KYIV: Ukrainian military recruitment officers raided restaurants, bars and a concert hall in Kyiv, checking military registration documents and detaining men who were not in compliance, local media reported Saturday.
Officers reportedly descended on Kyiv’s Palace of Sports venue after a concert Friday night by Ukrainian rock band Okean Elzy. Video footage aired by local media outlets appears to show officers stationed outside the doors of the concert hall intercepting men as they exit. In the footage, officers appear to be forcibly detaining some men.
Checks were also conducted at Goodwine, an upscale shopping center, and Avalon, a popular restaurant.
It is unusual for such raids to take place in the capital, and reflects Ukraine’s dire need for fresh recruits. All Ukrainian men aged 25-60 are eligible for conscription, and men aged 18-60 are not allowed to leave the country.
Local reports said raids were also conducted in clubs and restaurants across other Ukrainian cities, including Kharkiv and Dnipro in eastern and central Ukraine.
Ukraine has intensified its mobilization drive this year. A new law came into effect this spring stipulating that those eligible for military service must input their information into an online system or face penalties.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s military said on Saturday that it struck a Russian-controlled oil terminal in the partially occupied Luhansk region that provides fuel for Russia’s war effort.
“Oil and oil products were stored at this base, which were supplied, in particular, for the needs of the Russian army,” Ukraine’s General Staff wrote on Telegram.
Russian state media reported that the terminal close to the city of Rovenky had come under attack from a Ukrainian drone and said there were no casualties and that the fire had been extinguished, but did not comment on the extent of any damage.
On Monday, Ukrainian forces said they struck a major oil terminal on the south coast of the Russia-occupied Crimea Peninsula.
Both sides are facing the issue of how to sustain their costly war of attrition — a conflict that started with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and that shows no signs of a resolution.
Ukraine’s aim is to impair Russia’s ability to support its front-line units, especially in the eastern Donetsk region where the main Russian battlefield effort is stretching weary Ukrainian forces.
Kyiv is still awaiting word from its Western partners on its repeated requests to use the long-range weapons they provide to hit targets on Russian soil.
Meanwhile, Russia’s Defense Ministry said 47 Ukrainian drones had been intercepted and destroyed by its air defense systems overnight into Saturday: 17 over the Krasnodar region, 16 over the Sea of Azov, 12 over the Kursk region and two over the Belgorod region, all of which border Ukraine.
Belgorod regional Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov said Saturday that one person had been killed and 14 wounded in Ukrainian shelling and drone attacks over the previous 24 hours.
In Ukraine, the country’s Air Force said air defenses had shot down 24 of 28 drones launched overnight against Ukraine.
Zaporizhzhia regional Gov. Ivan Fedorov said two women were wounded Saturday in Russian attacks on the capital of the southern Ukrainian region, also called Zaporizhzhia.
Ukrainian recruiters descend on Kyiv’s nightlife in search of men not registered for conscription
https://arab.news/8nyzg
Ukrainian recruiters descend on Kyiv’s nightlife in search of men not registered for conscription
- It is unusual for such raids to take place in the capital, and reflects Ukraine’s dire need for fresh recruits
- All Ukrainian men aged 25-60 are eligible for conscription, and men aged 18-60 are not allowed to leave the country
Justice Department faces hurdle in seeking case against Comey as judge finds constitutional problems
Justice Department faces hurdle in seeking case against Comey as judge finds constitutional problems
WASHINGTON: The Justice Department violated the constitutional rights of a close friend of James Comey and must return to him computer files that prosecutors had hoped to use for a potential criminal case against the former FBI director, a federal judge said Friday.
The ruling from US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly represents not only a stern rebuke of the conduct of Justice Department prosecutors but also imposes a dramatic hurdle to government efforts to seek a new indictment against Comey after an initial one was dismissed last month.
The order concerns computer files and communications that investigators obtained years earlier from Daniel Richman, a Comey friend and Columbia University law professor, as part of a media leak investigation that concluded without charges. The Justice Department continued to hold onto those files and conducted searches of them this fall, without a new warrant, as they prepared a case charging Comey with lying to Congress five years ago.
Richman alleged that the Justice Department violated his Fourth Amendment rights by retaining his records and by conducting new warrantless searches of the files, prompting Kollar-Kotelly to issue an order last week temporarily barring prosecutors from accessing the files as part of its investigation.
The Justice Department said the request for the return of the records was merely an attempt to impede a new prosecution of Comey, but the judge again sided with Richman in a 46-page order Friday that directed the Justice Department to give him back his files.
“When the Government violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures by sweeping up a broad swath of a person’s electronic files, retaining those files long after the relevant investigation has ended, and later sifting through those files without a warrant to obtain evidence against someone else, what remedy is available to the victim of the Government’s unlawful intrusion?” the judge wrote.
One answer, she said, is to require the government to return the property to the rightful owner.
The judge did, however, permit the Justice Department to file an electronic copy of Richman’s records under seal with the Eastern District of Virginia, where the Comey investigation has been based, and suggested prosecutors could try to access it later with a lawful search warrant.
The Justice Department alleges that Comey used Richman to share information with the news media about his decision-making during the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Prosecutors charged the former FBI director in September with lying to Congress by denying that he had authorized an associate to serve as an anonymous source for the media.
That indictment was dismissed last month after a federal judge in Virginia ruled that the prosecutor who brought the case, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed by the Trump administration. But the ruling left open the possibility that the government could try again to seek charges against Comey, a longtime foe of President Donald Trump. Comey has pleaded not guilty, denied having made a false statement and accused the Justice Department of a vindictive prosecution.
The Comey saga has a long history.
In June 2017, one month after Comey was fired as FBI director, he testified that he had given Richman a copy of a memo he had written documenting a conversation he had with Trump and had authorized him to share the contents of the memo with a reporter.
After that testimony, Richman permitted the FBI to create an image, or complete electronic copy, of all files on his computer and a hard drive attached to that computer. He authorized the FBI to conduct a search for limited purposes, the judge noted.
Then, in 2019 and 2020, the FBI and Justice Department obtained search warrants to obtain Richman’s email accounts and computer files as part of a media leak investigation that concluded in 2021 without charges. Those warrants were limited in scope, but Richman has alleged that the government collected more information than the warrants allowed, including personal medial information and sensitive correspondence.
In addition, Richman said the Justice Department violated his rights by searching his files in September, without a new warrant, as part of an entirely separate investigation.
“The Court further concludes that the Government’s retention of Petitioner Richman’s files amounts to an ongoing unreasonable seizure,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote. “Therefore, the Court agrees with Petitioner Richman that the Government has violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
