tropical-storm-leaves-8-dead-thousands-displaced-in-philippines-after-flooding-and-landslide

CNN, “France and Spain wildfires” — https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/26/world/live-news/france-spain-wildfires-evacuations

Al Jazeera, “Wildfires in southwest Europe: What we know so far” — https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/7/27/wildfires-in-southwest-europe-what-we-know-so-far

NASA Earth Observatory, “Destructive Fires Char Western Europe” — https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/destructive-fires-char-western-europe/

European Commission Joint Research Centre, “Current wildfire situation in Europe” — https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/scientific-activities/natural-and-man-made-hazards/forest-fires/current-wildfire-situation-europe_en

Reuters (via Sharjah24), “UK wildfires reach record levels amid extreme heat” — https://sharjah24.ae/en/Articles/2026/08/15/UK-wildfires-reach-record-levels-amid-extreme-heat

UN International Law Commission, Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters (UN Doc A/71/10, 2016) — https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/6_3_2016.pdf

IFRC, Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance (IDRL Guidelines, 2007) — https://www.ifrc.org/document/idrl-guidelines

UNDRR, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 — https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030

International Committee of the Red Cross — https://www.icrc.org/en

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies — https://www.ifrc.org

UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs — https://www.unocha.org

UNFCCC, The Paris Agreement — https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement

60 years later The Joy,In Between and The AI-fication of NottingHill Carnival Policing.

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

To be clear, the handouts distributed by officers mention that people are not obliged to walk past or through the facial recognition cameras, and that images of anyone not flagged as a person of interest are deleted automatically at the point of capture.

Yet as the afternoon grew into evening, skipping ropes, drums, and stationary sound systems removed the initial fears.

The heavy thoughts began to fade into the celebration and it was party time.

Hours later, I felt these reflections needed to be codified and documented while the iron was hot.

It must be said that after decades of attending NottingHill Carnival, anyone would be stretched to find a finer place to spend those two days rounding off the summer in London or anywhere in Europe.

To understand the full legal and historical weight of this surveillance, however, requires revisiting the festival’s roots.

August Party

Every August bank holiday, West London hosts Europe’s largest street party. Sound systems vibrate through the pavement while masqueraders in feathers and sequins fill the streets. The smell of jerk chicken drifts past Portobello Road and Oxford Gardens, surrounded by crowd energy and neighborhood sound systems.

But let us go back to where and how it all started.

NottingHill began as a direct response to injustice and local racism.

During the 1950s, NottingHill was a working-class neighborhood that housed one of London’s largest Caribbean communities. Many arrived as part of the Windrush generation from 1948 onward to help rebuild post-war Britain. They faced hostility, discrimination in housing and employment, and violent attacks from far-right groups. Prominent signs reading “No dogs, no Blacks, no Irish” were common across the area.

In 1958, white mobs targeted Caribbean residents during a wave of violent street attacks. Trinidadian-born activist and journalist Claudia Jones responded by organizing an indoor Caribbean carnival at St Pancras Town Hall in January 1959 to showcase cultural pride and community resistance.

In May 1959, an Antiguan carpenter named Kelso Cochrane was murdered in the neighborhood. The racially motivated killing went unsolved, deepening distrust toward the police investigation.

By 1966, community worker Rhaune Laslett organized an outdoor street festival to build connections across local neighborhoods. When Russell Henderson’s Steel Band marched through the streets, crowds followed, establishing the format of Notting Hill Carnival.

Throughout the 1970s, the event adopted a stronger Caribbean identity and political tone. Sound systems became the primary draw, driving attendance past 100,000 in the mid-70s before eventually growing into millions of annual visitors.

This history established a persistent dynamic where carnival functions as both a celebration of Black British culture and a frequent subject of heavy policing and media scrutiny. Critics point out that media coverage often skews negative, despite the event maintaining lower crime rates per capita than major UK festivals like Glastonbury.

Over time, security tactics transitioned from heavy physical presence to automated monitoring. Supporters claim that artificial intelligence tools offer operational benefits by tracking crowds, supporting threat detection, and streamlining police deployment. Authorities highlight arrest figures as proof of concept, arguing that biometric tools help locate high-risk individuals without relying on aggressive physical stop-and-search tactics.

Conversely, public interest groups raise concerns around privacy loss, racial profiling, misidentification, and systemic bias.

Evaluating Artificial Intelligence

No question, artificial intelligence is transforming society at a pace that challenges existing legal and ethical frameworks. Systems that increasingly determine access to housing, employment, healthcare, and even justice operate at scales and speeds far beyond human decision-making.

In a book I published last year, I examined how international human rights law can and must respond to these developments. While human rights frameworks were designed for human actors, their foundational principles of dignity, equality, and accountability remain essential for governing AI in a manner that protects individuals and promotes justice. That work is dedicated to all who strive to ensure that technological progress serves humanity rather than undermines it. Today, in policing at Notting Hill Carnival and similar events, that work became real as I heard the radio direction “IC3” roll over police channels.

Live Facial Recognition (LFR)

Live Facial Recognition (LFR) has been deployed at Notting Hill periodically since 2016, scanning crowd faces to match them against police watchlists in real time. Officials consistently credit the software with identifying wanted individuals.

Critics contend that continuous scanning subjects entire crowds to passive data collection without clear consent.

Civil rights groups highlight potential chilling effects on public gathering and document disparities in algorithmic accuracy across different demographic groups. In 2025, eleven civil rights and anti-racism organizations issued a joint letter to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, calling the deployment a mass surveillance tool that treats attendees as default suspects.

The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission separately warned that current operational safeguards may fail human rights compliance standards.

Evaluating the legal authority for live biometric surveillance requires separating statutory obligations from international guidance. Mandatory legal frameworks in the UK include the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), the Data Protection Act 2018, and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). International declarations, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, provide guidance unless formally incorporated into domestic law.

Law enforcement justifies AI deployment under Article 8 of the ECHR by arguing that surveillance measures are lawful and proportionate. Early proceedings in R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police saw the Divisional Court rule that published policy guidelines provided sufficient legal clarity for operational use. Police base their defense on public safety outcomes, policy transparency, and existing legal remedies.

Opponents rely on the subsequent Court of Appeal decision in R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2020] EWCA Civ 1058, which overturned the lower court. The ruling established that South Wales Police lacked adequate legal boundaries and failed to satisfy the Public Sector Equality Duty under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The modern debate mirrors historic tensions over police discretion, shifting the question from physical patrol tactics to automated software systems and algorithmic databases.

Arguments Supporting Police Use (Blue Corner)

Under human rights standards, police are required to demonstrate that surveillance technology is lawful, necessary, and proportionate under Article 8(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This standard permits privacy interventions that are “in accordance with the law” and necessary for public safety or crime prevention.

The Metropolitan Police positions its Carnival operations within this standard. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Matt Ward stated that LFR targets a small number of individuals suspected of serious offenses, rather than monitoring the broader public. The force pointed to published policy documents and Data Protection Impact Assessments as evidence of statutory compliance, referencing the initial Divisional Court finding in R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police regarding operational policy clarity.

Arguments Opposing Police Use (Red Corner)

The appellate precedent in UK law set stricter limits on biometric scanning. In R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2020] EWCA Civ 1058, the Court of Appeal determined that South Wales Police operated live facial recognition unlawfully on three counts: breaching Article 8 due to overly broad officer discretion regarding watchlist inclusions, producing an inadequate Data Protection Impact Assessment, and failing the Public Sector Equality Duty by not verifying potential racial or gender bias in the algorithm.

The legal challenge also cited Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of assembly), arguing that mass biometric monitoring creates a chilling effect on public gatherings.

Applying these standards to Carnival, advocacy groups argue that structural deficiencies persist. Data compiled by Big Brother Watch highlighted high historic false-positive figures in police trials, including 35 incorrect matches recorded in a single day at the 2017 Carnival. Campaigners argue these error margins fail the necessity test mandated by Article 8(2).

In 2025, eleven advocacy groups wrote to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner regarding mass surveillance risks, while the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission cautioned that current force safeguards remain vulnerable to human rights challenges.

Given that Carnival remains tied to London’s Black Caribbean population, civil rights groups maintain that deploying software with known demographic accuracy variations at this specific event creates ongoing compliance risks under the Public Sector Equality Duty (Section 149, Equality Act 2010).

A Transatlantic Comparison

North America, Europe, and the UK

Surveillance policy at public events reflects broader legal divergences across North America, continental Europe, and the UK regarding data protection, civil liberties, and private sector involvement.

North America

The United States lacks a single federal statute regulating law enforcement use of facial recognition, relying primarily on post-hoc constitutional litigation. In Williams v. City of Detroit, Robert Williams filed suit following a wrongful arrest caused by a false facial recognition match, alleging Fourth Amendment violations and state civil rights breaches. The resulting 2024 settlement prohibited the Detroit Police Department from making arrests based exclusively on facial recognition hits and mandated audits of historical warrants involving the technology.

This approach functions reactively, evaluating constitutional violations after harm occurs rather than requiring upfront equality impact assessments.

Canada focuses heavily on commercial data collection practices. Following disclosures that Clearview AI scraped online imagery to build databases used by law enforcement, Canadian privacy commissioners found the company in violation of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and related provincial laws. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner determined that police use of improperly acquired commercial data breached the federal Privacy Act. Canadian courts subsequently sustained orders requiring the deletion of improperly gathered biometric records.

Europe

The European Union established a statutory ban on real-time public biometric identification under Article 5(1)(h) of the EU AI Act. The framework restricts public law enforcement use to specific exceptions: searching for missing persons or victims of human trafficking, preventing imminent security threats, or tracking suspects in defined serious crimes, subject to prior judicial authorization. Regulatory violations carry statutory penalties up to €35 million or 7 percent of global turnover.

Regulatory enforcement remains active across member states. European data protection authorities have issued dynamic fines against non-compliant vendors, and the European Commission issued regulatory warnings to member states attempting to launch unauthorized public facial recognition networks.

The UK

The UK operates between these models. Under Bridges, facial recognition usage remains legal if police forces meet Article 8 ECHR standards, data protection law, and Public Sector Equality Duty requirements. This creates a case-by-case compliance standard rather than a total statutory ban.

Comparing these jurisdictions highlights three distinct approaches: North America relies on post-incident civil litigation, the EU enforces broad statutory restrictions with judicial exceptions, and the UK applies case-specific Judicial review against human rights frameworks.

1959 to 2026

The More Things Change, The More They Change Form, But The Substance Stays

NottingHill Carnival continues as an enduring cultural festival established by a community responding to racial hostility through public art and music. However, its operation remains linked to broader debates over public monitoring, security classification, and civil liberties in public spaces.

While facial recognition systems represent modern technological additions, the core legal questions match historical concerns around public policing, civil rights, and accountability mechanisms during major cultural events.

After decades of Notting Hill Carnival, one would still be stretched to find a better place to spend those two days rounding off the summer in London or anywhere in Europe. The music plays on, the crowds gather, and the struggle to balance joyful public assembly with accountability and human rights continues.

Sources & References

1. Court Rulings & Statutory Authorities:

   • UK Court of Appeal: R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2020] EWCA Civ 1058 – Landmark judgment establishing legal limits, Article 8 ECHR compliance, and PSED requirements for police use of Live Facial Recognition.

   • UK Legislation: Equality Act 2010, Section 149 (Public Sector Equality Duty).

   • UK Legislation: Data Protection Act 2018 & UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).

   • US Federal Lawsuit: Williams v. City of Detroit, No. 2:21-cv-10827 (E.D. Mich. 2024 Settlement) – Landmark federal civil rights settlement restricting law enforcement reliance on automated facial recognition searches.

   • European Union Law: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU Artificial Intelligence Act), Article 5(1)(h) – Prohibition of real-time remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for law enforcement.

2. Civil Liberties & Regulatory Reports:

   • ACLU & ACLU of Michigan: Summary of Detroit Facial Recognition Settlement Agreement (June 2024).

   • Panopticon Legal Blog: Key Points from the Bridges Facial Recognition Appeal (September 2020).

   • Liberty (National Council for Civil Liberties): Legal Challenge: Ed Bridges v South Wales Police.

     ---

Legal & Informational Disclaimer General Information This article is provided strictly for educational, historical, and commentary purposes. It does not constitute formal legal advice, legal opinions, or professional consulting services. Accuracy of Case Law & Statutes Legal frameworks surrounding biometric technologies, dynamic surveillance tools, and data protection laws evolve rapidly across jurisdictions. During the preparation of this work, AI tools were are are used solely for research, editing, and time factors and formatting assistance; the author reviewed and edited all content and retains full ownership and responsibility for the final manuscript. Readers seeking legal counsel regarding live facial recognition, data protection compliance, or human rights proceedings should consult a qualified legal practitioner in their respective jurisdiction. Personal Narrative & Opinions Expressed reflections on historical context, community dynamics, and public safety policy represent commentary on matter of public interest and do not reflect official views of any police force or statutory authority.For a look at the security updates and camera deployments surrounding recent events, check out this Notting Hill Carnival security overview.

Erin Popolo holds a picture of daughter Emily Murilla, who died at age 17, during a protest outside of the federal courthouse in Oakland, California on Tuesday, Aug. 18, 2026. Noah Berger/AP

Meta’s Child Safety Settlement Real Impact or Paper Tiger Effect?

By Shemi Esquire

During an avalanche of breaking world news, unfolding events and what is dubbed as silly season, in the media calender, Meta, formerly facebook, this week reached a potentially pivotal settlement regarding design issues around its platforms. This related to the extent to which designs are allegedly harmful to children.

While a welcome first step, it raises more questions around its remedial impact, cascading effect to other tech giants and other wider issues,such as the determination of financial beneficiaries will be or in what quantum.

Furthermore, from an objective perspective, the settlement may be criticised as legally uncertain and dubiously unenforceable.

Technology law specialists could also argue that Meta’s product features are common across the industry, and that proving a direct connection between platform design and individual mental health injuries is difficult.

They may also contend that imposing product design restrictions through litigation could discourage innovation, interfere with users’ freedom of choice, and allow regulators to set policy without clear legislative standards.

Hence a real risk of becoming yet another headline grabbing item, a paper tiger of sorts than a real remedial protective tool.

From that perspective, stronger privacy enforcement and improved parental education might arguably be preferable to a large financial settlement and government directed changes to online services.

Notably, jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and Australia, among others have also introduced legislative protections for children under 16.

Examining the legal issues in the settlement might provide some basic understanding.

Legal Issues

Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, agreed to pay up to $17 billion over ten years to settle a major child safety lawsuit brought by California and other states.[2]

The settlement followed a federal trial in Oakland, California, concerning allegations that Meta designed its platforms to keep children and teenagers engaged while concealing the risks those products pose to young users.

The federal judge approved the settlement shortly after it was filed.[3]. The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of state attorneys general, including California, and the states alleged that Meta intentionally deployed features such as infinite scrolling, autoplay videos, personalised recommendations, frequent notifications and image filters to increase the amount of time young people spend on Facebook and Instagram.

According to the states, Meta knew that some of these features could contribute to anxiety, compulsive use, sleep disruption, body image concerns and other mental health problems among minors, and the states further claimed that the company failed to adequately disclose those risks to the public.[4]

The litigation also involved allegations that Meta collected personal information from children under the age of 13. Although Meta’s policies prohibit children under 13 from creating accounts, the states argued that the company knew many young users were accessing its services and did not take sufficient steps to prevent it.

The case was part of a broader wave of lawsuits alleging that social media companies have contributed to harm affecting children and teenagers, and it was consolidated from multiple state actions and ultimately resolved claims brought by fifty one states and jurisdictions.[5]

Doubts

It is not entirely clear, apart from the settlement itself, what protective measures will be put in place to ensure the alleged harm is mitigated or removed.

The consumer protection claims generally rest on laws that prohibit companies from misleading consumers or engaging in business practices that are unfair, deceptive or likely to cause substantial harm, and the states sought both financial penalties and orders requiring changes to Meta’s products.

Privacy

There is also the question of children’s online privacy. the states alleged violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, commonly known as COPPA, which requires online services directed at children, or knowingly used by children under thirteen, to obtain parental consent before collecting certain personal information.[6]

Prior Knowledge

The claims were not limited to Meta’s stated age policy.

A major question was whether Meta knew that children under 13 were using its services, and whether the company took reasonable measures to protect their data.

Design And Defences

The sword

A further issue concerned product design and social media addiction.

Shield

Meta raised First Amendment and federal statutory defences.

The company maintained that it had long run programmes intended to support young users, and argued that there was no established link between its products and the alleged harms.

The authority of the states to obtain changes to a nationwide platform was also challenged.

Meta argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online services from liability for content posted by users, barred much of the states’ case.

The states argued, however, that their claims rested largely on Meta’s own conduct, such as product design, data practices and public representations, rather than on content posted by users, and that this distinction could limit the protection available to Meta under Section 230.[7]

The Settlement

The terms of the settlement provide that Meta will pay $17 billion in penalties over a ten year period. The agreement also requires substantial changes intended to make Facebook and Instagram safer for minors.

These changes include stronger parental controls and modifications to features that can encourage prolonged engagement, and the settlement is intended to reduce risks associated with addictive design and to improve the way Meta responds to reports involving young users.[8]

Whislteblowers

The agreement followed testimony from current and former Meta personnel, including engineers and internal researchers, who testified that young users experienced harmful interactions at higher rates than the company had publicly acknowledged.

Take a Break

State attorneys also questioned whether Meta’s Take a Break feature was promoted more prominently than its actual use justified, a criticism not unlike those levelled at design features used in gambling.[9]

Importance

The outcome is critical because it may encourage other states to pursue similar cases against other platforms, and it may encourage future lawsuits against social media companies generally to hold them accountable.

It combines financial penalties with operational restrictions, rather than treating the dispute solely as a disagreement over past harm, and it requires Meta to change its future conduct.

If oversight is rendered weak, or the changes turn out to be mostly symbolic, the settlement may prove less practical than intended. Essentially a paper tiger.

Money A Solution?

Money alone cannot solve the problem, but meaningful oversight and transparent practices are necessary to ensure that Meta places children’s welfare ahead of engagement and profit, and this concern is not confined to Meta. Platforms such as TikTok, X and YouTube arguably follow the same financial model, one built on keeping people online, and the same design logic increasingly runs through banking, finance, travel, entertainment and many other aspects of daily life.

What is also not clear is who the compensation money trickles down to and in what quantum.

Paper Tiger Effect

While a first step, this outcome will arguably undoutedly lead to more questions that it answered and risks making the law a mete paoer tiger against the media gianys that control much of our ordinary life.

Footnotes

See generally the UK Online Safety Act and the Australian Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act.

State of California Department of Justice, ‘Attorney General Bonta Secures Transformative $17 Billion Settlement with Meta’ (26 August 2026).

National Public Radio, ‘Meta, states agree to $17 billion settlement in child safety trial’ (26 August 2026).

State of California Department of Justice (n 2).

CNN Business, ‘Meta settles landmark state child harm claims for $18 billion’ (26 August 2026).

National Public Radio (n 3).

National Public Radio (n 3).

State of California Department of Justice (n 2).

National Public Radio (n 3).

As before, this is plain text, so paste it in and set line spacing to 2.0 (Ctrl+2 in Word) for the double spaced format.

Is the UN Fit for Purpose? What Zambia poses.

The recent elections in Zambia have led to a sequence of events that has attained global tension.

The election was hotly disputed.

The opposition leaders above

The opposition leaders above stated that the elections were rigged, and they said they would pursue the matter through the courts.

Then a raid took place in Lusaka’s Kabulonga area, in which one of the former cabinet ministers, Mutotwe Kafwaya, was killed. The head of the opposition alliance, Brian Mundubile, along with his running mate Makebi Zulu, sought what they called protection at the UN compound in Lusaka.

A few days later, they left that compound and were taken into police custody. It is not yet clear whether they were simply handed over, whether they were compelled to leave, a sort of Julian Assange moment, who took shelter in the Ecudorian embassy in London, UK or whether this was the outcome of a genuine negotiation.

The reporting so far points toward several days of negotiation involving a senior UN official representing the Secretary-General and the Zambian president, ending with the two men arrested by police.

To be clear negotiated does not settle the legal question but just reframes it.

After what they describe as lengthy interrogation, Mundubile and Zulu were held on allegations connected to treason. Mundubile has disputed the government’s account of the raid, saying the opposition officials were unarmed and were the ones fired upon, contrary to the government’s claim that security officers were shot at first and returned fire. He has also denied government allegations that the opposition was planning an insurgency.

The issue at the heart of this is whether the UN either by allowing it, or by being leaned on to create the circumstances participated in handing over people facing political prosecution to a government they had just sought protection from, in a context where someone had already been killed.

That raises questions of non-refoulement, protection from persecution, arbitrary detention, fair trial rights, risk of enforced disappearance, complicity, and the UN’s own obligations under its founding charter.

What the law actually says

The legal position

A transfer of political figures to a hostile government is incompatible with international law when the transferring authority knows, or should know, that the individuals face a real risk of torture, persecution, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, or a fundamentally unfair, politically motivated trial.¹

This protection is treated as absolute and does not bend to the seriousness of the allegations against the person, and it does not bend to a state’s national security claims.³

Article 14 guarantees the right to an independent and impartial tribunal, with adequate defense rights and a public hearing. If the receiving government is likely to prosecute someone for political reasons, or run a trial whose outcome is already decided, transfer into that system is unlawful under this framework.⁵

Where a government has a pattern of secret detention or refuses to disclose where people are being held, the protections against enforced disappearance and against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment come into play as well.⁶

None of this stops at the state level, a government or an international body can be held responsible not only for directly abusing someone in custody, but for knowingly assisting another state’s unlawful conduct.

The test usually comes down to what officials knew, or should have known, at the time they acted.⁷ And because we are talking about the United Nations here, not just Zambia, there is a further layer, the UN is itself bound by its own Charter and by applicable human rights standards.

UN staff cannot treat someone’s political status as a reason to set aside basic protections. Responsibility in a case like this may also depend on exactly who had effective control over the two men at each stage the UN, Zambian authorities, or some shared arrangement between them.⁸

However, and this matters, political prisoner status alone does not automatically make every transfer unlawful. The decisive questions are whether the person faces a real and foreseeable risk of serious abuse, whether the receiving state offers effective legal safeguards, and whether the transfer followed a genuine, individualized assessment with access to review not a blanket assumption based on who the person is politically.⁹

A diplomatic promise from a government with a documented record of abusing political opponents may not be enough on its own to satisfy that standard.¹⁰

Why “negotiated” is not the same as “safe”

As of writing, there has been no detailed public statement from the UN addressing whether its officials on the ground felt compelled to act as they did, what specific assurances were actually sought from the Zambian government, or how enforceable those assurances are considered to be if they are broken.

A UN spokesperson has said only that the government assured the UN the two men would be treated in full respect of due process and fair trial rights.¹¹ An assurance is not a guarantee, and it is worth asking what recourse exists if that assurance turns out to be hollow.

Even if this was a fully negotiated outcome and the reporting suggests it likely was, rather than a forced removal the underlying question does not go away. What message does it send to the next person who seeks protection from the UN, if UN premises can become a waystation to arrest rather than a shelter from it?

Negotiation implies the UN had leverage and used it. It does not tell us whether that leverage was enough, or whether it was used to secure anything more than a promise.

The precedent that should worry us is the tragedy of Srebrenica

This is not the first time the international community has faced this exact dilemma, and the historical comparison that actually applies here is not South America — it is the Balkans, and specifically Srebrenica.

Srebrenica

In July 1995, Srebrenica had been declared a UN “safe area,” protected in theory by a UN Security Council resolution and guarded by a contingent of Dutch UN peacekeepers. Thousands of Bosniak civilians and fighters sheltered there, believing UN protection meant something concrete.

When Bosnian Serb forces under General Ratko Mladić who died yesterday, advanced on the enclave, the UN peacekeepers on the ground did not — and by most accounts, could not — stop them. Bosniak men and boys were separated from women and children, and more than 8,000 were subsequently massacred. International tribunals later found that what happened at Srebrenica constituted genocide.

The lesson from Srebrenica is not that the UN acted in bad faith.

It is that a UN designation of “safety,” and even a UN presence on the ground, does not automatically translate into protection when the political will or the operational capacity to back it up is missing. People trusted the blue flag and the blue helmets, and that trust was not enough to save them. That is the weight the word “UN protection” carries historically, and it is the weight that should be sitting behind any assessment of what happened in Lusaka.

To be clear nothing so far reported about Zambia suggests anything approaching the scale of Srebrenica, and it would be wrong to imply otherwise. The comparison is not about scale. It is about the structural question what does it actually mean, in practice, when someone seeks refuge with the UN, and what obligations does that create for the UN to see the matter through rather than negotiate an exit that looks orderly on paper but leaves the underlying risk unaddressed?

Unknown Knowns

At the time of writing, Mundubile were accused of treason. Police have cited a specific section of Zambia’s penal code in connection with the allegations against them. We do not have the UN’s full account of the four days of negotiation, what alternatives were considered, or whether removal to a third country was ever seriously on the table.

Reports suggest President Hichilema refused to grant safe passage to a third country, and that this refusal shaped the eventual outcome but the UN’s own reasoning for accepting that position, if it did, has not been made public in detail.

The question this leaves us is the UN still fit for purpose?

Can it still be trusted to protect the persecuted, the oppressed, and those fleeing for their lives, when push comes to shove and a host government wants them back? Srebrenica taught the world that a UN safe area is not the same as UN protection in practice.

Zambia may be a smaller, lower-stakes test of the same underlying question but it is the same question, and it deserves a direct answer from the UN, not a diplomatic non-statement.

Brian Mundubile, the opposition leader referenced above, challenged President Hakainde Hichilema in the August 13 election and rejected the result, alleging irregularities; Hichilema was declared winner with around 60% of the vote per the electoral commission.

Mundubile’s running mate, Makebi Zulu, surrendered alongside him. Authorities say security officers were fired on during the raid and returned fire. Mundubile disputes this and says opposition officials were unarmed and fired upon.

Amnesty International called the killing of former minister Mutotwe Kafwaya “deeply alarming.”

As of writing, formal charges had not been confirmed, though police cited a specific penal code section in connection with the allegations.

¹ General standard drawn from non-refoulement jurisprudence under the Convention Against Torture and related human rights law.

² Convention Against Torture, Art. 3; ICCPR, Arts. 9 and 14; general principle of state responsibility for aiding or assisting unlawful conduct.

³ Convention Against Torture, Art. 3.

⁴ 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Art. 33.

⁵ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Arts. 9, 14.

⁶ General principle drawn from international protections against enforced disappearance and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

⁷ General principle of state responsibility for aiding or assisting internationally wrongful conduct.

⁸ UN Charter, Art. 105; Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (1946).

⁹ General non-refoulement standard requiring individualized risk assessment rather than status-based assumptions.

¹⁰ General principle that diplomatic assurances alone do not automatically satisfy non-refoulement obligations where the receiving state has a documented rights record.

¹¹ UN spokesperson statement as reported by SRN News, Aug. 2026.

Above president and opposition leaders

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Tension mounts following the hotly disputed elections in Zambia and reported arrests of senior opposition leaders and including the main candidate.

As events unfolded the Mo Ibrahim Foundation issued a statement.

The foundation was set up to document, monitor and inculcate Good Governance in Africa.

This morning both opposition leaders were arrested from the UN compound.

The legality of that under international law is a question that will be very closely examined.

Local media report also state that a Former Zambian Ambassador to Ethiopia and Permanent Representative to the African Union, Emmanuel Mwamba, also made an appeal in a letter, dated August 25, addressed to the African Union Commission chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, on behalf of the opposition alliance. He stated that,“The gravest of these breaches can still be arrested, but only before the inauguration scheduled for 1 September 2026 renders judicial scrutiny of the election moot”.

The ambassador argued that the ‘systems which the constitutional and judicial mechanisms designed to allow an election result to be challenged were themselves being disabled’.

He went on to specifically cite the apparent ‘sealing of court premises across the country on August 24, including the Lusaka High Court complex and the building housing the Constitutional Court, by armed military and police personnel’’.

The former ambassador further complained that lawyers had been instructed to leave the premises, and that an unsigned memorandum had been issued to Judiciary staff communicating the closure, with no formal public explanation offered of its legal basis, scope or duration.

The MO Foundation intervened with an urgent statement replicated in full here.

Mo Ibrahim Foundation

Statement From Mo Ibrahim On The Zambian Elections

Statement from Mo Ibrahim on the Zambian elections

26 August, 2026

Statement, elections, Zambia

• Privacy Notice

© Mo Ibrahim Foundation 2026

Chameleons,Lizards,Closed Courts, Prosecution or Protection of Opposition leader? “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”

Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, 1849

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Map of Zambia

Reflection

Around a year ago we reflected that even in serious times, stories emerge that appear comical yet carry consequential outcomes. Retelling the story that, at a conference in London, I had the fortune to meet the late President of Zambia, Kenneth Kaunda, KK as people affectionately knew him. He graced me with a photo opportunity.

During the conference encounter, he shared a story about how his friend, the late Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, had warned KK’s successor, the late Frederick Chiluba, that “what he does to KK will be done to him.”

Those words proved prophetic.

But more precisely are playing out in the current Zambian political climate rapidly sliding into a full blown storm with arrests and an opposition leader in hiding or as he claims protection.

Chiluba faced corruption charges after leaving office, though he was eventually acquitted in 2009, but died disgraced. Chiluba died on June 18, 2011. Meanwhile, KK lived to a ripe old age, spending some of his later years in London’s Kensington, where I also met him after the conference.

This story of witchcraft prosecutions strikes me as equally comical yet indicative of how things change but remain fundamentally the same.

As the French saying goes: “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” (The more things change, the more they stay the same)

Kaunda A Central Founding Father Figure Of modern Zambia

The late Kenneth David Kaunda affectionately known as KK in Africa.

Born into a missionary family, Kaunda’s political career began with his involvement in the Northern Rhodesia African National Congress, where he advocated for the rights of Africans against colonialism. Dissatisfied with Harry Nkumbula’s leadership, he was at the forefront of the struggle for independence from British rule. He was president for 27 years.

Kaunda stepped down peacefully on November 2, 1991, earning international praise for his dignity and statesmanship in transition.

On 4 June 1998, Kaunda announced that he was resigning as United National Independence Party leader and retiring from politics.. He passed away at 97 on June 17, 2021 in a Military Hospital in Lusaka and was the last surviving lion of African independence.

To highlight that peaceful transfer of power, since independence in 1964, Zambia has had seven president. Kenneth Kaunda (1964-1991), Frederick Chiluba (1991-2002), Levy Mwanawasa (2002-2008), Rupiah Banda (2008-2011), Michael Sata (2011-2014), Edgar Lungu (2015-2021), and the current president Hakainde Hichilema.

Kaunda who lost to Chiluba in 1991 in the country’s first multi-party elections, peacefully transferred power, a rare occurrence in African politics at the time. Two presidents died in office.

Levy Mwanawasa on August 19, 2008, aged 59, and Michael Sata on October 28, 2014, aged 77.

The prophetic warning about Chiluba’s treatment of Kaunda appear to have indeed materialized through subsequent events to date.

The Tale Tale signs of Zambia’s Constitutional slide?

On September 16, 2025, Magistrate Fine Mayambu made legal history at the Lusaka Magistrates’ Court.³ She sentenced two men, Leonard Phiri (43, Zambian national) and Jasten Candunde (42, Mozambican), to two years in prison for attempting to use witchcraft to kill President Hakainde Hichilema.

The court convicted them under Zambia’s colonial era Witchcraft Act, marking the first time in the nation’s history that anyone has faced prosecution for witchcraft-based threats against a sitting president.

Parliament originally enacted the Witchcraft Act in 1914 during British colonial rule.

Colonial administrators crafted this legislation through European legal frameworks, viewing traditional African spiritual practices with suspicion and seeking to control what they perceived as superstitious beliefs that might challenge colonial authority. The law underwent several amendments in 1964, 1977, 1993, and 1994, yet retained its colonial essence.

Chapter 90 of the Laws of Zambia criminalizes not only witchcraft practice but also “professing” witchcraft and possessing charms or instruments allegedly used for supernatural purposes.

This broad scope captures a wide range of traditional spiritual activities that remain deeply embedded in Zambian society.

The magistrate justified her decision to impose imprisonment by emphasizing the serious nature of threatening the head of state through any means.

However, this reasoning opens complex constitutional and human rights questions that legal scholars argue Zambia can no longer ignore.

The Lusaka case relied on possession of physical objects charms and a chameleon as evidence of criminal intent.

However, legal scholars questioned whether mere possession constitutes sufficient proof of criminal activity without additional evidence of concrete plans or actions.

This evidential challenge becomes particularly complex when dealing with traditional spiritual practices where symbolic objects carry legitimate cultural significance.

Constitution

Zambia’s 2016 Constitution protects freedom of conscience and religion, raising questions about whether the Witchcraft Act violates these fundamental rights.

Critics argue that the law criminalizes traditional African spiritual practices and belief systems, potentially discriminating against practitioners of indigenous religions.

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has expressed concern about prosecutions based solely on belief in supernatural practices.

International human rights organizations argue that such laws often target marginalized communities and perpetuate discrimination against traditional healers and spiritual practitioners.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, principles that may conflict with broad criminalization of traditional spiritual practices. African human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, specifically protect cultural practices, adding another layer of complexity to witchcraft prosecutions.

A Colonial Legacy serving incumbents?

Zambia’s Witchcraft Act represents just one thread in the vast tapestry of colonial legal legacies that continue to govern millions across the Global South.

From anti-protest legislation to moral policing and land dispossession, the legal relics of the colonial empire still reinforce authoritarianism and elite control decades after independence.

Many of the founding fathers had themselves been jailed under these laws: Uhuru Kenyatta in Kenya, Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana, Modibo Keïta in Mali, Sourou-Migan Apithy in Benin, Kenneth Kaunda in Zambia and Hastings Banda in Malawi.

They were punished simply for demanding self-rule. Yet ironically, these same laws remained on the statute books after independence, often wielded by the very leaders who once suffered under their application.

Across Africa, colonial penal codes remain deeply embedded in national legal systems. Kenya still enforces vagrancy laws that criminalize poverty, while Nigeria maintains colonial-era blasphemy statutes under its Penal Code.

Ghana continues to apply sedition laws originally crafted to suppress anti-colonial sentiment, now used against political dissidents and journalists.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Court ruled that Sierra Leone’s vagrancy laws – which criminalize anyone deemed “idle and disorderly” – discriminate against poor people and other marginalized groups.

Similar statutes remain active across former British colonies, effectively criminalizing poverty and homelessness.

Several countries around the world have repealed their sedition laws including Great Britain, New Zealand, Ghana, Kenya and Uganda.

And herein lies the irony. While former colonies have mostly maintained a range of colonial laws (including the sedition law), Britain, the biggest colonizer, has moved away from these legal instruments.

Moreover, these laws frequently serve the interests of post-colonial political elites who discovered their utility for suppressing dissent and maintaining power. The same legal instruments once used against independence leaders now protect their successors from similar challenges to authority.

This creates a perverse continuity where the tools of colonial oppression become instruments of post-colonial governance.

For Zambia, then, at the time of reporting, in September 2025, the witchcraft prosecution revealed how colonial legal legacies continue shaping contemporary judicial outcomes, often in ways that conflict with modern constitutional principles and international human rights standards.

While the case appeared comical on its surface prosecuting individuals for possessing a chameleon intended to harm the president its implications for religious political rights, expression, freedom, cultural rights, and legal equality proved to be more serious.

The story demonstrated that democratic transitions and a free legal system remain precarious. Just as Nyerere’s prophetic warning about Chiluba proved accurate, the witchcraft case then.

At the point of reporting about chameleon and lizards court prosecution coupled with the recent slide into the reported closure of the courts, as well as the reported killing of a former minister from the opposition, prophesised how Zambian law engages with political pluralism.

That lizard and chameleon was a tale tale sign of the future now a real detrimentally consequential political temperature.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

The current president Hakainde Hichilema

Current State of affairs

Which brings me back to where we started, several years ago in the Queen Elizabeth Hall in central London, where we attended a memorial lecture for the late Mwalimu. Mwalimu, meaning teacher, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, the late former founding President of Tanzania.

The main speaker none other than KK. KK, meaning Dr. KK, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, the late former President of the Republic of Zambia.

I followed him closely until his passing in 2021.

This brings us to the chameleon and lizard situation last year when the courts prosecuted an apparent witch doctor under colonial law.

Since then, the political environment in Zambia heated up and the most recently concluded election, the announcement of the incumbent as having won, vehemently contested by the opposition and has since triggered the sequence of events to date.

Zambian opposition leader and National Reconciliation Party for Unity and Prosperity (NRPUP) presidential candidate Brian Muntayalwa Mundubile casts his ballot during Zambia's general elections, including the presidential election, at a polling station in Lusaka, Zambia, August 13, 2026. REUTERS/Moses Mwape

Zambian Ex-Minister Killed in Post-Election Raid. Credit; Zambian Observer

The State of Zambia Today

Zambia went to the polls on the 13th of August 2026 and President Hakainde Hichilema was declared the winner with apparently 60% of the vote, giving him essentially a potential second term.

The opposition candidate, Brian Mundubile, contested the result and said he intended to challenge it in court, alleging serious irregularities in the electoral process, but incumbent Hichilema has denied any wrongdoing.

The United Nations issued a statement reproduced verbatim below.

Public reports indicate that a former cabinet minister Mutotwe Kafwaya was killed during the operation, and the authorities have described the operation in terms of national security and alleged threats to the state. The opposition has disputed that account.

The opposition candidate Brian Mundubile, subsequently went into hiding, saying that he is under protection.

Most significantly, on 24 August, the Zambian courts were closed on the very day that the opposition’s constitutional deadline for challenging the presidential result was expiring.

The judiciary cited security reasons. Civil-society and legal organisations argued that, whatever the government’s stated justification, the practical effect was to obstruct constitutional scrutiny of the election.

The international observers noticed that overall the election was peaceful on election day but there were irregularities, and civil society condemned the closure of the courts as undermining the rule of law.

However, the government stated that the operation concerned threats to state security; Mundubile’s side disputes that account.

And so Zambia, just other African countries, a nation that has seen to date, reasonably successive peaceful transfers of power, since the reintroduction of multi-party elections in the ‘90s, now appears at crossroads. Raising the question as to whether this is an unfinished republic, or one that is regressing.

Whether the current status quo for the opposition leader is consistent with protection or persecution will be more accurately judged in the distance of time.

But certainly, the adage, by Alphonse, that Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. remains accurate.

Yesterday, 17th August 2026, was a vigil to remember Professor Jason Arday at Trafalgar Square, London.

There were thousands and thousands of people from all walks of life who attended.

A speech was given on his behalf by his local MP, Bell Ribeiro-Addy.

There was reflections on his life of what people termed a hounding and witch hunt on completely debunked, bogus accusations, primarily because he was considered to be the exception a very young Black professor appointed at Cambridge, and a panel of nine people.

He had three degrees and a well-recorded record of various posts prior to Cambridge.

Sadly, as we warned and appealed for restraint and empathy and calm, he lost his life three days later, after publication of our article calling for restraint, humanity and empathy on the 14th August 2026.

Vigils were held around the country, but this was the main one. A petition calling for a public inquiry and some calling for legal accountability for those who may have acted as a contributing factor to his loss of life but those are things down the road.

For now, it was a quiet moment, a sombre moment, as thousands paid tribute to the exceptional, gifted young man that humanity lost. He leaves two children and a widow.

In his own words, when asked how would you change the world, he said: “I’ll thread a needle and interweave love and empathy into society, because it is the lack of empathy...”

We will leave it there. Below are the images of the day.

As the signs at the Vigil stated:

Rest In Power.

Jason Arday.

Aluta continua. Vitória é certa.

Struggle continues victory is certain.

e

Aluta continua.

Vitória é certa.

Struggle continues victory is certain.

Thank You For Your Service-Professor Jason Arday Who lives on through his Service and Many Firsts.

**This post was written around three days before Jason’s sudden loss of life.

It was the very raison d’etre of the post to prevent, Urge Restraint and a Stand still Moment.**

Sadly it fell on deaf ears.

A futile exercise.

But since then thousands have attended vigils around the country and galvanised humanity into positive action and a call for reform of self regulation or implement existing recommendations.

Whether that will happen is another matter.

For now it's about A Father, a Son and Husband.

A Human Being.

Below are some of the images from that vigil.

Rest in Power Jason.

What Would Jesus Do?

We Appeal For Humanity, Kindness and Distance for His Family, Spouse and Very Young Children.

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Jason. Jason Arday.

He needed our support.

We could see it.

The outcome was not inevitable but reasonably foreseeable.

Sadly, tragically and now irreversibly for Jason and his family. And wider society on general.

First and Foremost Jason in his own words. About the healing power of collective Love, Compassion and narrowing Division.

‘I would take a thread and a needle and weave love into our society, that's what I would do’.

Adding the absence of empathy in our society…. ‘Jason Arday Speaking to Channel 4 News UK.

Also some reflections from his confidant and one of his lawyers coordinating the letter in a video attributed to the Good Law Project Maugham below.

And while on that path also remember what veteran writer Gary Young put very aptly.

It's the same spirit captured in the video below by Mr Maugham.

The sentiments expressed in that video are heartfelt but are identical, familiar and fell on deaf ears and stone hardened minds.

So, Jason.

Jason was a father, a son, someone’s brother, someone’s childhood friend, a colleague, a human being, a human person.

His own family put it simply in the days after his loss of life , saying they had lost “this amazing father, partner, brother, uncle and son.”

Speaking to reporters during a visit to Cornwall, Andy Burnham addressed the situation, ”It’s a tragedy on so many levels, but particularly just for everybody who knew Jason, his family obviously, his friends we think of them today. It’s not a moment for any rushing to judgment. It’s a moment for reflection, I would say, reflecting on how things came to this. A really sad, sad and sorry state of affairs and I think we all today think of Jason, his contribution and his family and friends.”

Regarding the assertions, Liverpool John Moores University stood its ground, reviewing his academic work and standing by the award of his doctoral degree, concluding that text overlaps were down to “honest and reasonable error” with no formal finding of intentional academic fraud established by an independent panel.

In addition he held several degrees, a BA, two masters, and his doctorate, before he ever reached Cambridge.

Then focus switched, to everything he had ever said or done since school to his entire life, the Olympics, the marathons and so on.

What was initially about academia morphed into an intrinsically traumatic story about a human person at the centre of a relentless storm of discourse.

Whether there is a plausible hands up recognition and contrition against any particular entity for how this was covered is a separate matter, one we leave for others to weigh.

What can be said, as a matter of scale, is that national broadsheets, broadcasters and specialist press ran dozens of pieces over the course of a few short weeks, a volume and extensive rolling coverage rarely seen for a university lecturer who held no public office.

He was not a councillor, MP, Mayor or PM. Tragic too was how he appears to have been partially abandoned, by the University and by some of the folks who backed him, because they were under pressure.

Over a thousand people, including MPs, campaigners and academics, had put their names to an open letter organised by the Good Law Project, which said “we stand in unwavering solidarity with Professor Arday.” Some of those names were later withdrawn seemingly under pressure.

Also hard to fully explain, in the middle of all this, was the sight of dozens of Cambridge’s own academic staff signing a separate letter to the vice chancellor calling for an independent review of how his appointment had been handled, as though the appointment itself had been the error. It felt, to us, like something close to a betrayal, made harder still by the fact that some of those signatories came from racial minority backgrounds themselves.

The media leaned into that internal rift too, giving it its own cycle of coverage.

They were relentless. Unabating. Ferocious. Feral. Disproportionate.

The Guardian admittedly visited his home, his school, his friends, even after he resigned. And a review was announced. He made a formal harassment complaint against one reporter by his account which was no further action.

Was that a cry for help perhaps or missed signs? It is for others qualifies to reach a judgement.

He resigned. That was not enough.

Even then, after the review was made public, reporters still went back to ask whether he really had been nonverbal until eleven, spoke to people from his old schools, tracked down friends, and approached his biographer.

When he cancelled two events built around his memoir, a bookshop appearance and a public conversation, both withdrawn at his own request in the days after he stepped down, even that could not be left alone.

We had asked then, in our piece on how his resignation was covered, and we ask again now.

Was Jason, the human or the Professor, such a pivotal figure and of the essence in impacting existential aspects of public life like elected politicians, for example, to garner and warrant such a full glare? Did he make pivotal wider or central policy decisions?

Years ago, addressing graduates at Morehouse College, Barack Obama urged his audience to widen their circle of concern, to imagine themselves standing in someone else’s place before passing judgement.

He spoke of the special obligation felt by those who had been given a chance others were denied, of the ability to connect, and of a sense of compassion as the true measure of leadership, more than any degree or title ever could be. He closed that thought with the words, in his own, “there but for the grace of God go I.”

Those words are fitting here too.

But we don’t want to dwell on the attacks. In his own words, in one of several interviews he gave around his first appointment, he made clear he hoped it would become the most normal thing in the world for Black professors to occupy such positions, everywhere.

That should be the end of such stories of firsts. Given the continued absence of Black folks in academia, and across other facets of life, there should no longer need to be a first.

It should be about merit, and people of every background should be able to reach as far as their ability takes them.

Those are the words, the prophetic words, that Jason left, and they carry as a message to many, many people around the world.

Nobody deserves how he was treated, especially not the loss of his life. We focused on humanity, not mere earthly things.

He was not an elected person or a Prime Minister.

He was a gifted, unique, intelligent human being.

A exceptionally talented ecturer who just happened to be young and Black.

What would Jesus do?

We call for humanity, respect and distance for his family, Spouse and young children

Professor Jason Arday lives on through his service.

A Go Fund Me has been started..

Please see link bellow to share or donate.

Hi, I’m supporting this fundraiser on GoFundMe. If you can, please consider supporting by donating or sharing the link. Every bit of support makes a huge difference.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/in-memory-of-dr-jason-atta-kwei-arday/cl/s?utm_campaign=fp_sharesheet&utm_content=amp30-treatment-5&utm_medium=customer&utm_source=copy_link&lang=en_GB

Kano Mass Wedding: 1,500 Couples Married Over the Weekend Source Picture Vanguard. Yusuf, Sanusi unite 1,500 couples in Kano mass wedding.

Mass Weddings: Cultural Pivot, Economic Reality, or Sign of the Times?

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Weddings.

Religious or not are stuff that boys and girls dream of and plan for, over the years.

​Weddings are also one of the most significant life events in modern life where essentially two families from two different backgrounds unite into one.

Now that comes with a joyful occasion, although in recent days people are doing smaller weddings, it has significant costs of entertainment, dressing, and venue arrangements.

In cultures all over the world, weddings remain a major, memorable event.

But as times change, as the nature and form of families change, as technology advances, as migration and people moving from one place to the other changes cultures and intermixes them, and as the cost of living bites while the traditional nature of the family changes, is that still feasible, and are mass weddings the answer?

Let Me Explain

​A few days ago, as I always do perusing through general headlines all over the world from the Associated Press, Reuters, and other international outlets, I came to a story a human story that also had distinct angles and connections to economic reality, regional insecurity in Kano in Northern Nigeria reported by TRT Afrika, and the changing nature of the world in terms of technology and its impact on human relationships.

​Uganda

In traditional African contexts such as Uganda, the marriage process remains deeply ceremonial and multi-staged. The union begins with the Okwanjula introduction ceremony where the groom’s family formally seeks consent and presents customary gifts to the bride’s clan, followed by pre-wedding family gatherings and bachelor celebrations before culminating in the main wedding event itself. These elaborate customs reflect rich cultural heritage, but they also highlight the significant financial resources traditionally required to establish a family.

​India

​Similarly, in India, traditional celebrations span multiple days. According to financial analysis by Bajaj Finserv, multi-day Indian wedding celebrations involve extensive rituals, hosting, and significant financial commitments that magnify expenses for families.

To alleviate extreme poverty and eliminate dowry demands, Indian state governments sponsor mass community weddings under initiatives such as the Mukhyamantri Kanya Vivah Yojana documented by The Times of India, enabling low-income couples to marry under civil law without incurring crippling debt.

​Nigeria

Nigeria is a very diverse country with multiple cultures and federal states, so Nigeria cannot be seen from one monolithic perspective, and the perspective of the mass weddings from the information I have reported is mainly in Northern Nigeria, which has a distinctively different regional, cultural, and general religious heritage. So this should not be seen as a complete and overall reflection on the whole of Nigeria.

Positive Encounters With Lagos Governor

​In the depth of winter this year, at King’s College London, under the Africa Week program organized by the African Leadership Centre, the Governor of Lagos, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, addressed the audience, took questions, and offered a very positive outlook on Lagos, its vast commercial opportunities, and its urban challenges.

The Governor extended an open invitation for global investment, particularly from the Nigeria diaspora, highlighting how sub-national governance can drive economic innovation.

Nigeria House Davos

This optimistic message strongly resonated with the promotional initiatives put forward at Nigeria House in Davos, Switzerland, during the World Economic Forum, where federal delegates showcased investment prospects to international capital.

Positive messages like these highlight that, notwithstanding persistent endemic challenges, Nigeria remains full of enterprise, reflecting broader picture across Africa.

Location Location Location

​Situated in West Africa, bounded by Niger to the north, Chad to the northeast, Cameroon to the east, Benin to the west, and the Gulf of Guinea along the Atlantic coastline to the south, Nigeria holds a commanding geopolitical position.

It is the most populous nation on the African continent with over around 220 million citizens, a major contributor to regional peacekeeping and diplomacy through the Economic Community of West African States and the United Nations, and a leading exporter of crude oil.

Nigeria is home to some of the wealthiest entrepreneurs in Africa and the world, such as Aliko Dangote, and continuously exports some of the finest global minds across science, technology, engineering, medicine, and academia, who hold prominent positions in institutions worldwide.

The Highs and Lows

​However, the nation faces complex domestic hurdles following the presidential transition where President Bola Tinubu succeeded former President Muhammadu Buhari.

The new administration introduced sweeping structural reforms, including the complete removal of the long-standing petrol subsidy, the unification and floating of the foreign exchange rate, and key policy frameworks for regional fiscal decentralization.

To expand tertiary education access for low-income families, the government established the Nigerian Education Loan Fund student loan scheme.

Critics argue that these rapid reforms accelerated inflation, drove up transport and energy prices, and severely diminished household purchasing power.

In a recent move he reportedly raised the salaries of the military and was applauded though some critics may consider this too little too late. But a step in the right direction to deal with the insecurity gripping the country.

Conversely, proponents maintain that these painful policy adjustments were indispensable to eliminate unsustainable federal debt, stabilize long-term public finances, and attract foreign direct investment.

The Lows

​According to global monitoring metrics, Nigeria faces significant socio-economic challenges.

Corruption

Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index reported by Transparency.org ranks Nigeria 142nd out of 180 nations.

Welfare

On social welfare indicators, the United Nations Development Programme Human Development Index places Nigeria 161st out of 193 countries, with an index score of 0.548.

Poverty rate

Findings from the World Bank Nigeria Development Update reveal a multidimensional poverty rate of approximately 63 percent, leaving nearly 140 million people experiencing severe deprivation.

Education No Show

Educational metrics highlight stark regional disparities: reports from the UNESCO GEM Report on out-of-school children indicate that Nigeria accounts for roughly 18.3 to 20 million out-of-school children, with northern states like Kebbi and Sokoto recording out-of-school rates above 66 percent, compared to far lower rates in southern states.

Security First

​These economic and social realities intersect with ongoing security challenges across Northern Nigeria, where rural insurgency and banditry have torn communities apart, claiming the lives of primary breadwinners and leaving thousands of widows, widowers, and orphans without financial security.

The Mass Weddings

In this context, mass weddings in Northern Nigeria are an inevitable outcome of cumulative regional insecurity and economic strain.

​In Kano State, municipal authorities organized state-sponsored mass weddings for 1,500 couples reported by Punch Newspapers as a direct welfare intervention.

Punch Newspapers quoted Kano State Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf stating that “this programme reflects our administration’s commitment to supporting vulnerable citizens by easing the financial burden associated with marriage and creating opportunities for dignified family life.”

Voluntary or Not?

Regarding the voluntary nature of these ceremonies, Peoples Gazette reported Hisbah Board statements quoting Deputy Commander-General Dr. Mujahideen Aminuddeen who emphasized that “participation in the programme is entirely voluntary and based on the willingness of both parties, noting that applicants must express mutual consent to live together as husband and wife before filling out and submitting forms for approval.”

Couples undergo local endorsements and health screenings covering HIV, hepatitis, and genotype compatibility.

According to TRT Afrika’s report on Kano State mass weddings, the state provides each bride with “a dowry of 200,000 Naira alongside business capital grants and household furniture” to allow vulnerable citizens to establish a stable home without crippling debt.

​South Korea

Couples on April 12 attend a mass wedding ceremony organized by the Unification Church at Cheongshim Peace World Center in Gapyeong, South Korea.Photo: AFP

​In South Korea, mass weddings have historically followed a different rationale rooted in religious doctrine. Large-scale ceremonies organized by religious organizations such as the Unification Church bring together thousands of couples from diverse international backgrounds in stadium-scale blessing ceremonies designed to foster cross-cultural unity and spiritual duty, as documented by SBS News.

​At the same time, South Korea faces unprecedented demographic challenges, recording the world’s lowest birth rate at approximately 0.72 to 0.73 children per woman, far below the standard replacement rate of 2.1, according to Voronoi Global Demographic Data.

​China

In China, mass weddings are predominantly driven by civil, economic, and social policy goals. Where traditional marriage markets like Shanghai‘s matchmaking corners in People’s Park reported by BBC News reflect deep social anxieties about finding partners—where parents gather every weekend to lay out open umbrellas displaying detailed resumes of their children to interview perspective matches—local municipal governments increasingly host group civil ceremonies to discourage sky-high traditional bride prices and reduce wedding expenses for young couples amidst shifting economic conditions.

Online Isolation Impact

​In an age where social media and technology have created improvements in travel, banking, and shopping, they have also left individuals increasingly isolated.

Official reports from the UK Office for National Statistics Community Life Survey reveal that approximately 7 percent of adults, representing 3.9 million people in Great Britain, experience chronic loneliness by feeling lonely often or always. Among young adults aged 16 to 29, over 31 percent report frequent feelings of social isolation.

​This exposure to toxic online environments and mental health pressures has prompted direct policy intervention worldwide.

Australia recently enacted landmark legislation establishing a mandatory social media ban for children under sixteen documented by UNICEF Australia to protect youth mental health, while the United Kingdom continues active debates on digital safety measures.

​Is the resurgence of mass weddings a recognition that society, despite giant leaps in technology, suffers from greater isolation, prompting a desire for genuine in-person connection?

Or is it fundamentally a matter of economic reality?

​Conclusion

​Global demographic statistics depict a pattern of a shift from traditional family units, with Spain and Japan maintaining persistently low fertility figures of 1.10 and 1.15 respectively, as reported by GeoRank World Bank Data.

In countries like Spain, young populations have migrated to coastal cities or abroad, leaving interior regions underpopulated and prompting government measures to regularize foreign workers to maintain the tax base.

Across East Asia and Western Europe, governments are resorting to public campaigns and financial allowances to encourage citizens to marry and start families.

​Whether mass weddings are driven primarily by economic reality or represent a cultural pivot as a sign of the times, the phenomenon really pushes us to think more introspectively about whether technological advances at a human level have encouraged or been harmful to personal relationships in terms of authentic human interaction.

This argument should not be overplayed, of course, because people still go to restaurants, bars, and clubs. However, whether those post-work social gatherings foster organic human relationships that lead to procreation within a historically recognizable family structure is a very different matter.

​There appears to be an inescapable recognition that times are changing, families evolve, and life happens.

Yet, the growing phenomenon of mass weddings stretching across regions from South America in countries like Peru and Mexico to West Africa seems to address these distinct social and demographic challenges all in one go. Whether through state encouragement, official blessings, or voluntary community schemes, these initiatives simultaneously alleviate the crippling financial expenses involved in setting up a home.

In effect, state authorities are signaling to their populations: “look, you are not our problem, just get together, get on with it, and sort yourself out.” As with all major societal shifts, it is only in the distance of time that these experiments fully play out, and we will undoubtedly come to understand the long-term impact of this global phenomenon much better over time.

​Some Key Selected Sources

​Reuters International News Service Coverage on Global Economic and Social Trends & Associated Press Dispatch Reports on International Human Stories and Regional Developments.

​BBC News Feature on Shanghai Marriage Market: “The parent trap: Looking for love in Shanghai’s marriage market.”

​Punch Newspapers Coverage on Kano Mass Weddings: “Kano holds mass wedding for 1,500 couples” & “Mass wedding: Kano gov urges 1,500 newlyweds to uphold justice, respect.”

​TRT Afrika On-the-Ground Report: “At least 1,500 couples in Nigeria’s Kano state exchange vows in mass wedding.”

​Peoples Gazette Legal & Hisbah Statements: “Kano Government prepares mass wedding for 1,500 lovers.”

​World Bank Nigeria Economic Data: Poverty metrics, macroeconomic reform updates, and human development trends across West Africa.

​United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): Global Human Development Index data for Nigeria, South Korea, China, and global benchmarks.

​UNESCO GEM Out-of-School Metrics: Global and regional education access statistics across Sub-Saharan Africa.

​Transparency International CPI: Corruption Perceptions Index ranking and governance indices.

​UK Office for National Statistics (ONS): Community Life Survey figures on chronic loneliness and youth isolation.

​UNICEF Australia Policy Explainer: Youth mental health and digital safety regulation legislative overview.

​SBS News Dateline Report: Unification Church mass wedding blessing ceremonies in South Korea.

​Voronoi Global Demographics & GeoRank World Bank Data: Fertility rates, demographic contraction trends, and population movement metrics.

Arday, Photo in 2023…Source BBC Website. Who stated recent events, "have taken a profound toll on me and on those I love". His Memoir is still reportedly set to be published around 27 August 26, reportedly, covering the story of his life from being non-verbal until the age of 11 and unable to read or write until 18, then going through a series of “improbable triumphs and heartbreaking setbacks”, prior to his appointment as professor of sociology of education at Cambridge, England, UK.

Jason In His Own Words Above.

This article was published while Jason was alive.

Three days We appealed for humanity.

We warned about this.

Professor Jason Arday Lost his life.

It was foreseeable.

But totally preventable.

How it was Covered and the Human Mirror

A Reflection, Empathy and Catharsis Of Wider Questions in Academia

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Which brings meback to Jason,

Jason Arday.

This has been agonizingly painful to watch.

From the time the first letters and reports surfaced, most people watched from a non-judgmental position. But then commentators started shifting away from academic matters to character, alleged exaggerations, and fundraising.

At that juncture, what was initially about academia, morphed into a intrinsically traumatic story about a human person who is at the centre of this relentless storm of discourse is a human being.

Beyond academic politics, woke, left or right commentary, there is a real person, a neurodivergent man who spent his entire life defying odds stacked against him from the start.

Someone's son, brother, uncle and someone's childhood friend.

Lived experience in elite institutions carries real weight. It directly shapes day-to-day interactions and life outcomes in a society where structural and institutional barriers remain very real.

​Reports about Professor Jason Arday’s mental well-being and the severe, foreseeable toll this exposure has taken on his health are a stark reminder of the human cost here.

But ultimately, in the much bigger scheme of things this is about life itself. Was Jason, the human or the Professor, such a pivotal figure and of the essence in impacting existential aspects of life like elected politicians, for example to garner and warrant such a full glare?

Did he make pivotal, wider or central public policy decisions? Was he an elected public official? An MP, A PM or Minister?

It is question I pose, and for others to reflect on and make a judgement.

Everyone navigates the world as best they can, using whatever tools they have within a system where the rules and structural barriers could be heavily stacked against them. Especially, black folks at an intergenerational level.

​Professor Arday, someone who it is publicly stated, was non-verbal until the age of eleven, who was told he would require lifelong assisted care, and who nevertheless carved out a path to the peak of British academia, represents an extraordinary struggle against systemic resistance.

As several observers have pointed out, commentators, external observers, and academic institutions need to stand back.

Look at the human person behind the headlines. Recognize the care, support, and empathy he needs right now to carry on and heal.

As he noted in his resignation statement, public debate shouldn’t devolve into a destructive cycle of personal consumption.

What we need instead is compassion, human decency, care and a cathartic effort to ask how society can better support and care for people of all backgrounds who dare to navigate spaces never built for them.

​When assertions were made across various platforms about Professor Jason Arday of Cambridge, a relatively young man, it forced deeper questions about the state of academia.

First, how meritocratic is academia in Britain and the broader Western world, especially for scholars aspiring to senior leadership? Second, what is the state of academia in modern times?

Third, is there genuine parity in the level of public scrutiny, reactions, and sanctions imposed when academic or administrative issues arise?

Not A Repeat

​To be clear, this isn’t about taking sides, offering technical legal commentary, or dissecting individual claims.

It is about evaluating how this unfolded across discourse, alongside responses from Liverpool John Moores University and Cambridge, commentary from legal organizations, the signed open letter, the subsequent withdrawal of signatories, and Jason Arday’s resignation statement.

Context Always Key?

​To understand Jason Arday’s trajectory, you have to look closely at the historical and institutional mechanics that have systematically suppressed talent in the educational system.

In a seminal 1971 study, a prominent Grenadian scholar highlighted how working-class children were disproportionately funnelled into “educationally subnormal” (ESN) schools, which were institutions designed for pupils deemed unable to succeed academically, writing off generations of youth.

Decades later, as documented in the BBC documentary Subnormal: A British Scandal, the legacy of low teacher expectations, bias in psychological assessments, and structural exclusion still haunts the British educational landscape.

​Against that historical backdrop, Jason Arday’s personal arc stands out as a monumental triumph over adversity.

As widely reported, he was diagnosed in childhood with global developmental delay and autism, did not speak until eleven, and learned to read and write much later in youth. Specialists predicted he would require lifelong assisted care.

Yet, supported by his family and dedicated mentors, he bypassed the institutional machinery designed to limit his horizons, earning a bachelor’s degree, master’s degrees, a PhD, and eventually becoming the youngest Black professor in the history of the University of Cambridge.

​Whatever discrepancies have been raised regarding past profiles, personal anecdotes, charity marathons, or CV details, the reality remains that he overcame profound structural, developmental, and institutional barriers placed in front of him from cradle to grave. He achieved at a level that far surpassed every hindrance the system places on individuals navigating public life.

​The broader context of representation across higher education professions, doctoral studies, master’s programs, and degree classifications underscores why his rise was so extraordinary. Data published by the Higher Education Statistics Agency demonstrates that while undergraduate enrolment has grown, structural drop-offs persist at higher academic levels.

​According to published data, out of more than twenty-two thousand working professors in the United Kingdom, fewer than one percent are from underrepresented backgrounds, with women accounting for a fraction of senior appointments nationwide.

The Broken Pipeline report published by Leading Routes highlights that over a five-year period, fewer than thirty Black British students were awarded full Arts and Humanities Research Council doctoral research studentships.

On top of that, degree classification records show a persistent percentage-point gap in degree outcomes, directly impacting progression into postgraduate study.

​This underrepresentation in academic leadership remains systemic across the Western world. In the United States, figures from the National Center for Education Statistics show underrepresented faculty making up under six percent of full-time instructional staff across postsecondary institutions, with full professors making up less than four percent. In Canada, federal research data from Statistics Canada reveals that scholars from minoritized groups represent under three percent of full-time university faculty, with severe underrepresentation at senior administrative levels. In Australia, figures from the Department of Education demonstrate that staff of diverse backgrounds constitute a minute fraction of academic personnel, where discussions of equity in university leadership remain at nascent stages.

Furthermore, recent research by the UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent emphasizes that these international disparities stem from a continuous pipeline from cradle to grave, where systemic suppression of talent makes elite academic attainment an anomaly rather than the norm.

​The intense public focus on Jason Arday mirrors a broader pattern of hyper-scrutiny faced by high-profile intellectuals across the Western world in recent years.

Harvard

Take Harvard and Boston, where the former president of Harvard University resigned following a public campaign led by conservative political activists, commentators, and donor networks. As major outlets reported, that campaign combined political hearings over campus free speech with allegations of attribution errors in past publications.

North Carolina

Similarly in North Carolina, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and scholar faced unprecedented institutional resistance and political interference when applying for a tenured professorship at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

In each instance, administrative discrepancies or political disputes escalated into broader debates over the scholar’s legitimacy and character.

Does this raise questions about how academics elevated to leadership positions are subjected to a level of public interrogation rarely applied to their peers?

Again it is is a judgment for others to make.

​On platforms like X and LinkedIn, as well as across academic forums, the reaction to Jason Arday’s resignation generated an intense collective catharsis. Scholars and commentators pointed out that while non-minoritized academics accused of administrative errors or plagiarism claims routinely retain their positions or face confidential internal remedies, errors by scholars from underrepresented backgrounds are quickly framed by critics as proof that diversity initiatives are flawed.

This dynamic led prominent academics to argue that elite Western universities remain inherently challenging environments for scholars pushing institutional boundaries. Across social platforms, a growing sentiment emerged that communities in Britain and Europe should look toward independent models, such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in the United States or initiatives like the Free Black University movement.

The underlying premise appears to be that independent academic institutions offer a sanctuary where scholars can pursue rigorous research without navigating persistent hostility, double standards, and severe campaigns.

​The commentary surrounding the case demonstrated a clear shift in how the issue unfolded over time under the full glare of discourse.

When initial allegations regarding doctoral work surfaced online, public commentary focused on the broader dynamics of academic whistleblowing. In response, an open petition signed by thousands of scholars, MPs, and public figures was coordinated, alongside commentary from a prominent legal civil rights advocate and senior academics.

The open letter published via the Good Law Project Campaign Statements stated verbatim that when a distinguished academic is repeatedly subjected to baseless allegations after being fully exonerated, it signals an attempt to undermine individuals who hold positions of influence.

​Representatives of the Good Law Project publicly addressed the campaign, stating verbatim that the demonisation of Professor Arday risks creating a chilling effect, signalling that success and public service may be met with hostility, misrepresentation, and disproportionate scrutiny, adding that they stood in unwavering solidarity.

​Commentators writing across sector journals similarly argued that the intensity of the reaction created a chilling effect for aspiring academics nationwide.

However, as reporting expanded across national and international outlets, the focus shifted away from strictly academic concerns to wider examinations of past CV entries, personal statements regarding charity marathons, and public interviews. Key to all of this, the degree-awarding institution, Liverpool John Moores University, reviewed the academic work and stood by their award of his doctoral degree, concluding that text overlaps were down to “honest and reasonable error” with no formal finding of intentional academic fraud established by an independent university panel.

​The trajectory developed in the full glare of public discourse across several distinct stages, beginning with initial academic whistleblowing focused on thesis citations and attribution standards, expanding to personal narratives scrutinizing interview statements and credentials, and concluding with institutional statements and resignation coverage following Cambridge’s new inquiries into credential records.

​The situation raises major questions about scale, moral equivalence, and the intensity of public scrutiny. Unlike elected political figures holding public state office, individual academics typically undergo administrative reviews through confidential university committees and peer reviews.

In this case, the level of public focus, investigative podcast deep-dives, and commentary reached an unprecedented scale.

​Much of the public discussion also failed to incorporate any clinical analysis of his neurodiversity. Diagnosed with autism and global developmental delay in his youth, not learning to speak until the age of eleven, his communication patterns, processing of past memories, and public narratives ought to have been evaluated with an understanding of his neurodivergent profile and special needs, viewing the human person through a holistic lens rather than a simplistic one.

​The sheer pressure of public scrutiny, personal attacks on social media, and further college reviews led to his resignation from the University of Cambridge in August 2026.

In his official resignation statement published on the Good Law Project website, Jason Arday stated in full context that the unrelenting level of public scrutiny and personal attack exceeded any standard of academic debate or institutional accountability. Elucidating that he took the decision to step down from his post at the University of Cambridge to protect his family, his mental health, and his well-being.

He placed his decision in the contextual backdrop of the wider narrative, writing that the decision should not be interpreted as a loss of faith in scholarship or in the values that first brought him to Cambridge, nor mistaken for an acceptance of the narratives surrounding him, but simply the decision of someone who has reached the limits of what any person should reasonably be expected to endure.

​Subsequent statements by the University of Cambridge and Jesus College confirmed that while acknowledging the personal toll on Professor Arday and committing to provide support, institutional reviews into appointment processes would continue in accordance with procedures (read full context in The Guardian).

​When you strip it all back, society is called upon to stand back and look at the human person that Jason Arday is, recognizing the acute care, empathy, human understanding, and mental health support he requires to navigate this ordeal.

At its core, this is about life itself.

In essence how human beings attempt to navigate an environment filled with structurally unequal intergenerational impediments, barriers, and a lack of social mobility.

​The episode raises central questions regarding the state of academia in modern times that behove all of us to ponder, meditate upon, and collectively work toward a much fairer, kinder, and equal society.

How do we accord merit? How does intense scrutiny impact non-elected persons in public life? And do employers in higher education provide timely, suitable, holistic care, support, mentorship, and protection for scholars and students of all backgrounds from historically disadvantaged demographics?

​In the end, in the big scheme of things can we both recognise, give flowers and be kind, proportionate through constructive criticism with a view not to break but uplift others to get the best out of them?

In his own words Jason the human not the professor needs space, Empathy and kindness from both critic and friends to heal.

His story is still being written. This is a cathartic, introspective and teachable reflection for both Jason the human and Prof. Jason Arday not to mention all of us, as humans in engaging in sometimes very detrimentally public discourse.

​References and Sources

​Advance HE Statistical Reports

​Australian Department of Education Higher Education Staff Statistics

​Coard, Bernard (1971). How the West Indian Child is Made Educationally Sub-normal in the British School System. New Beacon Books.

​Good Law Project Campaign Statements & Updates

​Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Data on Higher Education Staff

​Leading Routes – The Broken Pipeline Report

​National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Fast Facts on Higher Education

​Runnymede Trust Educational Inequality Reports

​Statistics Canada Faculty Demographics in Postsecondary Education

​UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent Reports

The historic home of The Africa Centre at 38 King Street, Covent Garden, London.

An Excerpt of a statement from the Charity’s Website reads,

‘In 1962, the tomato warehouse at 38 King Street in Covent Garden, London, was purchased by the Catholic church and “gifted to the people of Africa in perpetuity’. It was then transformed into the future iconic Africa Centre building thanks to the help of three willing architects; Lance Wright, Mike Hatrell, and Jaime Dealto, who worked and designed to a very tight budget. Ms. Feeny thought the location of The Africa Centre ideal as ‘it was a central point that was near business, the universities and not far from the Houses of Parliament’.

Two years later, in November 1964, the Africa Centre opened its doors to the public. The official inauguration was officiated by the late first president of Zambia, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, Cardinal Laurien Rugambwa from Rwanda, the first black African Cardinal, and Margaret Feeny, the Centre’s first Director…’

The contemporary site at 66 Great Suffolk Street, Southwark, London.

The short terse statement, below, says it all. No press conference or community gathering.

Just a notice of closure and an apparent unpublished statement, replaced later with what appears to be an earlier appeal for funds.

‘Notice of Closure

For the complete press statement, see the end of the article.

Summary

The Origins

​The closure of the Africa Centre a UK charity registered under number 313510, is neither shocking nor surprising, but equally disturbing, as announced in its official short tərsə statement published on its website.

Established in 1961 by founder Margaret Feeny and officially inaugurated in 1964 by Dr Kenneth Kaunda, the first President of independent Zambia, the Africa Centre was established to encourage non governmental relations and establish a safe meeting place for African nations and the diaspora.

Location Location Location

In 1962, the tomato warehouse at 38 King Street in Covent Garden, London, was purchased by the Catholic church and “gifted to the people of Africa in perpetuity”. It was transformed into the iconic Africa Centre building thanks to three willing architects Lance Wright, Mike Hatrell, and Jaime Dealto who designed to a very tight budget. Ms. Feeny thought the location was ideal as “it was a central point that was near business, the universities and not far from the Houses of Parliament”.

From its inception at 38 King Street, it became a vibrant center of intellectual debate, anti-colonial cooperation, and a literary and artistic epicenter. Human rights campaigners, statesmen, and cultural leaders including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Thabo Mbeki, Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe, Maya Angelou, Alice Walker, and Walter Rodney spoke from its podiums. In 1980, it presented a statement smuggled out of prison by Nelson Mandela.

The Centre buzzed with activity, hosting the renowned Calabash restaurant, a dedicated bookshop, art exhibitions, and live music from the likes of Fela Kuti and Angélique Kidjo at the legendary Limpopo Club, which featured as a pivotal figure in Black British culture.

A Debating Centre

It was at the original 38 King Street venue in Covent Garden where my own deep interest in listening to political debates was first sparked. I distinctly remember sitting in an energized audience when a much younger, fresh-faced man named Jeremy Corbyn, long before he became leader of the Labour Party, took part in a panel discussion about African affairs. I raised my hand and asked a direct question about corruption in Africa.

Rather than brushing it off, Corbyn answered with remarkable articulation. He expanded my perspective by explaining how corruption exists across different scales and modes globally, showing how external financial structures feed into it. While it did not completely change my view, his response elucidated the issue in a way that broadened my understanding.

That was the vibe of the old Africa Centre. Just folks in safe space being frank, open and well meaning.

Repeated Misstep or uncontrollable Events?

However, the decision to sell the original 38 King Street premises in August 2012 for approximately 10.5 million pounds represented both a moral and financial mistake, as covered in the London Evening Standard and archived on open Democracy.

That historical location, sanctified by Kenneth Kaunda and pre- and post-colonial African visionaries, was an irreplaceable cultural asset situated in the very heart of central London.

The core issue facing the charity at Covent Garden was never the physical building itself, but rather a persistent failure to harness the site to generate sustainable revenue. Operating in a premier West End location with millions of annual passersby, the institution could have maximized income through its restaurant, bar, event spaces, and commercial retail letting while preserving its primary cultural and educational framework. Instead, selling the asset without having a replacement facility already acquired left the charity floating in institutional limbo for nearly a decade, allocating capital reserves to operational overheads and rental expenses while central London real estate prices escalated beyond reach.

The Asset

By the time the charity purchased Gunpowder House at 66 Great Suffolk Street in Southwark and completed its renovation, is it feasible to argue that potentially, significant capital had been allocated toward maintaining administrative continuity? Reportedly, the charity holds the freehold title to 66 Great Suffolk Street, recorded on the official Charity Commission Register Asset Balance Sheet as a tangible physical asset worth millions of pounds.

According to public records, the property acquisition and construction works were assisted by public capital grants, including a £1.6 million grant from the Mayor of London’s Good Growth Fund and a £1.6 million grant from Arts Council England.

Reopening in June 2022 as a building with performance and exhibition space, a research and learning center, a business suite, and a café and lounge bar, possessing a multi-million pound freehold property could still not prevent operational failure when day-to-day cash flow eviscerated to manage the contemporary building.

Elusive Access

When I tried to visit for the first time and locate the new Africa Centre at 66 Great Suffolk Street, the first problem was simply finding it. Visitors had to walk around under an arch with no clear directions, no visible advertising, and no prominent branding. Once inside, the total lack of reception was loudly evident. I stood waiting in an empty area for a long time before having to look around for staff just to ask if they were actually open and where I should go.

Missing Ubuntu Hospitality

Looking to hire space for events and podcasts, I was eventually told to go upstairs to the café. When I got there, the staff treated me as if I was bothering them. I sat down in the café to order a coffee while waiting to look around, but I was completely ignored. When I finally managed to get the attention of the person serving, they casually told me they were on their break while sitting right there on their phone. When the coffee finally arrived, it was honestly one of the worst coffees I have ever had, and even getting someone to take my money so I could leave was a complete hassle.

Operational Inadequacy

The customer experience was so poor that it made you wonder why anyone would choose to visit. Why would a customer come here when they could easily walk past and go to any of the nearby shops, cafes, and restaurants, whether Turkish, Portuguese, or standard local venues, where staff are genuinely happy to see you, smile, and learn your name?

A second visit three or four weeks ago in the 2026 summer heat proved that nothing had changed. The final straw. The atmosphere remained completely casual and detached. Nobody greeted us or asked if we needed assistance, forcing me to hunt down staff again just to order coffees for my colleagues. The complete lack of professionalism, operational focus, and interest in running a proper business was obvious, presenting a muted, dampened venue compared to the vibrant energy of Covent Garden.

It’s the Financials, Stupid

A detailed examination of the published financial records explains how this operational breakdown occurred. Public filings under charity number 313510 on the Charity Commission Overview reveal an escalating shortfall. For the year ending 31 March 2024, the charity recorded incoming revenue of £464,541 against expenditure of £1,266,049, leaving an operating shortfall of £801,508. For the year ending 31 March 2025, revenue was £642,999 against expenditure exceeding £1.18 million, creating a deficit over £542,000.

Two years running of spending double income or more isn’t a bad quarter — it’s an accumulating deficit, paired with payables and operational liabilities. £384,000 of the 2025 income was donations and legacies, showing that trading income still isn’t close to covering the gap.

Governance

Public filings show around 11 staff employed, with two positions paid over £60,000 (one in the £60k–£70k band, one in the £90k–£100k band).

Based on the publication on its website, the board appears small, consisting of just two to three trustees against eleven staff.

The Chair is Oba Nsugbe, KC SAN and the other trustee is Nzube Ufodike.

An internal review found rising costs, declining unrestricted income, and building maintenance made the model unsustainable while a proposed sale to relocate to smaller premises in adjoining railway arches is being considered.

Simultaneously, the Centre has launched a campaign called “Our Africa Centre. Our Heritage. Our Future,” seeking public support, philanthropic investment, and strategic partnerships for an “Africa Centre 3.0.”

Ordinary High Street Success

In sharp contrast to these struggling institutions, private Black businesses across the UK are thriving. Ethiopian, Jamaican, Nigerian, Algerian, and West African restaurants, entertainment venues, and creative platforms consistently draw dense crowds of patrons from all ethnic backgrounds.

Private enterprise succeeds because it focuses relentlessly on high standards, exceptional customer service, quality products, and an inviting atmosphere. It isn’t about who tries harder; it’s structural.

A restaurant survives on repeat business, , meaning the feedback loop between quality and revenue is immediate.

A charity, by contrast, is reliant on donations and philanthropic capital without a commercial structure underneath it, leading to blurred lines of accountability.

Private operators also avoid high building costs by leasing exact footprints, maintaining tighter accountability where an owner feels every loss directly.

Why can this dynamic commercial energy not be replicated at the Africa Centre?

Imagine an institution hosting weekly rotating regional menus showcasing continent-wide gastronomy, curated live music, literary festivals, and podcast production suites. The demand and market spending power exist, as outlined in the Black Pound Report and WPP’s Consumer Equality Equation study.

Opportunity in a Crisis?

So is this second closure an opportunity in a crisis, or an existential event?

On balance it leans toward crisis but can be turned around with full transparency.

While owning the freehold makes a sale a controlled decision rather than a forced eviction, this is the same problem repeating on a fourteen-year cycle.

Two straight years of spending far outrunning income isn’t fixed by moving buildings; it’s a sign the underlying model hasn’t caught up with the size of what it’s funding. Financial sustainability cannot keep relying on donations and reserve funds without a commercial business structure behind it.

The Africa Centre cannot survive on historic legacy alone while operating in a casual manner without commercial discipline. The demand, the spending power, and the professional talent within the community are all readily available.

For renewal, the board must appoint experienced business professionals from relevant commercial sectors to manage operations, establish revenue-generating enterprises, and restore a genuine culture of hospitality grounded in the welcoming ethos of Ubuntu.

PRESS STATEMENT: Our Africa Centre. Our Heritage. Our Future.

PRESS STATEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Our Africa Centre. Our Heritage. Our Future.

The Africa Centre Launches a National Campaign to Secure the Future of Britain’s Leading African Cultural Institution

London, United Kingdom | 4th August 2026

Statement from the Chair of the Board of Trustees, OBA NSUGBE KC SAN

“Our Africa Centre. Our Heritage. Our Future.

#OurAfricaCentre #SaveOurAfricaCentre #SOAC

Address: 66 - 68 Great Suffolk St,London SE1 0BL Email: info@africacentre.org.uk Phone: +44 (0) 208 004 6436 The Africa Centre is a UK charity registered under number 313510.

Selected References and Sources

​The Africa Centre Official Notice of Closure (July 28, 2026).

Our board | The Africa Centre

Black Current News | Nadine White | Substack

​New African Magazine: London Centre – A Glorious History (July 2, 2022).

Africa Centre closes London headquarters amid financial pressures and sale plans

Africa Centre closes London headquarters amid financial pressures and sale plans

​London Evening Standard: Battle to Stop Sale of African Centre for Arts and Politics (April 12, 2012).

​openDemocracy: Africa Centre Politics - Microcosm of Failed Democracy (May 18, 2011).

​The Guardian: Back. Now Will Britain Embrace All of Its Cultural Heritage? (July 1, 2022).

​Price & Myers Engineering: The Africa Centre Project Archive.

​Charity Commission Register: The Africa Centre Limited (Charity No. 313510) Overview.

​Charity Commission Register: Assets and Liabilities Statement for Charity No. 313510.

​The Africa Centre Governance and Board Overview.

​The Africa Centre Press Statement on Southwark Building Strategy.

​Backlight: The Black Pound Report Data and Insights.

​WPP: The Consumer Equality Equation Study.

​Black Cultural Archives Official Site.

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

Photo: H.E. Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations.

​UN Candidates History

​I am not a betting person but recent political predictions in this publication that Andy Burnham would be British PM before he even won the by election appeared accurate.

Too accurate.

Whether that turns out to be the same trend in the UN race for SG remains to be seen in the short but long distance of time.

Currently, the international community is seeking, reviewing, and interviewing candidates for the next United Nations Secretary General, who will take up office in January 2027.

The current United Nations Secretary General, António Guterres, hails from Portugal and has served in office since 2017.

Throughout the eighty one year history of the United Nations, the office has been held by nine male leaders spanning various global regions.

The Record

Given that other regions have repeatedly enjoyed their opportunities to lead, it is entirely fitting that a candidate from the Caribbean, specifically a woman and a woman of color, take the helm at this crucial juncture.

​There are a number of candidates from South America, the Caribbean, and Africa, among others.

The key contenders to date are the candidates from Costa Rica and Guyana, two women who already have impeccable resumes and could both be suitable candidates.

However, as public records and official diplomatic biographies highlight, the fact that the Caribbean has never had a candidate and that she is a woman of color hailing from an Indigenous heritage could be one of the strongest factors at this stage in making the Guyanese candidate, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, the most suitable, qualified, and fitting choice at this time.

​Positioning

​The UN Security Council initial secret straw poll provided the first clear picture of the contest standings.

​Rebeca Grynspan of Costa Rica emerged in the lead with ten encourage votes, one discourage vote, and four no opinion responses. She was closely trailed by Guyana’s Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, who secured nine encourage votes, two discourage votes, and four no opinion responses. Behind them, Argentina’s Rafael Grossi gathered seven encourage votes, two discourage votes, and six no opinions, while Chile’s Michelle Bachelet received six encourage, five discourage, and four no opinions.

Former Senegalese President Macky Sall recorded six encourage votes alongside seven discourage votes and two no opinions, Ecuador’s María Fernanda Espinosa received five encourage votes, two discourage votes, and eight no opinions, and Uganda’s Olara Otunnu drew heavy abstentions with eight no opinion ballots.

​Geopolitics

​When examining the broader field, African candidates such as Uganda’s Olara Otunnu and Senegal’s former President Macky Sall literally have no chance of securing the post in this election cycle. Under the unwritten tradition of regional rotation, the mantle belongs firmly to the Latin American and Caribbean Group, known as GRULAC. Given that Africa previously held the position for two consecutive terms under Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Kofi Annan, and considering that the United Nations has never had a female chief in its entire history, non GRULAC male candidacies face insurmountable political resistance. Any attempt to bypass the Latin American and Caribbean region would trigger sharp opposition and swift vetoes from permanent Security Council members committed to upholding rotational norms.

​It is therefore far more tactical, prudent, and opportunistic for African and Caribbean nations to throw their collective diplomatic weight behind the Guyanese candidate, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett. From a purely practical perspective, African leaders aligning early behind Guyana could secure immense political leverage, negotiating major Under Secretary General portfolios and high level agency appointments within her incoming administration. At the same time, this strategic coalition fulfills the dual meritocratic necessity of electing a woman and a woman of color, while giving the Caribbean its historic debut at the helm of the world body.

​To secure the final appointment, any candidate must navigate the strict procedural rules governing the United Nations selection process under Article 97 of the UN Charter. The final outcome rests on the Security Council, where a candidate must secure at least nine positive encourage votes out of fifteen members, while avoiding a single veto from any of the five permanent members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Once recommended, the nominee is presented to the UN General Assembly for formal appointment. As the Security Council moves through its straw polls toward the decisive color coded ballots that reveal permanent member vetoes, consolidating the African and Caribbean voting bloc behind Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett gives the Global South the decisive influence required to deliver a landmark appointment for world diplomacy.

​The Politics

​Supporters of Costa Rica’s Rebeca Grynspan, who led the initial Security Council straw poll, point to her strong stance on global humanitarian issues, particularly her leadership at UNCTAD in highlighting economic collapse and advocating for unrestricted humanitarian relief in Gaza. They argue that her executive experience and diplomatic agility make her an exceptional choice among two remarkably qualified women leading the race.

However, as foreign policy analysts observe, this decision is not merely about individual qualifications, because virtually all major contenders are highly credentialed.

Instead, this election centers fundamentally on representation, ethos, and restoring regional balance, particularly for the Global South, which remains entirely unrepresented among the permanent seats of the Security Council.

​Under Article 27(3) of the UN Charter, decisions on substantive matters require nine affirmative votes, provided that no permanent member exercises a negative vote or veto. This structural apparatus was established in 1945 by the victors of the Second World War and imperial powers, codifying an asymmetrical power dynamic where the five permanent members retain unilateral authority over global security.

Because no developing nation from the Global South holds permanent status or veto power, the demand for structural reform has grown urgent. While both leading female candidates bring immense technical skill, according to public biography records, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett is uniquely suited to drive this reform agenda, embodying the lived perspective of an Indigenous leader from a small developing Caribbean nation directly affected by these historic institutional imbalances.

​Conclusion

​As these proceedings and voting process continue, it would appear that the only candidate that provides the perspective, goals, ethos, and aims of the Global South with also the natural cultural competence to understand the distinct history of the Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples of African and Caribbean origin or wider diaspora, along with the challenges they face as a result of the intergenerational consequences of the twin pillars of colonialism and transatlantic slavery, is the Guyanese candidate, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett.

That is not just in relation to the intergenerational issues stemming from those twin pillars, but also the modern issues facing the Global South and in particular Africa and the Caribbean around knowledge transfer, technology, economy, and the impact of racism and the challenges of the diaspora in having their voices, needs, and issues not just at the decision making table, but driving the decisions that impact their lives. Such examples include a reform of the UN Security Council in terms of the veto power and permanent representation, reform of the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, and all the other UN organs for which critics argue are overwhelmingly not consistent with the needs, requirements, ethos, and fairness that the Global South demands, given these institutions were set up in a post First World War and Second World War global order decided by the then victors of the war and imperial powers at the time.

Times have changed, and whilst former leaders like Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Kofi Annan were unable to fully or as much as possible address those challenges, this presents a historic opportunity through which those challenges can be addressed at least measurably, highlighting the clear need for both Africa and the Caribbean to unite behind a single unifying candidate from Guyana, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett.

​Selected References and Legal Authorities

​Primary Legal Treaties and Official UN Records

​Charter of the United Nations, June 26, 1945, 59 Stat. 1031, T.S. No. 993, Chapter V, Article 27(3) (Security Council Voting and Veto Power) and Chapter XV, Article 97 (Appointment of the Secretary-General).

​United Nations Secretariat, Biographical Note: New Permanent Representative of Guyana Presents Credentials, U.N. Doc. BIO/5323 (Oct. 2, 2020).

​Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Official Profile: Director of the FAO Liaison Office at Geneva, Carolyn Rodrigues Birkett, FAO Geneva Registry (Aug. 2017).

​United Nations General Assembly Resolution 79/327, Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly, U.N. Doc. A/RES/79/327 (Sept. 5, 2025).

​United Nations General Assembly Resolution 69/321, Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly: Selection and Appointment of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/RES/69/321 (Sept. 11, 2015).

​Joint Communication of the President of the General Assembly and the President of the Security Council, Nomination of Candidate Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, U.N. Doc. A/80/764-S/2026/498 (June 15, 2026).

​Academic Treatises and Analytical Sources

​Anghie, Antony. Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

​Chesterman, Simon, ed. Secretary or General? The UN Secretary-General in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

​Franck, Thomas M. Fairness in International Law and Institutions. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.

​Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs, Chapter XV: Article 97, Codification Division, Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations.

​Sievers, Loraine, and Sam Daws. The Procedure of the UN Security Council. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Opinion | The Legal Chronicle | By Shemi Esquire

The Likeable Effective and Genuinely Popular Dangerous Substitute, so to speak in football Terminology?: Balaam’s Extra Time Politics

Uganda

The Substitute

We have just come off the back of a World Cup, and FIFA itself is in the throes of an ongoing power struggle, some would call it a coup, against Infantino.⁵

It is worth applying that to Mister Balaam here.

He is what you would call, if you were a manager or a supporter, a dangerous substitute, a winger perhaps, the kind of substitute you bring on at the last minute, or even in extra time, to try to change the fortune and the pace of the game, and eventually either mitigate the result, or create a draw, or influence the outcome altogether.

Enter Balaam.

Balaam Barugahara.

It's often stated that perception is more effective than reality.

He in short months with a genuinely likeable demeanor, common touch and understanding ordinary peoples problems than government and opposition combined.

It also reflects the total state collapse that courts, and all other arms of state are not fit for purpose and are part of the problem.

From a Public relations and observation, his method is working if there are no own goals of alleged abductions, torture, killings and human rights violations, the traditional politicians will lose the public.

One can recognise momentum when one sees it.

Traditional bread politicians should Ignore Balaam effect on your own peril because he projects fairness, sincerity and instant justice.

Step Back. Back in Time. For Holistic Perspective

To have a basic understanding of the environment and trajectory, and a holistic picture of why this young man’s approach is proving effective, cathartic, and potentially working, you have to go back entirely, five or six decades and more, to where the rot found its roots and how it came to be where it is.

In the 1800s, the British, just like in every other country, sent missionaries and explorers first, followed by often brutal and violent colonization.

That led the local leadership, in this case the Kabaka of Buganda, into signing an agreement with the British, which created what was in effect a protectorate, later expanding to the whole of Uganda.¹

That paved the way for further colonization, ruthless exploitation, the exiling of kings,² the introduction of religion through the missionaries,³ and the entire state structure of the current operating system of government, and the language.

That same pattern repeated itself two generations later.

The Kabaka Freddy Mutesa, Kabaka Yekka, fell out with Milton Obote in 1966, and was exiled to London, where he died in circumstances never fully settled.⁴ Obote was himself overthrown by Idi Amin in nineteen seventy one. Idi Amin himself was overthrown by a coalition of Ugandan exiles and the Tanzanians, backed by the international community, in nineteen seventy nine, and later died in exile in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, around two thousand three.

That was followed by a five year embattled guerrilla war, in which the allegations were flying thick and fast, and which in January nineteen eighty six brought to power the incumbent, who has since remained in power to date.

That is the trajectory of the country, and it is the environment in which ministers like Balaam Barugahara are operating.

The Man of the Hour

According to open public records Balaam Barugahara Ateenyi was born on the 28th of July 1979.

Said to be the fifth of fourteen children, in Kijura, Masindi District, his father, an engineer, died in 1991 when Balaam was still a boy.

He is stated to have studied at Namasagali School and St John Bosco Senior Secondary School before taking a Bachelor of Commerce in marketing at Makerere University, and later an MBA at Cavendish University.

Before politics he built a business empire, radio stations across Uganda.

Balaam received an honorary doctorate for his philanthropic work.

Government

He entered government as Minister of State for Gender, Labour and Social Development, in charge of children and youth affairs, and was promoted to full Minister of Local Government on the 26 May 2026 replacing Raphael Magyezi.

Today's Balaam

It is currently from that seat, barely three months old, that he has run the drive this piece has been examining.

Balaam change of fortune is the stuff of inspiration for the especially young generation.

A music promoter turned local government minister, is changing hearts and minds over corruption, and providing a sort of relief for now from the pressure on the central government.

The Media Blitz

Over the last two weeks, Uganda has been in the news in relation to the controversy of a minister inspecting schools, hospitals and local council offices, auditing on camera and on site, and ordering the arrest of individuals, and taking witness statements and evidence in public, sometimes from pupils, from doctors, from nurses, and from the wider public.

That approach is a PR masterstroke of sorts.

To start with, it takes the heat and the blame off central government for corruption, lack of service delivery, and all the excesses, failures and gaps that come as a result of longevity in power. Furthermore, it throws the opposition off balance.

Conundrum of Opposition on the back foot ?

But for voices like the leader of the opposition in the country’s parliament and others, across the board, key opposition voices are silent, in exile, in judicial systems, prison or under pressure, facing what they call and characterise as trumped up charges. Such as sad collapse in open court of the retired colonel and doctor Kizza Besigye, who publicly claims he is being tried unfairly and has been held in prison for almost two years on charges that are trumped up.⁶

Meanwhile the musician turned politician popularly known as Bobi Wine is now, for all intents and purposes, exiled in the United States, from where he continues to call and campaign for human rights and political change at home.⁷

This open fight of corruption puts the opposition on the back foot and disrupts their key messages around corruption in the country.

Because Balaam is not just talking. He is doing and solving the problem going where no one has gone before and seemingly, it is working.

For now at least.

Life Goes on

I mean the member who was herself the subject of a coffee payment wrangle,⁹ this approach seems to be having an effect, in terms of PR, sincerity and changing hearts and minds.

Deeper Wound

Because it has exposed something. Whilst there are excesses and failures of corruption in central government at the very highest levels, which also need to be tackled, it shows that the wound, the causes and the symptoms are much, much deeper. In fact, they are in every fabric of society and within the population itself.

Folks can cast blame on the failures of government over forty one years, and its failure to deal with the failures of the court system, which is itself corrupt, the failures of the so called IGG and other agencies, who themselves cite under resourcing as the reason, and to the extent of a corrupt Parliament, where MPs themselves have been taking all sorts of kickbacks, handouts and service fees, taking money to pass legislation or failing to, or treating Parliament itself as a get rich quick scheme.

As soon as they get in there, they forget the reason why they were there, and start fighting. This cuts across all parties, including the opposition, as we saw in the wrangles between the former deputy leader of the opposition party NUP and his then boss.

The public sees through it.

A man who has been in office for a few months manages to do what all institutions and MPs have failed to do, which is deliver the simple, natural justice of the common man, direct from the witnesses themselves, from the victims, from the accused and the accusers, administered swiftly and publicly, village justice, African style justice if you like. MPs are paid extremely well with unthinkable benefits while most Ugandan struggle on less than average global living standards.

One has to question whether they have the moral authority to question this young mans’apprisch of open, cathartic and public display of justice with a common man’s touch.

He has become the panacea for what a system has failed to do, swift and fast, seemingly fair justice, where the court system is itself locked up, expensive, and compromised.

Precedent

None of this has been proven, but it’s worth throwing in some examples where politicians or well meaning individuals who were themselves bent on tackling corruption ended up sidelined, realigned, or themselves fell on the system they were fighting.

The same pattern shows up all over the world.

In Kenya, John Githongo was made the country’s own anti corruption chief, only to be driven into exile after exposing a six hundred million dollar scandal and facing what looked very much like a tarnishing campaign from within the very government that appointed him.¹¹

The lawyer Sergei Magnitsky exposed a two hundred and thirty million dollar fraud and died in detention. Hence the Magnistky Act.

And it is not only historical.

Currently, public reports appear to indicate that even as this piece was being written, Chief Administrative Officers and district engineers, the very technocrats caught up in Balaam’s drive, were reportedly allegedly organising against him, with a meeting convened for the fifth of August in Kampala that insiders say was really about finding a way to deal with him.¹²

Balaam’s own characteristic signature response was that he will not be cowed, and that the drive is heading next to Greater Masaka and Ankole.¹³

We hope, though, given that he seems to have the backing of state machinery around him, that he might rise above that, and be impervious to that level of being compromised.

But it must be said, no one can honestly say that yet.

Uneven Field

It must also be fairly stated that for objectivity that whilst Minister Balaam has all the trappings, support and resources of the state, with direct phone calls, as we saw, to the State House Comptroller, to compensate and pay, as they call it, the coffee seedling suppliers,¹⁴ a dispute that also drew in a local NRM chairman in Masaka,¹⁵ the opposition claim that they are not allowed that space, even when they are in their own offices in Kamwokya.

They would most likely be tear gassed and potentially arrested if they formed any sort of gathering.

Politics in general and certainly Ugandan politics is not a fair game, and this has a psychological and practical effect on the ground.

If this is executed and rolled out across the board, this modus operandi just might be the rescue card of sorts for a central government that has been running out of schemes and was looking besieged, locally, nationally, and, internationally, appeared running out of rope and short of fresh ideas.The came the Substitute Balaam and Now Otunnu at the international stage.

UN Bid

It has also managed to secure a measure of political cover, not least from the nomination of former under secretary general Olara Otunnu as its candidate for the position of United Nations Secretary General.¹⁶

What that does is lend a sense of maturity, and a sort of unifying factor, around a government candidate who is certainly qualified, whether or not that is a matter for debate against the rest of the field. It could be that this is now time for a woman candidate, potentially a Black woman from the Caribbean, and I think Guyana has fielded that one.¹⁷

Verdict

From a tactical point of view, this is a positive attitude, a positive approach, and useful cover, meaning that Minister Balaam is a likeable guy. He is described as being of humble origins, and speaks the language of the common man.

He seems to have both the effect and the result.

Now, whether or not his political associations are ones that most people might like is, in itself, not the matter.

In terms of impact, approach and modus operandi, he is having an effect, and if that is rolled out across the board, at least in terms of service delivery and impact beyond politics, Uganda might begin to be on the right track.

But as always, it is only in the distance of time that this can be judged.

And naturally, in general, when one is dealing with tackling corruption, one tends to acquire criticism and, sometimes, enemies, as the precedents above make plain.

Like any dangerous substitute so to speak, a player can be taken off the pitch by the manager , or marked out of the game, just as easily as he was brought on.

We hope, he is fully resourced, protected and has the measures in place to deal with that.

Finally To be objectively clear,

Balaam has trapping backing of the state and arguably has political masters and an agenda too.

Furthermore opposition cannot be allowed at times to even have meetings on their own premises.

But they have especially parliamentarians with fat salaries even more than some European countries have become the dragon they were trying to tame.

Total state institutional collapse.

Balaam is milking it filling the vaccum.

But fully aware of the persecution they are facing.

See Dr Basigye, court collapse, Lukwago ət Al.

He has momentum, perception is shaping reality and he is a substitute who is impacting change for now. Positively.

Endnotes

The 1900 Buganda Agreement that sealed colonial rule, Monitor, https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/special-reports/uganda-50/the-1900-buganda-agreement-that-sealed-colonial-rule-1513928

Mwanga II of Buganda, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mwanga_II_of_Buganda

The White Fathers Mission in Uganda, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Fathers_Mission_in_Uganda

Today in History, Mutesa II Dies in Exile, Nilepost, https://nilepost.co.ug/news/304518/today-in-history-mutesa-ii-dies-in-exile

FIFA pledges to defend Infantino after World Cup rights plan collapses, Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/5/fifa-pledges-to-defend-infantino-after-world-cup-rights-plan-collapses

Detained Ugandan opposition leader Besigye in intensive care, wife says, Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/7/30/detained-ugandan-opposition-leader-besigye-in-intensive-care-wife-says

Bobi Wine’s decision to flee Uganda points to a shrinking landscape for opposition politics, The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/bobi-wines-decision-to-flee-uganda-points-to-a-shrinking-landscape-for-opposition-politics-279475

“Respect This Meeting For Once!” Balaam Publicly Confronts Nameere In Heated Masaka Showdown, Nile Post, https://nilepost.co.ug (as supplied)

Museveni Orders Payment for Masaka Coffee Seedlings Amid Dramatic Scenes, ChimpReports, https://chimpreports.com/museveni-orders-payment-for-masaka-coffee-seedlings-amid-dramatic-scenes/

Prominent Ugandan police officer shot dead, Africanews, https://www.africanews.com/2018/09/08/prominent-ugandan-police-officer-afande-muhammad-kirumira-shot-dead/

John Githongo, the persistent Kenyan whistleblower dreaded by graft kings, Citizen Digital, https://citizen.digital/article/john-githongo-the-persistent-kenyan-whistleblower-dreaded-by-graft-kings-n304428

District CAOs Move to Gang Up Against Minister Balaam Barugahara as Anti Corruption Drive Heads to Greater Masaka, Ankole, Kampala Gazette, https://kampalagazette.com/district-caos-move-to-gang-up-against-minister-balaam-barugahara-as-anti-corruption-drive-heads-to-greater-masaka-ankole/

Ibid.

Museveni Orders Payment for Masaka Coffee Seedlings Amid Dramatic Scenes, ChimpReports, https://chimpreports.com/museveni-orders-payment-for-masaka-coffee-seedlings-amid-dramatic-scenes/

Clarification, Nameere accuses Bulegeya of misleading Museveni over coffee seedlings, Pulse Uganda, https://www.pulse.ug/story/clarification-nameere-accuses-bulegeya-of-misleading-museveni-over-coffee-seedlings-2026072819312264516

Uganda Nominates Veteran Diplomat Olara Otunnu for UN Secretary General, KT Press, https://www.ktpress.rw/2026/07/uganda-nominates-veteran-diplomat-olara-otunnu-for-un-secretary-general/

Uganda’s Olara Otunnu UN Bid, Rio Times, https://www.riotimesonline.com/museveni-olara-otunnu-un-secretary-general-bid-2026/

CEUTA CROSSINGS: Piercing the Conspiracy Veils About the Spanish Enclave Crossings in the Context of Spain’s Supreme Court July 2026 Ruling.

​By Shemi Esquire

​They came, they stayed, briefly, and left. Thousands of people crossing from Morocco into the Spanish enclave, effectively Spain and part of Europe, were beamed across the world within hours.

​The Immediate Ceuta Genesis

​They came, they stayed briefly, and left.

​Thousands of people crossing from Morocco into the Spanish enclave effectively Spain and part of Europe were beamed across the world within hours.

The commentary that followed in some cases whipped up fears of a so-called “invasion” of Europe, echoing the same rhetoric that has surfaced around North America.

​From public and open sources, it would appear this reaction stemmed from a ruling of the Spanish Supreme Court, whipped up further by social media, with the effect that some younger people appear to have decided to take the chance.

There was also a whole range of inflammatory, unproven, and unsubstantiated claims and conspiracy theories not worth repeating here.

So we focus, as always, on the legal issue.

​Early this year, Spain took unprecedented steps to legalise an estimated 500,000 people said to be undocumented.

People line up at a citizens’ office on April 20, 2026 in Barcelona, Spain. Lorena Sopena/Europa Press/Abaca/Sipa USA

And in July 2026, the Spanish Supreme Court made a ruling that appears to be associated albeit wrongly with the current Ceuta incident.

​The Crisis

​For years now, since the collapse of Libya in the 2011 Arab Spring, there have been crossings across the Sahara Desert, resulting in innumerable losses of life.

Young men and women have drowned in the Mediterranean, just a few miles from the European Union an EU patrolled in part by NATO, the most capable military alliance in the world, with satellite technology that can track, monitor, and save lives.

​According to Italian, Spanish, and other European humanitarian organisations, at least nine hundred and ninety people lost their lives crossing the Mediterranean in the early months of 2026 alone one of the deadliest starts to a year since records began in 2014.¹

​IOM Director General Amy Pope put it plainly: “Saving lives must come first.”²

​UNHCR, IOM, and UNICEF, in a joint statement, called for urgent support for search and rescue, and for safe and regular pathways so people are not forced to risk their lives at sea.³

Complexity

​To be clear, the issue is complex. It is intersectional, requires rational voices, and cannot be dissected or dismissed from the current issue.

Morocco itself is a relatively calm, safe, and stable country, with a good deal of tourism and sport, but clearly many young people still see a crossing as their chance at change.

​So What Is the Issue?

​Whether Spain’s summary rechazo en frontera (rejection at the border) procedure, reserved for migrants intercepted while breaching the physical fences at Ceuta and Melilla, extends to migrants intercepted at sea while swimming toward those same enclaves.

​The Law

​The Tenth Additional Provision of Ley Orgánica 4/2000 permits summary rejection only of those detected overcoming a border containment element.⁴

Anyone else falls under the ordinary devolución procedure, with its guarantees of identification, legal assistance, and access to asylum.⁵ The Constitutional Court upheld this regime in 2020 only on a conditional basis, subject always to full constitutional and international human rights protections.⁶

​Context

​An Algerian national, together with two others, was intercepted on the high seas on 14 November 2024 while attempting to reach Ceuta by swimming.⁷

Spanish authorities handed him over immediately to Moroccan authorities under rechazo en frontera—in everyday usage, devolución en caliente (a “hot return”). He challenged the handover.

​The Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Andalucía annulled it. The State Attorney’s Office appealed to the Supreme Court, whose Fifth Section, sitting in the Contentious-Administrative Chamber, dismissed the appeal on 29 June 2026, fixing the point as binding doctrine.⁸

​The Ruling

​Migrants intercepted at sea must be processed under the ordinary procedure.

​The judgment does not grant a right to remain in Spain, and the 1992 Spain–Morocco readmission treaty remains untouched.⁹

The change is procedural, not substantive.

​Media Coverage

​The BBC reported officials’ estimates of around forty-nine thousand arrivals within a single twenty-four-hour period.¹⁰

​The New York Times, MSNBC, and others in the American press carried the story alongside domestic debates over migration policy at home, a juxtaposition several commentators noted was itself revealing.

Al Jazeera’s early reporting carried the regional president’s declaration of an absolute humanitarian and social emergency.¹¹

​CNN tracked the losses of lives toll as it rose through the week, from an initial count in the teens to a confirmed figure past sixty by the weekend.¹²

The Guardian, the Independent, and Euronews all covered the diplomatic fallout in close detail.

​To be clear, most of the people who crossed have since returned. Reports of loss of life are not yet fully confirmed, but every single loss of life is irreplaceable to the loved ones left behind especially when it is entirely avoidable.

​Pulling It Together

​Reading the Tenth Additional Provision against that constitutional backdrop, the Supreme Court concluded the special regime was never a general licence to reject anyone crossing irregularly by any route, but was tied specifically to overcoming a physical containment element such as a fence.

​The sea, the Court held, is not such an element. Nor are thermal cameras, drones, or sensors, since those tools only monitor and alert, rather than physically bar passage.

​The judgment does not grant a right to remain in Spain, nor does it disturb the 1992 bilateral treaty with Morocco.⁹ What changes is procedural.

A person intercepted at sea is now entitled to identification, legal assistance, and the opportunity to lodge a claim for international protection before removal.

Migration lawyers note this process can still conclude quickly and still end in removal.

​The Court also noted that nothing would prevent the summary regime from being extended to sea crossings if Spain builds physical containment elements in the water itself.

That is less a loophole than an invitation, and it is difficult to read as anything other than a signal to the government.

​EU Response

​Italy’s government, led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni alongside Deputy Prime Ministers Antonio Tajani and Matteo Salvini, ordered the temporary suspension of Schengen with Spain.¹³

​France increased police presence on its Spanish border roughly fivefold.

​Germany’s chancellor called for prompt implementation of existing EU return rules, while Finland, Denmark, the Czech Republic, and Sweden backed Spain’s suspension, and Portugal and the Netherlands urged stricter enforcement instead.

Spain summoned Italy’s ambassador and dismissed the suspension as an overreaction.

​The European Commission took a more measured line. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called the scenes unacceptable and tasked commissioners with supporting Spain. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez condemned what he called a selfish, polarising response from other EU governments, suggesting the surge had been fuelled by misinformation surrounding the ruling.

Spanish authorities have since begun installing a floating barrier near the Tarajal breakwater, stating the purpose was to bring the position at sea into line with the judgment.

​The Lawyers

​Reaction within the Spanish legal profession has been more measured than the political response. Commentary from Spanish legal outlets has stressed the judgment did no more than apply the conditional constitutionality already set in 2020.¹⁴

Patricia Fernández, a lawyer with the Asociación Coordinadora de Barrios, has pushed back on the suggestion that the ruling acted as a pull factor, arguing that crossings had already been rising for months for unconnected reasons, and that attributing the surge to the judgment gets the causation backwards.

That remains the position as of August 2026.

​All in All

​The Supreme Court did not open Spain’s southern border, nor did it repeal the Tenth Additional Provision. It held, on a fairly conventional reading of the text and its own constitutional limits, that a regime designed for people scaling a fence does not extend to people swimming around it.

​The wider crisis reflects the determination of young people who want a better life but also how quickly images can be amplified into a global narrative without the full context of a Supreme Court Ruling.

​The judgement should be viewed in the totality of the circumstances as opposed to what comes across as incendiary, inflammatory and conspiratorial cycle of misconceived rhetoric.

​Shemi Esquire, The Legal Chronicle

​Notes

1. ​International Organization for Migration, Over 180 Feared Dead as Mediterranean Death Toll Nears 1,000 in 2026, Geneva and Rome, 7 April 2026.

2. ​Amy Pope, Director General, International Organization for Migration, statement accompanying the April 2026 Mediterranean report.

3. ​UNHCR, IOM, and UNICEF, joint statement on Mediterranean deaths, 2026.

4. ​Ley Orgánica 4/2000, Tenth Additional Provision, as inserted by Ley Orgánica 4/2015.

5. ​Ley Orgánica 4/2000, Article 58.3.

6. ​Constitutional Court of Spain, judgment of 2020 on the constitutionality of the Tenth Additional Provision.

7. ​Supreme Court of Spain, Fifth Section, Contentious-Administrative Chamber, judgment of 29 June 2026, statement of facts.

8. ​Supreme Court of Spain, Fifth Section, Contentious-Administrative Chamber, judgment of 29 June 2026.

9. ​Agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the Kingdom of Morocco on the readmission of irregularly entering aliens, 1992.

10. ​BBC News, reporting on Ceuta arrivals, July 2026.

11. ​Al Jazeera, reporting on the Ceuta humanitarian emergency, July 2026.

12. ​CNN, reporting on the rising death toll, July to August 2026.

13. ​Reuters, Euronews, and The Guardian, reporting on the Italian Schengen suspension, July 2026.

14. ​Spanish legal press commentary on the Supreme Court’s judgment, July 2026.

​Cases Cited

• ​N.D. and N.T. v. Spain, European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, 2020.

• ​Supreme Court of Spain, Fifth Section, judgment of 29 June 2026 (unreported, Contentious-Administrative Chamber).

​”Events, dear boy, events” and “a week is a long time in politics” were famous phrases retorted by British Prime Ministers Harold Macmillan and Harold Wilson.

​So it is in the life of a similar non-governmental international organization.

FIFA.

​Since the World Cup started, it has been one controversy after another.

​Yesterday, we examined FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s proposals to address global football’s economic divide specifically how a $20 million payment to smaller countries could transform grassroots resources.

​However, recent insider revelations from a senior FIFA official exposed the vast reserves at FIFA’s disposal leading to a VAR reversal of scheme.

​The critical question is whether FIFA is fit for purpose, a new referred is needed or is a complete governance overhaul long overdue?

​Over the last several years, The Legal Chronicle has reported on global sports governance and sports jurisprudence

​Across our coverage of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, we have documented the structural economic divide between the Global North and Global South, host nation border detentions, officiating controversies, and the legal mechanics of sports federations.

​Today, the ongoing fallout has triggered an internal crisis at the highest levels of football governance.

Enter Carlos. Carlos Cadeiro.

In a dramatic public statement, Carlos Cordeiro Senior Advisor to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, former US Soccer President, and a veteran investment banker stated that

​His public strong rejection of the Infantino scheme marks a direct rejection of Gianni Infantino’s proposal to create FIFA Forward Enterprise, a subsidiary intended to sell a 20 percent minority stake to private equity investors for $4.2 billion at a $20 billion valuation.

​Under the scheme, FIFA would distribute $20 million up front to each of its 211 member associations, with incentives potentially pushing total payouts to $40 million.

​While Gianni Infantino framed the move as the democratization of football worldwide while retaining ultimate regulatory control, complete details are tracked in reporting on The Daily Star’s FIFA Forward Enterprise Breakdown and analysis from Front Office Sports on FIFA Stake Sales.

​Carlos Cordeiro’s resignation letter offers a sharp insider critique of Gianni Infantino’s private equity strategy.

​As a Senior Advisor to the FIFA President, a former banker, and a lifelong football fan, Cordeiro declared that he could not stand by while FIFA considered selling a stake in the World Cup.

​He made it clear that he had no involvement in the proposal and opposed it unequivocally as a bad deal for member associations, for football, and for the long-term future of the game.

​Drawing on 35 years in banking, Cordeiro dismantled the economic rationale for diluting football’s primary asset.

​He highlighted FIFA’s strong financial footing, pointing to billions in reserves, zero debt, and $15 billion generated in the 2022–2026 cycle alone.

​He noted that if member associations believe additional investment is needed, FIFA already has the financial capacity to provide support from existing resources.

​Selling a permanent stake in football’s most valuable asset to raise $4.2 billion makes little sense, amounting to mortgaging football’s future without justification.

​He further challenged the rush to privatize by asking why the deal is happening now, what oversight exists, who benefits, and why member associations are being forced to decide in barely 50 days.

​Carlos Cordeiro’s full public statement can be reviewed via the official Carlos Cordeiro Statement on X.

​This institutional clash reflects fundamental differences in the backgrounds of both leaders.

​Carlos Cordeiro is a Harvard Business School graduate and former Goldman Sachs partner.

​He co-chaired the successful North American 2026 World Cup bid and served on the White House Task Force before resigning from FIFA.

​He views the World Cup through the lens of fiduciary duty and balance sheet equity, treating it as an irreplaceable public trust that should never be privatized.

Infantino

​Gianni Infantino is a sports lawyer and former UEFA Secretary General who took charge of FIFA in 2016 following the 2015 corruption scandal.

​He views governance through political expansion, wealth redistribution, and aggressive commercial growth, as documented in official updates from the FIFA Official Announcement on X.

​Gianni Infantino was elected to restore trust following the 2015 U.S. Department of Justice indictments that ended Sepp Blatter’s presidency over systemic racketeering and bribery schemes.

​Details of those federal proceedings are preserved in the U.S. Department of Justice Official FIFA Indictment Announcement and the FBI Official FIFA Corruption Case Overview.

​However, his administration has swapped historic corruption for centralized executive overreach and hyper-commercialization.

Legalities

​Challenging FIFA’s private equity pivot legally requires navigating Swiss association law, EU market regulations, and extraterritorial U.S. federal jurisdiction.

​As a Swiss non-profit association under Articles 60–79 of the Swiss Civil Code, FIFA and its officers owe strict fiduciary duties to member associations, creating grounds for internal civil claims or statutory challenges under Article 75 ZGB if assets are improperly diluted or non-profit mandates compromised.

​Concurrently, because FIFA operates commercially within the European Single Market, any market abuse or tie-in mechanism triggering a forced private equity stake sale falls directly under European Union antitrust oversight (Articles 101/102 TFEU) under the established effects doctrine.

​Furthermore, while non-EU Switzerland limits direct administrative reach, European national courts hold jurisdiction over FIFA’s significant local commercial and operational situs.

​From an extraterritorial U.S. perspective, the 2015 Obama-era DOJ prosecution procured jurisdiction by linking illicit conduct to U.S. financial clearing channels, wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343), and RICO statutes.

​Applying that precedent today, if private equity transfers, administrative commissions, or advisory dealings utilize U.S. banking wires or involve domestic investment firms, U.S. federal authorities would possess immediate jurisdictional hooks to investigate any potential self-dealing, misrepresentations, or foreign bribery under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

​The global game is no longer defined by match tactics or VAR decisions but is consumed by governance disputes and executive power plays.

​With UEFA and key member associations signaling potential boycotts over FIFA’s direction, the current model appears unsustainable.

​FIFA operates as a multibillion-dollar monopoly that uses voting blocs to bypass core stakeholders.

​Extra Time or Replay

​Has world football finally reached the tipping point where continental federations could break away to form an independent global structure, or will internal legal mechanisms force FIFA back to the drawing board for a complete institutional replay?

​If FIFA cannot limit presidential power and safeguard the game from private equity, major federations must consider creating a modern, transparent governing body that keeps the soul of football out of corporate hands.

​References and Further Reading

1. ​The Legal Chronicle – The Legal Chronicle Substack Official Publication and Legal Commentary

2. ​U.S. Department of Justice – Nine FIFA Officials and Five Corporate Executives Indicted for Racketeering Conspiracy and Corruption

3. ​Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – More FIFA Officials Charged in Ongoing Corruption Case and Federal Investigation

4. ​The Guardian – Infantino increasingly embattled after senior adviser resigns over World Cup sell-off plans

5. ​Financial Times – Fifa insiders turn on Infantino over controversial $20bn investment plan

​Watch Video Report: Infantino’s Senior Adviser Quits Over FIFA’s World Cup Plan

Will Infantino’s Private Equity Proposal Help Investment In Africa, the Carribean, Smaller Countries with less Resources or Harm Football’s Soul?

​By Shemi Esquire. The Legal Chronicle

​One can walk onto any pitch in any corner of the world and find the exact same scene. Young men and women gather to play, bound together in pure joy over a simple round object.

As King Pelé famously observed, football remains the only sport in the world that unites people across every racial, religious, economic, and social background, and may it always remain that way.

The recent just concluded 2026 World Cup, hosted across three nations in the United States, Mexico, and Canada, made most of June and July unifying, joyful, and a display of what we actually have in common together as a human race, from Quebec to Rio, Tokyo to Brixton in London, Lagos to Zanzibar, New York to Mexico City, Turin to Melbourne, and Dubai to Moscow.

The world was united over football, living up to the legendary quote of the one and only King Pelé of uniting humanity.

But Football is far more than a recreational pastime

It is a vital pillar of human life that sustains mental health, fosters physical wellbeing, and weaves the social fabric of local communities together.

For millions, it approaches a near religious passion.

Andy Burnham the new UK Prime Minister, professed his love for Everton, and famously noted the sport’s profound gravity in occupying a central place in modern identity and daily life.

​Transformative Power of the Ball

​Football’s financial transformation can rewire the fate of entire communities and nations.

Former Senegal captain Sadio Mané has poured millions of his earnings back into his home village of Bambali, funding a modern hospital, a public secondary school, 4G internet infrastructure, a fuel station, and monthly stipends for local families.

Ballon d’Or winner George Weah rose from the Clara Town slums in Monrovia to perform at the highest levels for Chelsea and AC Milan, eventually using his immense global stature to serve as President of Liberia.

These profound journeys prove how football acts as an unprecedented, life altering force for working class families across the Global South.

​So the recent proposal flawed as it is and for federations operating within this harsh economic reality, including Cape Verde, the Republic of the Congo, Haiti, and Curaçao, a guaranteed $20 million immediate payout from FIFA represents life changing infrastructure capital.

But that is not without it’s existential pitfalls to football as we have always known it.

A common man’s sport the world over.

First is how equal and affordable is it to live up to that common fallacy.

Inequality Of The Beautiful Game

Is it Out of reach and unaffordable for the ordinary people?

The inequality of earning power in football between the Global North and the Global South is glaringly obvious.

As I have covered extensively across several articles on The Legal Chronicle, the recent 2026 World Cup across three host nations in the United States, Mexico, and Canada showcased the unifying power of football.

The tournament highlighted the rich diversity of the World Cup where fans united living up to King Pelé’s observation that football brings all people together.

Yet, behind this global spectacle, critical legal and governance issues emerged.

The 2026 Yellow and Red Cards Governance Faux-Pas of Football Management

We analyzed the unlawful detention of Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, examined officiating controversies in the Argentinian game, and addressed grave social disputes including the racism of Paraguayan senator Celeste Amarilla against Kylian Mbappé and Mbappé’s response condemning her as a ‘despicable woman’ while defending the honor of the Paraguayan players themselves.

​Tournament Rifts

​Beneath this spectacle across host venues, critical issues began surfacing that exposed the fragile state of global governance.

​A primary issue emerged when ticket prices skyrocketed to historic highs, forcing supporters into extreme financial measures.

This crisis was highlighted in widely discussed commentary involving New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani alongside host Gary Lineker on his podcast The Rest Is Football regarding the inability of ordinary supporters to afford entry.

Procedural governance faced severe criticism when Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan was held at Miami International Airport for 11 hours, interviewed, and subsequently denied entry to the United States over alleged vetting concerns, preventing him from officiating without concrete evidence ever publicly presented, an incident examined closely on The Legal Chronicle Substack.

​Officiating consistency deteriorated further, sparking intense accusations of institutional bias and favoritism toward high profile nations like Argentina.

In their dramatic Round of 16 encounter, Egypt held a two goal lead over Argentina before a controversial VAR review overturned Mostafa Zico’s second half goal for minimal contact seconds earlier, prompting the Egyptian Football Association to lodge a formal FIFA complaint alleging double standards and a rigged system.

​These officiating tensions reached a boiling point after the final at MetLife Stadium, where Spain defeated Argentina 1 to 0.

Following the final whistle, a major brawl erupted as Leandro Paredes grabbed Eric Garcia by the throat, Nahuel Molina struck Rodri, and assistant coach Roberto Ayala swung at Dani Olmo.

Despite Paredes initially being reported as receiving a red card, confusion mounted when no official sanction was recorded, leading to widespread outrage over FIFA’s perceived inaction, slow response, and lack of timely discipline following intolerable post match violence.

Arbitrary Rules of the Game

Meanwhile, structural changes sparked fierce debate, as the expansion to 48 teams drew criticism for diluting competitiveness versus praising it for opening doors to smaller nations, while mandated hydration breaks disrupted the natural 45 minute cultural weave of the game to mimic commercial broadcast formats designed for frequent advertising breaks.

It's The Money- Stupid.

Private Equity Money

​​The proposed sale of a 20 percent minority stake in FIFA commercial operations to private equity investors for approximately $4.2 billion, valuing the new subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise, at $20 billion, is the latest controversy.

The core tension pits FIFA’s proposed $4.2 billion private equity deal against fierce pushback from European governing bodies like UEFA.

Meanwhile federations across developing regions, including Cape Verde, Curaçao, Haiti, and the Republic of the Congo, view the resulting capital payouts as an urgent necessity. At its heart, football remains an unmatched catalyst for social mobility that continues to lift families and communities out of poverty.

Yet, as dissenting member associations prepare potential legal challenges under Swiss association law, the entire global structure must challenge its own deep economic imbalance.

For all intents and purposes, introducing private equity threatens to further commercialize the game, drive up ticket prices, and expand commercial interruptions to maximize financial yields for investors.

While player salaries have inflated and ticket prices have risen, football has remained somewhat accessible to millions.

Turning it into an asset for private investors threatens to corporate it completely, turning it into an elite commercial product akin to golf or tennis and stripping the spirit out of the sport

Private firms, European governing bodies like UEFA must establish formal funding pipelines to support academies across the Global South.

Premier grassroots institutions, such as Génération Foot in Senegal which developed Sadio Mané or the Right to Dream Academy in Ghana which developed Mohammed Kudus, demonstrate how holistic education and elite training can thrive when properly funded.

Direct institutional investment into these regional academies provides a humane, nonprofit alternative to private equity commercialization.

Economic Card

​Beyond the pitch, modern life, business, and employment thrive directly around the game.

Entire local economies depend on football matchdays, from neighborhood pubs and local restaurants to independent vendors selling food, ticketing agents, and merchandise retailers.

In major European football hubs surrounding clubs like Arsenal, Chelsea, or Manchester United, entire commercial real estate sectors are built around the stadium ecosystem.

This deep connection makes it essential that the beautiful game is not vulgarized or hijacked by artificial modifications, such as forced hybrid structures or over commercialized sports franchises, that risk severing football from its grassroots community identity.

The Divide

​While football serves as a universal language, the game remains deeply unequal in its economic rewards. In European football, elite players command annual salaries reaching tens of millions of euros, a scale now further amplified by the Saudi Pro League where marquee stars earn anywhere from 40 million to over 200 million euros annually.

In elite European leagues, average annual player salaries lead global wage structures, with the English Premier League exceeding $3.9 million, followed by Spain’s La Liga at $2.5 million, Germany’s Bundesliga at $1.8 million, Italy’s Serie A at $1.9 million, France’s Ligue 1 at $1.3 million, and Portugal’s Primeira Liga at roughly $450,000 annually.

​In stark contrast, top leagues across Africa present a dramatically different financial reality.

Even in South Africa’s Betway Premiership, one of the continent’s most developed domestic leagues, highest earning domestic stars peak at approximately $900,000 per year, while average squad members across Nigeria’s NPFL, Ghana’s Premier League, and Kenya’s FKF Premier League earn under $500 dollars a month, with some domestic clubs paying as little as $120 monthly. Similar stark divides separate South American giants in Brazil’s Brasileirão from smaller regional leagues across Latin America and the Caribbean, including Curaçao.

The Adversity Card

​This economic divide arguably contributes to the trigger of tragic human migrations.

Every single day, thousands of young African men attempt perilous overland crossings through Morocco and the Sahara Desert or risk sea voyages across the Mediterranean to reach Europe in search of professional trials.

The personal history of Spanish star Nico Williams exemplifies this journey, as analyzed in recent publications on The Legal Chronicle Substack detailing how his mother, Maria Arthuer, famously crossed the Sahara Desert on foot while pregnant with his older brother Iñaki, suffering immense physical hardship before obtaining asylum in Spain, where her sons eventually rose to world class football stardom.

​Similarly, Moroccan star Achraf Hakimi has spoken openly about his humble roots in Madrid, where his mother worked tirelessly cleaning houses and his father worked as a street vendor to afford his early football boots.

The story of Spanish prodigy Lamine Yamal echoes this same struggle, as detailed in It Was Football That Won It: Yamal and Williams Set Up Torres to Propel Spain to World Cup Finals, outlining how his mother Sheila Ebana worked double shifts at fast food restaurants while living in a tiny apartment before he entered Barcelona’s La Masia academy.

Always Politics

​The parliamentary reality within FIFA is governed by Article 26 of the FIFA Statutes, which grants each of the 211 national member associations exactly one vote at the FIFA Congress. Approving the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprise and selling the 20 percent stake requires a simple majority of present member associations, or 106 votes.

The Goals and Scores in Votes

​If a vote were held today, the proposal would likely pass comfortably despite fierce European pushback. The opposition is led by UEFA, commanding 55 votes across Europe, joined by elements of CONCACAF, which holds 41 votes. Together, this oppositional bloc represents up to 96 votes. Conversely, the Confederation of African Football holds 54 votes and has formally declared its full support for Gianni Infantino, enticed by the proposed $20 million immediate payout to each federation and the doubling of annual development grants to $5 million.

With the Asian Football Confederation holding 47 votes, Oceania holding 11 votes, and South America’s CONMEBOL holding 10 votes, Infantino needs only 52 votes beyond CAF to cross the 106 vote threshold. Smaller federations across Asia, the Caribbean, and the Pacific rely heavily on FIFA distributions, meaning an immediate vote would yield approximately 130 to 145 votes in favor.

​It is entirely unsurprising that total objection to the proposal comes from wealthy European nations where domestic TV rights generate billions, clubs hoard commercial wealth, and players earn astronomical salaries. Yet, most top players performing in Europe originate from Africa and South America, where local salaries and commercialization are far less rewarding. Furthermore, continental bodies like CAF have historically faced scrutiny over institutional transparency, such as opaque executive committee panels awarding major tournament hosting rights. For under resourced federations across the Global South, accepting much needed capital is a natural financial inclination.

​The underlying motivation remains straightforward, it comes down to the money above all else.

Valid, Fake Uefa Outrage or Self Interest?

The outrage from European institutions claiming to defend a working man’s game ignores the reality that European football is already deeply commercialized, with exorbitant ticket prices and fragmented media subscriptions pricing out local supporters.

However, complete commercialization via private equity is not the answer.

The genuine solution must be creating mechanisms to inject capital, resources, and development funding into the Global South through a balanced, nonprofit global trust model without surrendering control of the game to private investors.

Voting Positions Offside or onside? “It’s the Money, Stupid”

​The parliamentary reality within FIFA is governed by Article 26 of the FIFA Statutes, which grants each of the 211 national member associations exactly one vote at the FIFA Congress. Approving the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprise and selling the 20% stake requires a simple majority (>50%) of present member associations—or 106 votes.

​If a vote were held today, the proposal would likely pass comfortably despite fierce European pushback. The opposition is led by UEFA, commanding 55 votes across Europe, joined by elements of CONCACAF, which holds 41 votes. Together, this oppositional bloc represents up to 96 votes.

Conversely, the Confederation of African Football (CAF) holds 54 votes and has formally declared its full support for Gianni Infantino, enticed by the proposed $20 million immediate payout to each federation and the doubling of annual development grants to $5 million.

With the Asian Football Confederation holding 47 votes, Oceania holding 11 votes, and South America’s CONMEBOL holding 10 votes, Infantino needs only 52 votes beyond CAF to cross the 106-vote threshold. Smaller federations across Asia, the Caribbean, and the Pacific rely heavily on FIFA distributions, meaning an immediate vote would yield approximately 130 to 145 votes in favor.

​It is entirely unsurprising that total objection to the proposal comes from wealthy European nations where domestic TV rights generate billions, clubs hoard commercial wealth, and players earn astronomical salaries. Yet, most top players performing in Europe originate from Africa and South America, where local salaries and commercialization are far less rewarding.

Furthermore, continental bodies like CAF have historically faced scrutiny over institutional transparencysuch as opaque executive committee panels awarding major tournament hosting rights.

For under-resourced federations across the Global South, accepting much-needed capital is a natural financial inclination.

​The underlying motivation remains straightforward: “it’s the money, stupid.”

The outrage from European institutions claiming to defend a “working man’s game” ignores the reality that European football is already deeply commercialized, with exorbitant ticket prices and fragmented media subscriptions pricing out local supporters. However, complete commercialization via private equity is not the answer.

The genuine solution must be creating mechanisms to inject capital, resources, and development funding into the Global South through a balanced, non-profit global trust model without surrendering control of the game to private investors.

​FIFA Presidential Removal Precedents

​A FIFA President cannot be removed simply by confederation boycotts or political pressure; dismissal is governed by strict legal frameworks under Swiss association law and the FIFA Statutes. Under Article 28, the FIFA Congress holds the power to dismiss a President, but this requires a two-thirds supermajority vote (141 out of 211 votes).

Alternatively, under Articles 36 and 52, the independent FIFA Ethics Committee can provisionally or permanently ban an official from all football activities if an investigation reveals bribery, fraud, or breach of fiduciary duty.

​This legal statutory procedure was demonstrated during the downfall of former FIFA President Sepp Blatter and former UEFA President Michel Platini in 2015.

When Swiss federal prosecutors opened criminal proceedings over a 2 million Swiss franc payment, it was not a Congress vote that ousted them, but rather the independent Ethics Committee issuing provisional suspensions that stripped both leaders of administrative power prior to handing down multi-year bans.

​Gianni Infantino, a Swiss-Italian lawyer and former UEFA General Secretary who oversaw the expansion of the European Championship to 24 teams, was elected in 2016 amidst the fallout of the Blatter-Platini scandal.

His tenure has been defined by expanding the men’s World Cup to 48 teams, expanding the Women’s World Cup to 32 teams, launching the 32-team Club World Cup, and driving record revenues.

While FIFA rules restrict presidents to three four-year terms (12 years), the FIFA Council ruled that Infantino’s initial three years (2016–2019) completing Blatter’s term did not count as a full statutory term.

Having been re-elected in 2023, Infantino is serving his second formal term and remains legally eligible to run for a final term through 2031.

​Responses to date From Continental Governing Bodies

​The six continental confederations have issued stark, contrasting on-the-record statements regarding Infantino’s privatized commercial proposal.

​UEFA (Europe)

Dissenting unanimously, UEFA issued an official statement asserting that the World Cup is not FIFA’s to sell, stating: “This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross... The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially.” UEFA Vice President Gabriele Gravina added: “Does it look like the Super League? Very much so... Football isn’t a private asset that you can sell to the highest bidder.”

​CONCACAF (North/Central America)

Following an emergency executive meeting, CONCACAF released an official statement criticizing the procedural rush: “The membership expressed deep concerns about the lack of due process surrounding the proposal, the artificially short deadline imposed, and the absence of any review or approval by relevant governance bodies... History has shown FIFA what happens when custodians of the game lose sight of these values.” ​

CAF (Africa)

Supporting the financial influx, CAF confirmed in an official declaration that its member associations unanimously agree to back Gianni Infantino, emphasizing that guaranteed distributions under FIFA Forward are essential for regional pitch infrastructure and grass-roots development.

AFC, CONMEBOL, and OFC

Maintaining a divided stance, Asian, South American, and Oceanian federations remain split between concerns over calendar congestion and the desire for guaranteed development funding.

​Potential Legal Challenges Under Swiss Civil Law or International Courts

​Beyond political opposition, member associations can initiate formal legal actions to halt the sale under Swiss civil jurisprudence.

Because FIFA is an association registered in Zurich under Articles 60–79 of the Swiss Civil Code, its corporate resolutions are subject to judicial oversight.

​Under Article 75 of the Swiss Civil Code, any member association that has not consented to a resolution that violates association statutes or civil law has the legal right to challenge that decision in court within one month of learning of it.

UEFA or dissenting federations can file an emergency action in the Cantonal Court of Zurich, requesting an injunction on the grounds that transferring non-profit association assets to a corporate subsidiary breaches FIFA’s statutory non-profit mandate.

Furthermore, member associations can submit appeals to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne or file antitrust complaints with the European Commission under EU competition law, alleging that privatizing global broadcast rights constitutes an illegal abuse of a dominant market position

​Absolute Power?

​The concentration of executive power in the office of the FIFA President demands structural review.

Under the current governance setup, presidential authority over committee appointments, revenue allocation schemes, and tournament bidding processes creates an environment where sweeping financial restructurings can be presented to federations with minimal advance consultation.

​A reformed FIFA framework must establish strict legal checks on presidential power.

On the pitch, procedural protections for match officials must be legally guaranteed so that when host nation status is awarded for major tournaments, binding diplomatic treaties guarantee that accredited match officials, such as Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, receive automatic visa clearance and protection from arbitrary host nation border detentions. Off the pitch, any proposal involving the privatization, spin off, or commercial sale of nonprofit association assets must require a two thirds supermajority vote of 141 votes rather than a simple majority, ensuring that major structural decisions cannot be forced through against the collective resistance of major confederations.

​A Set Piece Then?

​Ultimately, whether right or wrong, the overriding rationale moving forward must center on a genuine leveling of the game and its financial resources between the Global North and the Global South.

The world requires an equitable framework that does not open the sport up to corporate vultures circling over the soul of football, but instead establishes a dedicated nonprofit mechanism capable of injecting resources and structural capital into Africa, South America, and the Caribbean.

Achieving parity means granting those regions access to the same levels of earning power, infrastructure, and revenue that Europe, North America, and the Middle East currently enjoy. Anything less will continually produce these risky commercial ventures and leave the sport exposed to the highest bidder, which would be a profound tragedy for the beautiful game.

Reiterating King Pelé famous observation, football remains the only sport in the world that unites people across every racial, religious, economic, and social background, and may it always remain that way.

​References and Legal Citations

1. ​The Legal Chronicle (July 2026) – The Legal Chronicle Substack Official Publication & Legal Commentary

2. ​The Legal Chronicle (July 2026) – It Was Football That Won It: Yamal and Williams Set Up Torres to Propel Spain to World Cup Finals

3. ​The Legal Chronicle (July 2026) – Football Won Against Violence As France Disqualified A Violent Cheating Paraguay

4. ​The Legal Chronicle (July 2026) – A Critical Analysis and Review of the Pace and Power Syndrome

5. ​The Rest Is Football Podcast (July 2026) – Zohran Mamdani: why he loves Arsenal and hates hydration breaks

6. ​YouTube / France 24 (July 2026) – Egypt files FIFA complaint as Argentina rigged World Cup claims go viral

7. ​YouTube / Sports TV (July 2026) – Argentina’s Red Card REMOVED and Players REFUSE To Apologize

8. ​The Guardian (July 2026) – Gianni Infantino’s World Cup plan is part of a desire for expansion that was clear from the start

9. ​YouTube / SportyTV (July 2026) – Argentina v Cape Verde | Highlights | FIFA World Cup 2026

10. ​YouTube / FOX Sports (June 2026) – Germany vs Curaçao Extended Highlights 2026 FIFA World Cup

11. ​Court of Arbitration for Sport / Swiss Civil Code jurisprudence – Palestine Football Association v. FIFA (CAS 2017/A/5166 and 5405) under Article 75 Swiss Civil Code

​FIFA WC: Mbappe Slams Racist Senator Who Called Him ‘Colonised Cameroonian’

​This video provides direct coverage of Kylian Mbappé’s response and the surrounding international outrage following the racist remarks made by Paraguayan senator Celeste Amarilla.

Does Representation Take Precedence over Policy Implementation at the United Nations?

​BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

It’s that season again when member states decide who is the next UN Secretary-General. Which takes me back.

Back in time.

Sitting alongside former Secretary-General Kofi Annan on one of those final days, in a group photo, at the UN Secretariat in New York, his parting personal advice, which I understand better now, provided a striking personal lens on global governance.

​In his signature soft-spoken, intentional voice, he stated: Shemi, “Stay international.”

​Those words still ring in my ears almost every day when faced with the dilemma of going narrow, native, or instinctively staying inherently more globally focused, which is the natural disposition.

​The late Ghanaian diplomat spent much of his post-UN life in Switzerland and Africa, engaging in international advocacy through The Elders and establishing the Kofi Annan Foundation in Geneva.

​As the race for the next UN Secretary-General unfolds, a diverse slate of candidates contends for the world’s highest diplomatic office, highlighting the ongoing debate between symbolic representation and concrete policy execution.

​Organization History

​The United Nations was established in 1945 in the immediate aftermath of World War II to replace the League of Nations and prevent future catastrophic global conflicts. Representatives of 50 nations gathered at the San Francisco Conference to draft the UN Charter, building an international architecture rooted in collective security, sovereign equality, and diplomacy.

​The primary mandate of the United Nations is to maintain international peace and security, foster friendly relations among nations, achieve international cooperation on economic and social problems, and serve as a central harmonizing organ for national actions.

​The organization has six principal organs, namely: the General Assembly, which serves as the main deliberative body where all member states debate global policy; the Security Council, which bears primary responsibility for international peace and security, holding unique authority to authorize peacekeeping missions, impose economic sanctions, or direct military action, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which oversees global economic, environmental, and developmental cooperation; the Trusteeship Council, originally created to supervise trust territories transitioning toward self-government, now inactive after the final territory achieved independence; the International Court of Justice, which acts as the principal judicial organ for settling legal disputes between sovereign states; and the Secretariat, which comprises the Secretary-General and international civil servants managing daily global operations.

​Past to Date

​Nine individuals have led the Secretariat since 1946: Trygve Lie (Norway, 1946–1952), Dag Hammarskjöld (Sweden, 1953–1961), U Thant (Myanmar, 1961–1971), Kurt Waldheim (Austria, 1972–1981), Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (Peru, 1982–1991), Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt, 1992–1996), Kofi Annan (Ghana, 1997–2006), Ban Ki-moon (South Korea, 2007–2016), and António Guterres (Portugal, 2017–present).

​Current Contenders

​The current candidate pool reflects a mix of technical specialists, former heads of state, and veteran multilateral diplomats.

​Olara Otunnu

Nominated by Uganda, Otunnu brings extensive institutional experience, having served as President of the Security Council and UN Under-Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, following early executive service as Uganda’s foreign minister and later leadership of the opposition Uganda People’s Congress.

​Macky Sall

Nominated by Burundi, Sall offers a strong executive platform after serving twelve years as President of Senegal (2012–2024) and Chairperson of the African Union (2022–2023), leveraging his experience leading large-scale infrastructure projects under the Plan Sénégal Émergent despite navigating domestic economic challenges.

​Rafael Grossi

Nominated by Argentina, Grossi brings deep technical credibility as Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), offering proven crisis management experience in nuclear safety and non-proliferation from his career as a senior Argentine diplomat.

​Michelle Bachelet

Nominated by Brazil and Mexico, Bachelet provides high-level multilateral governance experience, having served two non-consecutive terms as President of Chile, founding Executive Director of UN Women, and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

​Rebeca Grynspan

Nominated by Costa Rica, Grynspan delivers strong economic and developmental expertise, drawing on her experience as Secretary-General of UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Associate Administrator of UNDP, and Second Vice President of Costa Rica.

​María Fernanda Espinosa

Nominated by Antigua and Barbuda, Espinosa leverages comprehensive institutional knowledge within the UN architecture, having served as President of the 73rd UN General Assembly and holding senior cabinet portfolios as Ecuador’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defense.

​Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett

Nominated by Guyana, Rodrigues-Birkett offers a distinct perspective on climate resilience and small island developing states, backed by her record as Guyana’s Permanent Representative to the UN, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, and senior leader at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

The gravity of the job is self evident as accentuated by the UN spokesperson who stated that The selection of the Secretary-General has widespread consequences that resonate far beyond this building,” declared Ms. Baerbock. “Our choice will shape the direction of the world’s unique multilateral organization and demonstrate whether the United Nations truly represents the more than eight billion people we serve around the world, half of whom are women and girls.”

The process

According to the UN, the process takes the following format and will be broad cast live.

According to the UN, The six candidates in the running to be the next UN Secretary-General each have the chance to show why they are the best choice during a series of “interactive dialogues” taking place at UN Headquarters in New York.

‘The Interactive Dialogues’

​Political Dynamics

​As Security Council deliberations proceed, diplomatic power dynamics significantly influence the field.

​Grossi holds early technical momentum due to his high-visibility non-proliferation work at the IAEA, which appeals to Western permanent members, though any successful bid depends on avoiding a veto from Russia or China. Concurrently, strong momentum exists behind female candidates such as Grynspan and Bachelet, driven by a global push to elect the first woman to lead the organization in its 81-year history. Grynspan is widely viewed as a skilled consensus builder capable of bridging Western powers and the Global South. While African candidates Sall and Otunnu bring notable executive and diplomatic credentials, their candidacies navigate regional headwinds given that informal rotation norms strongly favor the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC) for this term.

​Representation Complexities

​Stated to be rooted in social and organizational psychology, the phenomenon where leaders from a marginalized racial background treat members of their own group more strictly than an outgroup leader is arguably associated with or grounded in Social Identity Theory and Subjective Group Dynamics.

​Marques et al argue that a key psychological mechanism driving this is the “Black Sheep Effect”.

​The phenomenon demonstrates that individuals often evaluate underperforming or deviant ingroup members more harshly than outgroup members.

​The proposed rationale is that a leader’s own social identity is tied to the collective reputation of their group; an underperforming ingroup subordinate is perceived as a direct threat to the group’s social standing and public legitimacy.

​Hence, minority leaders in high-stakes or historically majority-dominated institutional settings often face systemic pressure to distance themselves from perceived ingroup flaws.

​Therefore, to preempt accusations of favoritism, avoid validating negative group stereotypes, or prove their own institutional alignment and objectivity, leaders from marginalized backgrounds may overcompensate by applying hyper-vigilant scrutiny and stricter standards to same-race subordinates.

​Comparatively, an outgroup leader, such as a liberal counterpart, may feel less identity threat and operate with greater latitude, leniency, or benefit-of-the-doubt.

​Bill Clinton

​It was often stated that Bill Clinton was the first Black president due to his policies that addressed socioeconomic issues that historically impacted African Americans disproportionately. Ditto Jeremy Corbyn, who through his dictum, deeds, and past record instinctively understood and propelled policies that were cathartic to those causes identified with marginalized socioeconomic groups.

​Kofi Annan

​The tenure of Kofi Annan illustrates why identity and symbolic representation, while historically significant, do not automatically yield structural transformation. Annan was a deeply respected leader who dedicated his life to diplomacy, yet his tenure faced sharp criticism over the UN’s failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda and Darfur.

​His consistent response pointed to the structural constraints of the Secretariat: the United Nations possesses no standing army or independent revenue, depending entirely on member states’ political will and voluntary contributions.

​Barack Obama

​A parallel dynamic was visible in Barack Obama’s presidency. While his visits to Kenya and Ethiopia carried immense symbolic pride across Africa, his administration did not establish structural industrial transformations or direct economic programs capable of altering Africa’s long-term economic baseline.

​In domestic policy, while his administration enacted broad social measures, it did not institute targeted reparative policies aimed specifically at addressing the deep-seated economic disparities stemming from systemic racial oppression and historical disenfranchisement.

​It is also an irrefutable fact that Obama was elected twice by a majority white electorate precisely because they thought he was qualified and suitable over two similarly qualified candidates, the late John McCain and Mitt Romney.

​In any realm, individual character and substantive action must always take precedence over surface identity, though this is distinguished from addressing past injustice often along an intergenerational trajectory.

​It’s the Economics - Stupid

​In a similar vein, Nelson Mandela warned against confusing formal political transition with genuine economic emancipation: “As long as poverty, injustice and gross inequality persist in our world, none of us can truly rest.” Mandela spent 27 years in prison before guiding South Africa through its historic political transition from apartheid. Serving a single five-year term as president, his administration focused primarily on racial reconciliation and institutional stability.

​However, this focus left severe structural and economic inequalities unaddressed challenges that continue to burden South African society today.

​The ‘White Zambian’

​Conversely, the political career of Guy Scott in Zambia demonstrates that effective policy execution is not restricted by racial or regional identity. Serving as Minister of Agriculture, Vice President, and later interim President, Scott, a white Zambian politician, managed major national agricultural initiatives and navigated severe regional droughts.

​His tenure highlighted that practical governance, administrative competence, and direct execution matter far more to citizens than the background of the person holding office.

​Whether analyzing nominations for the UN Secretariat or evaluating national governance, representation remains distinct from policy execution. Improving real-world outcomes for marginalized nations and communities requires moving beyond symbolic appointments to demand concrete, well-funded policies that confront structural inequality and economic stagnation at their source.

​Irrespective of who ends up being the Secretary-General of the UN, it matters not so much about their ancestry, regional heritage, or race, but rather the policy, the actions, and the transformation and lifting of societies and millions of people. It is not about the individual, but about what the individual can do with the office to transform lives.

While representation matters having a psychological impact in terms of perceptions, optics, and role models where children from similar backgrounds can see themselves in that individual in terms of aspirations and while it is understood very clearly why regional rotation matters to avoid the concentration of power, impunity, manipulation, and to ensure transparency given that this is a UN body, it is actually critical that whoever is in office executes and uses that platform to make the change that is much needed in a world divided and characterized by war and conflict. So whether it’s Michelle, António, or someone from Guyana or Peru, the execution of policy, implementation, formulation, and using the office for the good of everyone is what really matters.

​Although used in a different context regarding the cycle of violent racism in the United States, we can be comforted by the timeless quote of Martin Luther King Jr. regarding the content of someone’s character rather than the color of their skin. It can be supplanted to mean that the UN Secretary-General should be a person who is competent, qualified, and who has the needs, aspirations, and solutions of everyone at heart, notwithstanding the need and understanding of what representation means to millions all over the world.

​References

​United Nations Secretariat. Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice. San Francisco, October 24, 1945.

​Kofi Annan Foundation. Official Institutional Overview and Global Mandate. Geneva, Switzerland.

​United Nations Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General. Historical Records and Official Press Statements. United Nations, New York.

​King, Martin Luther Jr. Address delivered at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. Washington D.C., August 28, 1963.

​Mandela, Nelson. Address at Trafalgar Square for the Make Poverty History Campaign. London, February 3, 2005.

​Scott, Guy. Adventures in Zambian Politics: A Story in Black and White. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2019.

​Security Council Report. Selection and Appointment of the Next Secretary-General: 2026 Forecast. New York, 2026.

Andy Burnham’s Promise to End Rough Sleeping in the UK from Day One. Analysing the Housing First Model Finessed in Finland, and Other Experiences in America and Canada, in Comparison with Britain

By Shemi Esquire, The Legal Chronicle

The PM Pledge

On his first day in Downing Street the new Prime Minister promised to end rough sleeping in the UK, backing that promise with an extra three hundred and forty million pounds.¹

I have spent years writing and researching about what happens to that kind of promise once it meets the UK statutory homelessness system. In particular in England.

A reflection

But first a reflection from Obama and how most people are one month away from losing a roof over their head.

In one of his speeches, in the 2009 address to the NAACP, Former Potus, while driving through Harlem, the former president of the United States Barack Obama saw the many young men on the streets of Harlem hanging out and he said but for the grace of God he was one of them.

Obama went on to say that they were no less talented or intelligent than he was and in fact most of them were but the difference is that someone somewhere every time he made a mistake every time he fell on hard grounds someone picked him up and gave him a chance and the rest was history.

The connection and the nexus to housing and homelessness is that it could happen to anyone especially in the Western world or predominantly most of the world in modern times.

Where housing is commercialised and is directly linked to the cost of living to someone’s earning power or access to employment and exorbitant housing costs, inflation and the cost of living crisis.

As studies from housing research bodies across North America and Europe show most people in industrialized societies are one paycheck or two paychecks away from homelessness.

Therefore, the fallacy that somehow housing is always connected or most likely tied to people not pulling their weight or substance abuse or mental health.

Whilst they are intersecting factors is not the only explanation in fact as policy reports from organizations like Shelter demonstrate in other cases it could be a sudden life event, it could be an illness, it could be an accident, could a medical bill, a family breakdown or any other incident.

That at least temporarily makes people seemingly doing all the right things unable to afford a home or be in a home temporarily.

Homelessness Causes and the so called Working Poor

When you couple those life events with skyrocketing housing costs and the public rely on housing supports with very many criteria and loopholes like the statutory 56 day relief duty under Section 189B and the priority need criteria under Section 189 of the Housing Act 1996 in the UK then you see how it is possible for people at least temporarily to be in a situation where they cannot afford a home

​Although the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 introduced a 56 day relief duty requiring local housing authorities to take reasonable steps to help relieve homelessness for all eligible applicants regardless of priority need, this duty merely obliges councils to assist in securing accommodation rather than placing a direct duty on them to provide permanent housing themselves and once the 56 day relief duty period ends without a housing solution single applicants without a priority need find themselves abruptly discharged without accommodation.

​This priority need gatekeeping is heavily dictated by complex case law tests surrounding vulnerability under Section 189 paragraph 1 c of the Housing Act 1996, where for years local authorities applied the rigid Pereira test from R v Camden London Borough Council ex parte Pereira asking whether an applicant when homeless is less able to fend for himself than an ordinary homeless person so that injury or detriment to health will result and although the landmark Supreme Court decision in Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council revised this comparator to an ordinary person if made homeless rather than an ordinary street homeless person the legal hurdle of proving vulnerability remains a severe statutory barrier that routinely leaves single homeless adults excluded from main housing duties after the initial 56 day relief duty expires.

​This systemic precarity forms the core of the human rights argument I articulated in Make The Homeless Homeless Again, Council Duties Human Rights Race Disability and the Re Homelessment of the Temporarily Housed as well as Human Rights Law And Housing, A Global Overview which demonstrate that adequate housing is an inherent human right under Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights and that systemic reliance on statutory loopholes to re homeless vulnerable individuals constitutes a fundamental breach of human rights, dignity and public council duties.

As research and annual reports from the Trussell Trust show most people using food banks in the UK or at least one in seven of them live in households where someone is in full time or active employment while data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that millions of Americans work multiple jobs just to meet their basic housing needs.

Looking at the official statistics released by the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government now all over the UK there are over one hundred and 30,000 households in temporary accommodation including a record of over 175, 000 children while single night snapshot statistics from government departments and tracking networks like CHAIN record 4700 rough sleeping on the streets and broader studies from the charity Crisis estimate over 15,000 individuals experiencing street homelessness across the UK.

Housing First Juxtaposed with Andy Burnham’s Pledge

The traditional model in Britain, Canada, and America often treats housing as something to be earned after solving complex issues, but the Housing First model as finessed in Finland and documented by European housing studies treats secure housing as the immediate starting point

This aligns directly with the new UK PM Andy Burnham’s day one pledge used to tackle rough sleeping in Greater Manchester by prioritizing immediate housing access, though local initiatives must be supported by national statutory reform to remove criteria barriers like priority need test loopholes

Housing First

First, what is Housing First?

Helsinki Deaconess Institute Image caption, The Helsinki Deaconess Institute has more than 400 apartments for ex-homeless people

The Genesis

Housing First began as a specific programme with a specific name.

The Pathway

Sam Tsemberis founded Pathways to Housing in New York City in 1992, placing people who had been living on the street directly into their own scattered site apartments, with support delivered afterward rather than demanded beforehand as a condition of the tenancy.²

His own published results, and the wider body of work that followed it, gave the approach its name because it inverted the older staircase model, in which a person had to pass through shelters and treatment programmes and prove their readiness before they were ever offered a permanent home.³

The model that grew out of that programme rests on a small number of principles that have stayed remarkably consistent as it has spread around the world.

In its simplicity, housing is offered immediately, without preconditions and is unconnected to any requirement to accept treatment and follows a harm reduction approach rather than demanding abstinence.

Above all, the policy practice respects the individual’s own choices about their treatment and their life while delivered through active engagement rather than coercion.

Finally, the support on offer is flexible and open ended, available for as long as the person needs it, which in practice can mean for life.⁴

These principles, in my view when examined alongside the statutory failures can be traced back to a decision maker abandoning one of these six principles under budgetary pressure.

While the proven benefits, is in the evidence itself, Housing First should not be on mere trust. The evidence base is now one of the largest in social policy.

Tsemberis’s own five year follow up of his original New York programme found an 88 percent housing retention rate among Housing First participants, against 47 percent in the comparison group receiving the older treatment first model.²

Canada’s own five city randomised controlled trial.

It was found that Housing First participants spent 73 percent of their time in stable housing compared with 32 percent for those receiving treatment as usual, a result achieved through the single largest study of its kind ever funded.⁵

Most importantly, the National Alliance to End Homelessness records one year retention rates of up to 98 percent for permanent supportive housing delivered on the Housing First model.⁶

Crucially, none of this is limited to housing outcomes alone.

A systematic review and meta analysis of randomised controlled trials, published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, found that Housing First approaches reduced emergency department visits, reduced hospitalisations, and increased the number of days a person spent housed, without any corresponding increase in problematic substance use.⁷

That last finding matters as much as any other, because it removes the excuse most often given by decision makers for withholding housing until sobriety or treatment compliance has been demonstrated. The evidence does not support that condition.

Diverse Voices

Crisis, the national homelessness charity, ran its own independently evaluated Housing First services in London and Newcastle, and its evaluators concluded that a properly resourced service delivering true fidelity to the model produced strong outcomes, while identifying landlord reluctance and the absence of secure long term funding as the two barriers preventing the approach from being taken to national scale.⁸

Homeless Link and the Centre for Homelessness Impact have both pressed government, to move away from repeated short term pilots and toward permanent mainstream commissioning, on the basis that fidelity to the model cannot survive being reinvented every few years by a new funding round.⁹

This is buttressed by the academic picture.

Suzanne Fitzpatrick and her colleagues at Heriot Watt University, through the Homelessness Monitor series they produce for Crisis, have tracked year on year the widening gap between what this evidence base recommends and what our statutory framework actually delivers.¹⁰

Juha Kaakinen, who led the Y Foundation’s implementation of Housing First across Finland, has been equally direct in his own published account of that programme, that the elimination of street homelessness in Finland was the product of political will translated into land assembly and capital investment, not of any advantage unique to Finland itself.¹¹

Dennis Culhane’s research in the United States reaches a parallel conclusion from the other side of the Atlantic, that the model succeeds wherever it is properly funded and fails wherever speculative housing markets and fragmented budgets are left to undermine it.¹²

Priority Need Trap Cycle

Shelter’s own guidance to homeless applicants and their advisers is, in my view, the clearest evidence from within the sector that our own gatekeeping has gone too far.

Shelter describes the priority need vulnerability test that decides who actually receives help under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 as a standard left almost entirely undefined in the statute itself, and built up instead through case law that has narrowed rather than widened who qualifies.¹³

That is precisely the statutory architecture needs further examination and precisely the reason I argue that priority need should be abolished outright and replaced with a single qualifying fact, that a person is homeless.¹⁴

Finland, Canada and America Studies

Finland is the clearest demonstration available anywhere that street homelessness can be functionally ended rather than merely managed, through the Y Foundation’s conversion of night shelters into permanent self contained flats, financed as a funded national programme rather than a series of local pilots.¹¹

Canada’s own trial proved the model works clinically while the United States proved it works at scale wherever the funding follows it, through Utah’s early programmes and the Veterans Affairs housing initiatives.¹²

In cases where the evidence held, such as in Finland, Canada and America alike, was the funding. It demonstrated that speculative housing markets and short term budget cycles ate into the very affordable stock and long term support funding the model depends on.

Britain too has already run the pilots

Greater Manchester, Liverpool, the West Midlands and Scotland have all run Housing First pilots, and the pattern in each of them is the same one the international evidence predicts.

Where the model is properly resourced and given time, it is not only functional but successful in resolving both the housing and the underlying issues.

However, notably, where it is treated as a small experiment bolted onto an unreformed statutory system, it cannot outrun the system underneath it.

That statutory system remains the real obstacle, for the reasons I have set out at length elsewhere. The law is on fact the very tool of Dispossession.

The Housing Act 1996 not fit for purpose

Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 does not require a local authority to house everyone who is homeless.

It requires a local authority to house only those found to have a priority need, a category narrowed further by the courts until an applicant must show they are vulnerable to a degree beyond the ordinary vulnerability already expected of a homeless person.¹⁴

A Prime Minister can announce all the funding he likes on day one but if the underlying test for who actually receives a home is still this restrictive on day two, the funding will be spent managing the queue rather than closing it, exactly as I have documented happening in London boroughs including Lambeth and Bromley in my own published research.¹⁵

Economics

The United Kingdom is the fifth largest economy on earth, with a nominal Gross Domestic Product of roughly four point two six trillion US dollars.¹⁶

A country that size, sitting inside the G7, hosting one of the world’s two dominant financial centres in London, cannot credibly claim that it lacks the resources to house a few thousand people sleeping on its own streets.

Finland managed this with a fraction of Britain’s economy.

The constraint in the United Kingdom has never been affordability at the level of the state.

It is evidently been the political choice not only not to prioritise housing but to fund temporary sticking plasters rather than the permanent housing.

This needs to be supported by statutory reform that would make those sticking plasters unnecessary, a choice I trace in my own earlier work back to the same reluctance to use the compulsory purchase powers the state already holds and already uses freely for commercial regeneration.¹⁷

Is Change Here?

Three suggestions could arguably be the catalyst for change.

First, replace priority need with a simple test, that a person is homeless, full stop, so the vulnerability threshold the courts have built over three decades no longer decides who gets help.

Second, end the fifty six day relief duty cliff edge that currently lets a council discharge its duty and return a family to the street the moment the clock runs out.

Thirdly, utilise the arekedy empty homes on boroughs like Lambeth which were part of failed so called regeneration policies such as the defunct Homes for Lambeth.

Lastly, use the compulsory purchase and land assembly powers the state already holds, and already uses freely for commercial regeneration, to build the permanent Housing First stock this country has spent a decade proving works in pilot after pilot.

The right call

Andy Burnham, the Prime Minister has made the right promise before, in Manchester, and watched rough sleeping rise anyway because the system beneath the promise did not change.

He now has a second chance, a bigger budget, and the evidence set out above already tells him what to do with it.

Britain has no excuse for endemic homelessness and rough sleeping.

As Barack Obama’s reflection shows us that anyone can fall on hard grounds when life happens, and the difference is whether a system catches you or lets you fall into homelessness, which is why rough sleeping ends where unconditional housing begins.

Homelessness is the Priority need. Full stop. No ifs or Buts

References

Prime Minister’s Office and Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. New PM says government can bring back hope to Britain, and launches drive to end rough sleeping at the earliest opportunity. GOV.UK, July 2026.

Tsemberis, S., and Eisenberg, R. F. (2000). Pathways to Housing. Supported Housing for Street Dwelling Homeless Individuals With Psychiatric Disabilities. Psychiatric Services, 51(4), 487 to 493.

Tsemberis, S., Gulcur, L., and Nakae, M. (2004). Housing First, Consumer Choice, and Harm Reduction for Homeless Individuals With a Dual Diagnosis. American Journal of Public Health, 94(4), 651 to 656.

Pleace, N. (2016). Housing First Guide Europe. FEANTSA, the European Federation of National Organisations Working With the Homeless.

Goering, P., Veldhuizen, S., Watson, A., Adair, C., Kopp, B., Latimer, E., et al. (2014). National At Home Chez Soi Final Report. Mental Health Commission of Canada.

National Alliance to End Homelessness. Housing First, evidence summary, citing a one year housing retention rate of up to 98 percent for permanent supportive housing.

Baxter, A. J., Tweed, E. J., Katikireddi, S. V., and Thomson, H. (2019). Effects of Housing First Approaches on Health and Wellbeing of Adults Who Are Homeless or at Risk of Homelessness. Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 73(5), 379 to 387.

Blood, I., Pleace, N., Dulson, S., Birchall, A., and Hands, C. (2025). Crisis Housing First in London and Newcastle. Final Evaluation. London: Crisis.

Homeless Link, sector commentary on statutory guidance and local authority commissioning of Housing First services. Centre for Homelessness Impact, evidence and policy commentary on scaling Housing First in England.

Fitzpatrick, S., Pawson, H., Bramley, G., Wilcox, S., and Watts, B. The Homelessness Monitor: England. Crisis and Heriot Watt University, annual series.

Kaakinen, J. (2019). Securing the Right to Housing. The Finnish Model of Housing First. Y Saatio, the Y Foundation, Research Report series.

Culhane, D. P., Metraux, S., and Byrne, T. (2011). A Prevention Centred Approach to Homelessness Assistance. Getting From Evidence to Policy. Housing Policy Debate, 21(2), 295 to 315.

Shelter. Priority Need of Vulnerable People and People Living With Them, last updated 19 June 2023.

Housing Act 1996, c. 52, Part VII. Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, c. 13. R v Southwark London Borough Council, ex parte Pereira (1998) 31 HLR 317. Hotak v London Borough of Southwark [2015] UKSC 30, [2016] AC 811.Esquire, S. (2026). Make the Homeless Homeless Again. Council Duties, Human Rights, Race, Disability, and the Re Homelessment of the Temporarily Housed. Lulu Publishing and The Legal Chronicle, Substack.

International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook, April 2026. The United Kingdom is the fifth largest economy in the world by nominal Gross Domestic Product, at approximately four point two six trillion US dollars.

Esquire, S. (2024). Human Rights and Compulsory Purchase Orders. Esquire, S. (2025). Human Rights Law and Housing. Esquire, S. (2025). Human Rights and Housing Estate Regeneration. Esquire, S. (2025). The Westbury SW8 Files. A Diary. Regeneration or Dispossession and Displacement?

Make Uganda Clean 2.0: 1970s Repeat to 2026

​The Social Contract & Command Sanitation

​Published by Shemi Esquire | Legal Chronicle

Opposition leader Robert Kyagulanyi (Bobi Wine) strongly condemned the enforcement deployment, posting verbatim on Platform X (@HEBobiwine):”The Ugandan regime at it again! Now using force and violence to enforce a “cleaning campaign”! Again, they’ve lost any ability to persuade so they have to coerce. Sad!”

Keep Uganda Clean 2.0: 1970s Repeat to 2026

Advisory Not Linked

The U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs, officially issued and renewed its Level 4 Travel Advisory for Uganda on June 4, 2026, stating verbatim: “Do not travel to Uganda due to crime, health, terrorism, and unrest.” (Full documentation can be viewed directly via the U.S. Department of State Travel Advisory for Uganda or through the U.S. Embassy in Uganda Travel Advisory Page).

​That rating has nothing to do with National Cleaning Day because it predates the programme and stems from broader security and public health evaluations.

However, the State Department’s detailed advisory notes a pattern of security enforcement that mirrors the current street deployment, observing verbatim that “when protests, strikes, and demonstrations turn chaotic, security services respond with force” and “have used batons, rubber bullets, tear gas, and gunfire to break up the crowds.” The travel advisory is not a reaction to the cleaning campaign, but both reflect a government that reaches for security enforcement quickly and visibly when it seeks compliance.

​General Abdallah Nasur

​The latest episode has clear historical roots in Uganda. Under President Idi Amin, Lieutenant Colonel Abdul Abdallah Nasur (1946–2023), Governor of Central Province through the mid to late 1970s, personally fronted what was called at the time a Keep Uganda Clean Campaign an urban beautification and order enforcement drive that earned him a lasting reputation. He was accused for decades of forcing people caught wearing rubber sandals (slippers) to eat them.

​Although he repeatedly denied this accusation until his death in April 2023, the broader pattern of enforcement around his administration remains well documented. Soldiers under his command made surprise visits to businesses, closed them for breaching written or unwritten rules, and enforced decrees on public attire. None of it stayed contained to dress codes and footwear; it spread into surveillance of movement and association before the regime fell in April 1979.

Today’s campaign is not that regime returning, but the shape of that historyordinary civic behaviour turned into a compulsory performance handed to security forces to enforce explains why public unease remains acute.

​Legalities

​From a strict constitutional and statutory perspective, National Cleaning Day rests on fragile legal ground. The requirement did not originate from Parliament through a debated Act passed by elected legislators. Instead, Cabinet Circular No. 1 of 2026 (operationalising Cabinet Minute No. 246 of 2025) decrees the establishment of the monthly exercise, with official joint communications issued by the Office of the Prime Minister, State House, and the Ministry of Water and Environment

Compounding the executive mandate, is an official Press Release from the Uganda Police Force Headquarters (Ref. 301/ VOL 01/116, dated July 24, 2026) formally declared that on Saturday, July 25, 2026, from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., traffic movement would be strictly restricted nationwide.

Under Section 4 of the police directive, all vehicles, vessels, motorcycles, and bicycles were prohibited on roads and water bodies except for emergency services and security personnel on official duty. Citizens, traders, and motorists were urged to fully comply and remain in their areas.

​Enforcement for noncompliance relies on older statutory provisions, primarily Section 54 of the Public Health Act (Cap 281 / Cap 310), which provides verbatim that “no person shall cause a nuisance or shall suffer to exist on any land or premises owned or occupied by him or her or of which he or she is in charge any nuisance or other condition liable to be injurious or dangerous to health.”

However, that colonial 1935 statute was designed for localized sanitation issues managed via formal notices and magistrate courts it was never enacted to authorise a nationwide, police-enforced movement ban repeated every month indefinitely.

Said to be arguably modelled on Rwanda’s Umuganda

​Government and outside commentators frequently point to Rwanda’s Umuganda as the model to follow, describing it as a community tradition. However, Umuganda is genuine statutory law (Law Number 53 of 2007) passed by Rwanda’s Parliament, applying to every citizen over eighteen with fines for non-attendance.

​What differs is delivery.

Rwanda’s law hands planning to local supervising committees who assign specific tasks weeks ahead, building a two-decade routine where social expectation handles enforcement. Uganda’s version was built and enforced nationally via executive circular, backed from day one by police explicitly invoking lockdown powers, without the decentralised planning or accumulated routine that gives Rwanda’s law lower friction today

​Soviet Subbotnik?

​Uganda is far from alone in reaching for security-enforced or socially enforced behavioural compliance as a tool of governance.

The closest structural twin is the Soviet subbotnik, which began in 1919 as an unpaid Saturday workday devoted to cleaning cities and building public infrastructure, framing compulsory labor as a shared contribution to the common good. Within a decade or two it had become “voluntary-compulsory”a status where formally nobody was forced, but those who stayed home were branded lazy, reprimanded as bad citizens, and in workplaces risked their jobs.

​Cuban Model

​Cuba borrowed the model directly from Moscow. Che Guevara launched Cuba’s first trabajo voluntario in November 1959 and made weekly attendance a personal discipline, explicitly citing Lenin’s Saturdays as the precedent. It remains a live practice in Cuba today, still framed as unpaid, patriotic, and technically optional, while functioning in practice as a marker of political loyalty that is dangerous to skip too often.

​Iranian Control

​Iran offers a live comparison of the same logic applied to personal appearance rather than labour. Mandatory hijab law has been enforced since shortly after the 1979 revolution through a dedicated morality police force, the Revolutionary Guard, paramilitary Basij units, and surveillance cameras, alongside business closures. Enforcement has visibly oscillated with the political moment, tightening after protests and easing when the state wants to project calm, demonstrating how a compliance apparatus built for one purpose becomes a lever government can pull whenever it decides.

​Other Regimes

​Other global regimes employ similar enforcement mechanisms to mandate social behavior.

Afghanistan

Afghanistan under the Taliban runs a totalising version through a dedicated ministry enforcing dress and public conduct backed by corporal punishment.

Turkmenistan Gold Teeth Rush

Turkmenistan enforces informal bans on gold teeth, black cars, and long hair on men through police patrols.

Pyongyang NK

North Korea mobilises citizens for mass unpaid public works campaigns while enforcing state-approved dress through youth patrols.

Cambodia

Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge stands as the starkest historical case where collective labor demands were enforced under the language of shared national duty.

​None of these regimes are equivalent to Uganda’s cleaning campaign in scale or intent, but they share a structural feature.

Each began as a stated public good and was sustained not by service delivery or earned consent, but by security enforcement and social shaming.

​Social Reactions

​Public reactions captured across social media during the campaign’s launch illustrate the immediate tension on the ground across the capital and transit corridors.

Video footage documented security personnel physically apprehending citizens on paved streets to enforce compliance during movement bans, while safari drivers were stopped at armed roadblocks, as shared by @Ntalebrian22, causing delays for international tourists and sparking concerns over foreign exchange losses.

​By midday, uncollected piles of garbage accumulated along major urban routes like Lukuli Road, highlighting severe gaps in municipal collection and disposal capacity. In response, citizens resorted to satirical protests, ranging from individuals riding bicycles with waste bags to demonstrate compliance to residents using mops on dry tarmac roads.

On Jinja Road, cleared empty streets briefly transformed into an improvised photo booth for local residents, while young people elsewhere converted empty highways into temporary football pitches once cleaning hours expired.

Meanwhile, government media outlets posted updates proclaiming “Four hours well spent... the brooms have officially signed off until next month”, presenting photos of officials with brooms that contrasted sharply with the coercion experienced on the ground.

​Changing Modus Operandi

​This exercise unfolds alongside a separate anti-corruption drive involving unannounced early-morning inspections of public institutions across eastern Uganda, which has drawn criticism from professional bodies over arbitrary public arrests. The common thread with the cleaning campaign is method: compliance obtained through surprise, security accompaniment, and public spectacle, rather than through structural reform or earned trust.

​Fiscal Priorities

​The financial framing of the initiative further underscores the policy disconnect.

Uganda’s national budget totals roughly 84.4 trillion shillings, with security, governance, and the rule of law receiving the single largest sectoral allocation at approximately 10.21 trillion shillings.

In contrast, the health budget stands at 5.23 trillion shillings, while the water and sanitation sector receives just around 1 trillion shillings.

​Implementation guidelines explicitly state that no new funding has been allocated for National Cleaning Day, instructing local entities to absorb costs within existing budgets. Meanwhile, state anti-corruption watchdogs estimate that Uganda loses close to 10 trillion shillings annually to corruption an amount nearly forty-four percent of domestic tax revenue and larger than the entire water and sanitation budget several times over.

​Authoritarianism or Bulungi Bwansi

( Common Good)?

​As historical patterns from the Soviet Union and Cuba to contemporary Iran demonstrate and as Uganda’s own 1970s history reminds us authoritarian apparatuses regularly leverage public sanitation and civic duty as vehicles for central command and control.

While genuine civic initiatives and social sanitation measures are undeniably beneficial, deploying full security force, imposing total travel bans, and forcing business closures over several hours represents an extraordinary degree of state coercion.

​This level of enforcement directly interferes with the daily lives of ordinary citizens and tourists going about their legitimate business.

To many observers, this approach appears undeniably authoritarian; to others, it stands as a poorly planned, poorly executed distraction from institutional failings.

Ultimately, it brings the core question back to the fiscal social contract.

If taxpayers generate the country’s wealth, where is that revenue going, and why is the state failing to deliver basic municipal services?

When viewed in its totality amid existing foreign travel advisories, severe fiscal imbalances, and economic strain this security-enforced campaign emerges as yet another entirely avoidable public relations own goal, illustrating the increasingly authoritarian trajectory the country continues to take.

Indeed, ​as French writer Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr famously wrote, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”—”the more things change, the more they remain the same.”

That observation remains relevant in global events today in the case of Uganda.

Please Keep All Countries Clean Always we say.

​References & Sources

1. ​Karr, Jean-Baptiste Alphonse. (1849, January). Les Guêpes (”The Wasps”). Epigram: “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”

2. ​U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs. (2026, June 4). Travel Advisory: Uganda – Level 4: Do Not Travel. Issued by U.S. Department of State / U.S. Embassy Kampala. https://travel.state.gov/en/international-travel/travel-advisories/uganda.html

3. ​SoftPower News. (2021, November 6). I Never Fed Anybody on Slippers – Former Amin Governor Abdallah Nasur.

4. ​The Independent Uganda. (2023, April 19). Former Governor in Amin Era Abdallah Nassur Dead.

5. ​Uganda Police Force Headquarters. (2026, July 24). Press Release: Uganda Police Force Press Statement on National Cleaning Day, 25 July 2026 (Ref. 301/ VOL 01/116).

6. ​Government of Uganda / Office of the Prime Minister / Ministry of Water and Environment. (2026, July). National Cleaning Day: Why National Cleaning Days Matter [Official Campaign Poster].

7. ​Republic of Uganda. The Public Health Act, Cap. 281 (Cap. 310 of the Laws of Uganda), Section 54.

8. ​Kyagulanyi, Robert (Bobi Wine). (2026, July 25). Verbatim Statement on Security Enforcement of Cleaning Campaign. Social Media Platform X (@HEBobiwine).

1. ​Ntale Brian. (2026, July 25). Video Documentation of Tourism Transport Interruptions. Social Media Platform X (@Ntalebrian22).

1. ​The New Vision. (2026, July 25). Jinja Road Becomes Photo Booth as National Cleaning Day Clears Streets. Social Media Platform X (@newvisionwire).

2. ​Government of Uganda. (2026, July 25). Four Hours Well Spent Statement. Social Media Platform X (@GovUganda).

3. ​Eco Housing Solutions (EHS). (2026, July 25). Policy Assessment: Uganda Should Make Monthly Cleaning Smarter, Not Costlier.

4. ​Official Gazette of the Republic of Rwanda. (2007). Law No. 53/2007 Establishing Community Works (Umuganda) in Rwanda.

The Historic Elephant and Castle Pink Elephant Statute. Source The Elephant

BY SHEMI ESQUIRE

The Pledge and the Root Causes

Andy Burnham speaking outside 10 Downing Street on July 20, 2026, delivering his official address after becoming Prime Minister.

Photo was by press photographer Lauren Hurley for No 10 Downing Street / news agencies.

Speaking outside Number 10 Downing Street, the Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, pledged that as soon as he walked through that door, he would take immediate steps to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping across the UK.

For too long, we’ve been told that ending rough sleeping will take decades or even that it’s impossible. I’m not having that. This is something a government can fix if it chooses to.

Today, I’m choosing to. On my first day as Prime Minister, I’m announcing this government’s commitment to finally end long-term rough sleeping across the UK at the earliest opportunity. We’ll get to work immediately, bringing together national and local government with the investment needed to get it done’

​Delivering on that promise requires looking far beyond surface level pledges.

​While a concrete policy roadmap remains emerging, addressing rough sleeping demands an understanding of the underlying conditions and root causations, a complex web of personal factors intertwined with systemic, structural failures.

​At the absolute forefront is the staggering cost of living and the sheer unaffordability of housing.

​Yet, under these causes lies an irrefutable, glaring paradox, the United Kingdom remains one of the wealthiest nations on earth, consistently ranking as the fifth or sixth largest economy globally by GDP.

​When a nation commands economic output on that scale, the persistence of street homelessness becomes less a matter of national scarcity and strictly a question of priorities.

​While personal misfortune, acute trauma, or family breakdown explain temporary personal shocks, they do not explain why walking down Oxford Street, Tottenham Court Road, or through major provincial towns reveals a scene where street sleeping has become almost normalized.

​While this visual reality is shared by other major European hubs like Paris, Berlin, and Munich, its prevalence in London underscores a political failure of distribution.

​There is simply no structural excuse for anyone to be forced onto the streets in a top tier global economy.

​The Prime Minister explicit focus suggests he has his finger on the pulse of this issue, but reversing it requires dismantling the systemic pressures driving dispossession.

​Equal weight must be given to the widespread displacement, disenfranchisement, and dispossession affecting large swathes of urban communities, particularly within inner cities.

​As the sociologist Ruth Glass originally observed when coining the term gentrification, these transformations fundamentally alter the social character of inner London neighborhoods.

​For generations, these communities relied on affordable social housing to maintain the very fabric of urban life.

​The people being priced out and displaced are the bedrock of the city, including workers in public transport, emergency services, hospitals, catering, and local schools, the essential workforces that keep the metropolitan economy moving.

​Compounding this, over fifteen years of chronic underinvestment and severe cutbacks to public support services have crippled local infrastructure, directly exacerbating mental health crises and social vulnerability.

​Homelessness is not an isolated personal failing, but the natural consequence of these combined pressures.

​When juxtaposed with international models like the Finland Housing First strategy, the contrast in philosophy is stark.

​Under the Finnish approach, secure housing is treated as a fundamental human right and a core state responsibility.

​The foundational premise is simple, once a person is given a permanent home first, the secondary issues often associated with rough sleeping begin to evaporate.

​It remains early days for the administration, and it is yet to be seen how these pledges will translate into actual, transformative policy on the ground.

​This broader crisis of displacement connects directly to the legal mechanics driving urban restructuring across the capital.

​Compulsory Purchase Orders and the Regeneration of London Estates

​The Guardian reporting on Elephant and Castle as London gentrification patient zero sits comfortably alongside a body of legal and sociological analysis on compulsory purchase order enforced estate regeneration that has been building for several years.

​Read together, that research and the reporting on the ground tell the same story from different vantage points, one legal, one academic, and one journalistic, and the value of bringing them into conversation is that the pattern each identifies separately becomes unmistakable once combined.

What are CPOs

​Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) are legal mechanisms that allow public bodies, most notably local authorities, to acquire land or property without the consent of the owner, provided they can demonstrate a compelling public interest.

While framed as essential planning instruments for urban renewal, their operational deployment frequently functions as the legal engine for state-led gentrification and social displacement.

​The underlying policies, practices, and decisions that produce a CPO must be scrutinised through the lens of the European Convention on Human Rights as incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998.

​The central finding was that the compelling public interest test applied to CPO confirmation is permissive almost by design.

​Local authorities are rarely required to demonstrate that demolition was the only viable route to meeting housing need, only that demolition was a reasonable one among several, and reasonableness is a low bar when the same authority controls both the evidence base and the ultimate planning decision.

​Extending that analysis into the estate context demonstrates how proportionality review under Article Eight and Article One of Protocol One fails to offer residents a meaningful check on displacement, as domestic courts tend to defer heavily to the local authority regeneration business case.

​This is the same deference that Lambeth Council residents at Westbury Estate and Central Hill later encountered directly.

​Drawing directly from the lived experience of community members and grassroots organizing against Lambeth Council, the realities of this process come into sharp focus.

​At Westbury Estate, the Tenants and Residents Association argued that the compulsory purchase order was being used as a backstop against a process that was already causing significant emotional distress and financial intrusion to residents, and that the council was acting simultaneously as landlord, decision maker, and regeneration promoter, a conflict of interest with no independent check built into the local process.

​At Central Hill, in Lambeth, South West London, the objection took a related but distinct form.

​Residents commissioned their own survey to challenge the council cost comparison between refurbishment and demolition, and argued that the council own findings could not be scrutinised or disputed because no independent verification had been permitted.

​Displacement and Legal Tools

​As I argued in The Rich Have Lawyers, assessing whether the rationale, process, impact, and outcomes of these schemes are in fact compatible with compelling public interest reveals a recurring feature across borough programmes.

​The Secretary of State 2016 refusal to confirm the Aylesbury CPO in neighbouring Southwark Council forced Lambeth Council officers into the position of publicly distinguishing their own schemes from the Aylesbury Estate failure, arguing that their Key Guarantees offer to residents was more generous and had been independently benchmarked.

​That defensive posture is itself evidence of how thin the margin between confirmation and refusal can be, and how much a scheme survival depends on presentation rather than on any structural safeguard for residents.

​Cressingham Gardens, again in Lambeth supplies the clearest judicial test of these arguments.

​The judicial review brought by residents there rested on the same foundation identified across the literature, that the council had failed to adequately consider refurbishment as a genuine alternative to demolition and had not properly consulted residents before proceeding.

​As I noted in the European Convention on Human Rights and estate regeneration, alongside the subsequent Brockwell Park judgment against Lambeth Council, judicial review is a real and occasionally successful check, but it challenges process rather than the underlying policy choice.

​A successful review sends a scheme back for reconsultation.

​It does not, on the present state of the law, prevent an authority from ultimately reaching the same conclusion by a more carefully documented route.

​This structural pattern extends far beyond Lambeth Council.

​The urban sociologist Professor Paul Watt demonstrates in his extensive research on estate regeneration across London, state led regeneration routinely results in the net loss of public social housing and the systematic displacement of working class residents.

​Similarly, urban geographers Loretta Lees and Phil Hubbard have tracked how estate renewal mechanisms, including compulsory purchase orders, function as a form of spatial dispossession, as seen vividly in the clearance of the Heygate Estate.

​Stuart Hodkinson also argued in his analysis of housing policy and estate privatization, public estate renewal frequently prioritizes developer interest over resident security, turning the compulsory purchase mechanism into an engine for gentrification.

​Hence the Guardian reporting on Elephant and Castle systematic analysis now confirms that this is not an isolated peculiarity.

​The shopping centre demolition followed the identical sequence, a public interest justification built around housing and commercial need, resident objection concentrated on process and consultation rather than the principle of change itself, and an eventual outcome in which the displaced community, in this case the shopping centre Latin American traders, did not return in anything like its former shape once the site reopened.

​Elephant and Castle is not the origin of this pattern.

​It is simply the earliest and most visible instance of a mechanism that legal and urban research had already mapped in detail, and that Westbury Estate, Central Hill, and Cressingham Gardens in the London Borough Of Lambeth, have each subsequently reproduced with only cosmetic variation.

​The iconic, fibreglass pink elephant sculpture that once stood outside the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre served for decades as a community touchstone.

Its displacement, alongside the relocation of the market and Latin American traders, encapsulates the physical and social turnover of the wider district.

​The new Elephant replaces the pink elephant in the case of Elephant and Castle regeneration in South London.

​The razing of the Heygate Estate in the same locality and the old Elephant and Castle shopping centre took with it a long standing community, a vibrant, multicultural, and diverse hub of social power centered around its predominantly Latin American, Black African and Carribean, White working businesses and working class residents. With it a real sense of organic community cohesion engraved over decades. In its place are shiny new high rise glass boxes of mostly foreign students from very specific demographics, a symbol of wealth over community. While change is inevitable and investment is necessary imposed and destructive change can be a social own goal. Creating displacement, destroyed small businesses and bmighting real lives of real people. Which I argued and continue to argue is incompatible with the European Convention Of Human rights integrated in the Human Rights Act 1998.

​The new demographic profile of Elephant and Castle in Southwark Council demonstrates that while the physical infrastructure and economic framing have been reconfigured, the underlying structural results remain identical.

​The synthesis in this review points toward a reform argument rather than a purely descriptive one.

​If the compelling public interest test and the proportionality assessment under the European Convention on Human Rights consistently defer to the promoting authority own case, and if judicial review only ever interrupts process rather than outcome, then the safeguards residents are told to rely on are structurally incapable of preventing the harm they are meant to guard against.

​They can delay it, and occasionally force a better financial offer, but the evidence from Elephant and Castle through to the Westbury Estate suggests they cannot stop it.

​Any meaningful reform would need to address that gap directly, by requiring genuinely independent verification of the refurbishment versus demolition comparison before a CPO is confirmed, rather than after residents have already had to litigate to expose its absence.

Shemi Esquire has interests in international law, public policy, and global politics. His research focuses on the intersection of international legal frameworks, geopolitical strategy, and policy formulation, examining how global institutions, sovereign states, and international treaties govern cross-border relations, diplomacy, and global stability.