Defense lawyers said 13 of the defendants received eight-month prison terms and were due for release after completing their sentences. Two others were handed one-year sentences with 10 months to be served in detention, while three individuals received suspended 12-month terms after previously being released pending trial.

The case also includes six minors, who are scheduled to appear before the court on June 19. Four of them remain in pretrial detention, while two were released pending proceedings, according to defence lawyer El Hassan Essonni.

The prosecutions stem from protests that erupted in September 2025, led by a youth movement that called for reforms in public healthcare and education.

Authorities said the demonstrations, which took place across several cities, resulted in widespread arrests after gatherings were initially banned.

According to data cited by prosecutors, more than 2,400 people have been prosecuted in connection with the protests, while over 1,400 were held in detention by October last year. Police carried out hundreds of arrests in the early days of the unrest.

The protests included episodes of violence in some areas, including Agadir, where three people were killed in clashes. Organizers of the movement have maintained that their demonstrations were intended to be nonviolent.

Morocco authorities continue to process cases linked to the unrest as courts handle trials arising from the broader protest movement.

Yunus, a member of rights group KontraS, suffered severe injuries and lost sight in one eye after two men on a motorcycle threw acid at him in March shortly after he recorded a podcast discussing the military’s role in government.

The four defendants, all members of Indonesia’s Strategic Intelligence Agency (BAIS), are charged with premeditated assault. Prosecutors told a military court in Jakarta that the attack was an act of personal revenge rather than an operation ordered by military superiors.

According to prosecutors, the accused were angered by Yunus and another activist’s protest against revisions to Indonesia’s military law, which expanded the number of government institutions that can employ active-duty military personnel.

The case drew national attention after BAIS chief Yudi Abrimantyo stepped down following the arrests. Rights groups have called for the proceedings to be moved to a civilian court, citing concerns about transparency and accountability.

The court is expected to continue hearing arguments before delivering a verdict.

State-run Anadolu Agency⁠ reported that prosecutors issued arrest warrants for 30 suspects linked to alleged corruption involving municipal subsidiaries and public tenders. Twenty-nine suspects were detained, while one individual was reported to be abroad.

According to a statement cited by prosecutors, the investigation concerns the alleged “activities of a criminal organization established under the leadership of Ekrem Imamoglu.”Authorities accuse the suspects of manipulating public procurement processes through companies affiliated with the Istanbul municipality.

Imamoglu, who has been imprisoned for more than a year, is currently standing trial alongside 413 co-defendants. Prosecutors allege he directed a large criminal network operating within the municipality. If convicted on all charges, he could face cumulative prison sentences totaling 2,430 years under Turkish law.

The Istanbul mayor and his political allies deny the accusations and argue the investigation is politically motivated, accusing Erdogan’s government of attempting to sideline one of the country’s most prominent opposition figures ahead of the 2028 presidential election.

Imamoglu emerged as a major national challenger to Erdogan after securing repeated election victories in Istanbul, Türkiye’s largest city and economic hub. Opposition parties have increasingly described the legal proceedings against him as part of broader pressure on dissenting political voices and municipal administrations controlled by the opposition.

The Turkish government has repeatedly denied accusations of political interference in the judiciary, maintaining that courts operate independently and investigations are conducted according to the law.

The reports did not immediately provide further details on the identities of those executed, the charges brought against them, or the legal proceedings leading to the sentences.The executions follow unrest earlier this year that saw demonstrations across multiple Iranian cities, prompting a security response from authorities.

Iran’s judiciary has not issued a detailed public statement on the latest executions, and independent verification of the reports was not immediately available.

The case, being heard at the Seoul Central District Court, is part of a series of legal proceedings against Yoon following his removal from office last year after a brief imposition of martial law that triggered political turmoil in the country.

Prosecutors allege the drone operation heightened military tensions with North Korea and risked exposing sensitive information about South Korea’s military capabilities after one of the drones crashed.

The charges include benefiting the enemy, a provision that can apply even without direct coordination if national security interests are harmed.

Yoon has denied the allegations, with his legal team stating he did not take any action that could provoke a military confrontation with North Korea.

The trial is one of eight cases currently involving Yoon, reflecting the legal fallout from his presidency and the controversial martial law declaration. The court is expected to issue a ruling at a later date.

Reza Dindar, 44, was arrested in Panama in July at the request of U.S. authorities and transferred to the United States last week. He made an initial appearance in U.S. District Court in Seattle, with arraignment scheduled for May 1, according to officials.

Prosecutors allege that Dindar conspired to violate longstanding U.S. trade sanctions by acquiring military sonar components under false pretenses and rerouting them to Iran. The indictment, unsealed Friday, charges him with conspiracy, smuggling and money laundering.

According to court documents, Dindar operated a company, New Port Sourcing Solutions, based in Xi’an, China, and between 2011 and 2012 arranged the purchase of parts for three military sonar systems from a business in Washington state.

Prosecutors said the transactions were carried out using deceptive practices, including misrepresenting the final destination of the equipment and asserting that no export license was required.

The components, valued at $97,600, were allegedly shipped first to China and then covertly transferred to Iran, in violation of U.S. sanctions imposed in 1995 and reinforced in 2001.Authorities have not disclosed Dindar’s whereabouts in the years between the alleged offenses and his arrest.

His attorney, Farhad Alavi, declined to comment.The case underscores ongoing U.S. enforcement efforts targeting alleged sanctions evasion networks involving dual-use or military-sensitive technologies.

In a separate matter, federal prosecutors said a Los Angeles woman was arrested over the weekend on suspicion of assisting Iran in trafficking weapons to Sudan, though officials said the cases are unrelated.

Mohammad Sharifullah is charged with providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization resulting in death, in connection with the blast at Hamid Karzai International Airport during the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Opening statements in federal court featured sharply contrasting accounts of Sharifullah’s alleged involvement. Defense attorney Geremy Kamens said U.S. authorities had “got the wrong man” and argued that statements attributed to his client were unreliable because they were obtained while he was in foreign custody.

Prosecutor John Gibbs countered that Sharifullah, also known as Jafar, had expressed support for attacks against Americans and admitted ties to the regional affiliate of the Islamic State group, known as Daesh-K.According to prosecutors, Sharifullah told investigators he joined the group around 2016 and acknowledged involvement in militant activities, though he denied a direct planning role in the Kabul bombing.

The government alleges he helped scout the bomber’s route to the airport ahead of the attack.The bombing occurred on Aug. 26, 2021, near Abbey Gate at the airport, where thousands of Afghans were attempting to flee as U.S. forces completed their withdrawal.

A review by U.S. Central Command identified the attacker as Abdul Rahman Al-Logari, a Daesh-K operative who had been released from prison shortly before the incident.Sharifullah was captured and brought to the United States in 2025 after his arrest in Pakistan.

Then-President Donald Trump announced his capture, and he faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment if convicted.Jurors heard that the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted multiple interviews with Sharifullah following his detention.

The defense argued those statements should be viewed with skepticism, alleging coercion during his time in Pakistani custody.

The trial, taking place in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, is expected to last about a week. Twelve jurors and three alternates have been empaneled to hear the case.

The case centres on allegations that Lafarge, via its subsidiary Lafarge Cement Syria, paid millions of euros in 2013 and 2014 to armed groups and intermediaries to ensure continued production at its Jalabiya facility in northern Syria during the country’s civil war.

The ruling follows a 2022 case in the United States in which Lafarge pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide material support to designated terrorist organizations and agreed to pay a $778 million fine, marking the first time a corporation faced such charges under U.S. law.

French prosecutors allege that the company made payments totaling at least 4.7 million euros ($5.5 million) to groups including Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra, in exchange for access to raw materials and safe passage for employees and goods.

The payments allegedly continued until September 2014, when Islamic State fighters seized control of the plant.Lafarge completed construction of the $680 million facility in 2010, shortly before the outbreak of the Syrian conflict in 2011, triggered by protests against then-president Bashar al-Assad.

While many multinational firms exited Syria in 2012, Lafarge maintained operations, evacuating expatriate staff but retaining local employees until the site fell under militant control.Defendants include the company, its former chief executive Bruno Lafont, several former operational and security staff, and two Syrian intermediaries.

They face charges including financing terrorism and violating international sanctions.The French national counter-terrorism prosecutor’s office has argued that Lafarge acted with “a single aim: profit,” seeking the maximum corporate fine of 1.12 million euros and confiscation of 30 million euros in assets.

Prosecutors have also requested a six-year prison sentence for Lafont, who has denied knowledge of any illicit payments.During the trial, former deputy managing director Christian Herrault said the decision to keep the plant operating was driven by concern for local employees rather than financial gain.

Lafarge was acquired by Swiss group Holcim in 2015, which has said it had no knowledge of the Syria-related dealings.A separate judicial investigation into potential complicity in crimes against humanity remains ongoing.

The case originated from a 2017 inquiry following media reports and complaints filed by the French finance ministry, non-governmental organizations, and former employees.

The 47-year-old former member of the Australian Defence Force was detained at Sydney Airport and will face charges carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, according to the Australian Federal Police.

Police allege the victims were not participating in hostilities and were detained, unarmed, and under the control of Australian forces at the time of their deaths. Authorities further allege the killings were either carried out directly by Roberts-Smith or by subordinates acting under his orders.

Roberts-Smith, who received the Victoria Cross for his service, has previously denied wrongdoing. Allegations against him first emerged in 2018 through media investigations and later became the subject of a high-profile defamation case.

In 2023, a Federal Court judge ruled that reports by Nine Entertainment had substantially proven several accusations, including the unlawful killing of detainees. His final appeal was dismissed by the High Court in 2025.The charges follow a broader inquiry into alleged misconduct by elite Australian forces in Afghanistan.

A 2020 military report found credible evidence that members of the Special Air Service Regiment unlawfully killed dozens of prisoners and civilians.The investigation into Roberts-Smith was conducted jointly by the Australian Federal Police and the Office of the Special Investigator, led by Ross Barnett, who said the process was complicated by limited access to crime scenes in Afghanistan.

Authorities said 53 war crimes allegations have been examined, with several cases ongoing. Another former special forces soldier is scheduled to stand trial on similar charges next year.

Roberts-Smith is expected to appear before a court in New South Wales later on Tuesday.

The 47-year-old suspect, whose identity has not been officially confirmed by authorities, was arrested at Sydney Airport after arriving on a domestic flight from Brisbane, Australian Federal Police Commissioner Krissy Barrett said.

He is due to appear in a Sydney court later on Tuesday.Police allege the victims were not taking part in hostilities at the time of their deaths and were detained, unarmed, and under the control of members of the Australian Defence Force.

Barrett said the accused either directly carried out the shootings or ordered subordinate personnel to do so.The charges come as part of a broader investigation into alleged misconduct by elite Australian forces in Afghanistan.

A landmark 2020 military inquiry found credible evidence that special forces personnel unlawfully killed 39 Afghan prisoners, farmers, and other noncombatants.Barrett said the latest case involved only a limited number of personnel and emphasized that the allegations did not reflect the conduct of the wider military.

She described the accused actions as confined to “a very small section” of the defence force.The Office of the Special Investigator, established to examine war crimes allegations, has reviewed 53 incidents to date, with 39 cases concluding without charges, according to its director Ross Barnett.

The case follows separate proceedings against former SAS soldier Oliver Schulz, who has pleaded not guilty to a charge of war crime murder over the alleged killing of an Afghan man in Uruzgan province in 2012.

War crime murder is a federal offense in Australia and carries a potential sentence of life imprisonment. Around 40,000 Australian personnel served in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2021, during which 41 troops were killed.