Azerbaijan ruling party wins vote as opposition cries foul

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, right, and his wife and Vice President Mehriban Aliyeva line up to collect their ballots at a polling station during a snap election in Baku, Azerbaijan, Sunday, Sept. 1, 2024. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 02 September 2024
Follow

Azerbaijan ruling party wins vote as opposition cries foul

  • Only one opposition candidate from the Republican Alternative Party made it to parliament
  • The opposition Musavat party said there were “mass violations” of the rules, including multiple voting

BAKU: Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev’s party has won snap parliamentary elections, the electoral commission said Monday, as the opposition denounced widespread violations including multiple voting.
Aliyev called Sunday’s vote ahead of schedule to avoid the poll coinciding with the COP29 climate conference that Baku is to host from November 11 to 22.
None of the elections held in the oil and gas-rich country under Aliyev’s two-decade rule have been recognized as free and fair by international observers.
The electoral commission said Aliyev’s Yeni Azerbaijan party won 68 seats in the 125-member legislature.
Another 45 seats were won by independent candidates as well as 12 seats by candidates from nine political parties — all of them widely believed to be pro-government.
Only one opposition candidate from the Republican Alternative Party made it to parliament.
The opposition Musavat party said there were “mass violations” of the rules, including multiple voting.
International observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said the elections “did not offer voters genuine political alternatives and took place within a legal framework overly restrictive of fundamental freedoms and the media.”
The observers said Monday they were concerned about “intimidation of voters and their ability to cast their vote without fearing retribution.”
The “increase in arrests and detentions of journalists and civil society activists, combined with the restrictive media legal framework, resulted in widespread self-censorship and severely limited the scope for independent journalism,” their statement added.
Baku has faced strong Western criticism for persecuting political opponents and suffocating independent media.
Aliyev, 62, has ruled the ex-Soviet republic with an iron fist since 2003 after the death of his father, Azerbaijan’s Soviet-era Communist leader and former KGB general Heydar Aliyev.
He enjoys widespread popularity due to Azerbaijan’s military victory over Armenian separatist forces that had controlled the Armenian-populated Nagorno-Karabakh region for three decades.
Last year, Baku’s troops recaptured the mountainous enclave in a lightning offensive, after which its entire ethnic Armenian population — more than 100,000 people — fled to Armenia.
With power concentrated in the presidency, Azerbaijan’s parliament has a limited role in shaping affairs in the Caspian Sea nation.


Court ruling jeopardizes freedom for pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil

Updated 10 sec ago
Follow

Court ruling jeopardizes freedom for pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil

  • The panel ruled a federal judge in New Jersey didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the matter at this time
  • The law bars Khalil “from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition,” the panel added

WASHINGTON: A federal appeals panel on Thursday reversed a lower court decision that released former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil from an immigration jail, bringing the government one step closer to detaining and ultimately deporting the Palestinian activist.
The three-judge panel of the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t decide the key issue in Khalil’s case: whether the Trump administration’s effort to throw Khalil out of the US over his campus activism and criticism of Israel is unconstitutional.
But in its 2-1 decision, the panel ruled a federal judge in New Jersey didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the matter at this time. Federal law requires the case to fully move through the immigration courts first, before Khalil can challenge the decision, they wrote.
“That scheme ensures that petitioners get just one bite at the apple — not zero or two,” the panel wrote. “But it also means that some petitioners, like Khalil, will have to wait to seek relief for allegedly unlawful government conduct.”
The law bars Khalil “from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition,” the panel added.
Ruling won’t result in immediate detention
It was not clear whether the government would seek to detain Khalil, a legal permanent resident, again while his legal challenges continue.
Thursday’s decision marked a major win for the Trump administration’s sweeping campaign to detain and deport noncitizens who joined protests against Israel.
In a statement distributed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Khalil said the appeals ruling was “deeply disappointing, but it does not break our resolve.”
He added: “The door may have been opened for potential re-detainment down the line, but it has not closed our commitment to Palestine and to justice and accountability. I will continue to fight, through every legal avenue and with every ounce of determination, until my rights, and the rights of others like me, are fully protected.”
Baher Azmy, one of Khalil’s lawyers, said the ruling was “contrary to rulings of other federal courts.” He noted the panel’s finding concerned a “hypertechnical jurisdictional matter,” rather than the legality of the Trump administration’s policy.
“Our legal options are by no means concluded, and we will fight with every available avenue,” he added, saying Khalil would remain free pending the full resolution of all appeals, which could take months or longer.
The ACLU said the Trump administration cannot lawfully re-detain Khalil until the order takes formal effect, which won’t happen while he can still immediately appeal.
Khalil has multiple options to appeal
Khalil’s lawyers can request the active judges on the 3rd Circuit hear an appeal, or they can go to the US Supreme Court.
An outspoken leader of the pro-Palestinian movement at Columbia, Khalil was arrested on March 8, 2025. He then spent three months detained in a Louisiana immigration jail, missing the birth of his firstborn.
Federal officials have accused Khalil of leading activities “aligned to Hamas,” though they have not presented evidence to support the claim and have not accused him of criminal conduct. They have also accused Khalil, 30, of failing to disclose information on his green card application.
The government has justified the arrest under a seldom-used statute that allows for the expulsion of noncitizens whose beliefs are deemed to pose a threat to US foreign policy interests.
In June, a federal judge in New Jersey ruled that justification would likely be declared unconstitutional and ordered Khalil released.
President Donald Trump’s administration appealed that ruling, arguing the deportation decision should fall to an immigration judge, rather than a federal court.
Khalil has dismissed the allegations as “baseless and ridiculous,” framing his arrest and detention as a “direct consequence of exercising my right to free speech as I advocated for a free Palestine and an end to the genocide in Gaza.”
Dissenting judge says Khalil has right to fight detention

Judge Arianna Freeman dissented Thursday, writing that her colleagues were holding Khalil to the wrong legal standard. Khalil, she wrote, is raising “now-or-never claims” that can be handled at the district court level. He does not have a final order of removal, which would permit a challenge in an appellate court, she wrote.
Both judges who ruled against Khalil, Thomas Hardiman and Stephanos Bibas, were Republican appointees. President George W. Bush appointed Hardiman to the 3rd Circuit, while Trump appointed Bibas. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, appointed Freeman.
The majority opinion noted Freeman worried the ruling would leave Khalil with no remedy for unconstitutional immigration detention, even if he later can appeal.
“But our legal system routinely forces petitioners — even those with meritorious claims — to wait to raise their arguments, the judges wrote. “To be sure, the immigration judge’s order of removal is not yet final; the Board has not affirmed her ruling and has held the parties’ briefing deadlines in abeyance pending this opinion. But if the Board ultimately affirms, Khalil can get meaningful review.”
The decision comes as an appeals board in the immigration court system weighs a previous order that found Khalil could be deported. His attorneys have argued that the federal order should take precedence.
That judge has suggested Khalil could be deported to Algeria, where he maintains citizenship through a distant relative, or Syria, where he was born in a refugee camp to a Palestinian family.
His attorneys have said he faces mortal danger if forced to return to either country.