FILE - Shakira performs during the Global Citizen Festival in New York on Sept. 27, 2025. (Photo by Charles Sykes/Invision/AP, File)
A high court in Spain has cleared Colombian music star Shakira of tax fraud linked to the 2011 fiscal year, overturning a multimillion-euro penalty and directing authorities to return funds collected from the singer, court filings reviewed by Reuters and The Associated Press show.
The ruling from the Madrid-based High Court found that tax officials failed to establish that Shakira met the legal threshold required to be classified as a tax resident in Spain that year. Under Spanish law, individuals must spend more than 183 days in the country to be liable for full tax obligations. Judges determined that authorities could only verify her presence for 163 days.
FILE – Shakira performs during the Global Citizen Festival in New York on Sept. 27, 2025. (Photo by Charles Sykes/Invision/AP, File)
As a result, the court voided a fine originally set at more than 55 million euros and instructed Spain’s Treasury to reimburse over 60 million euros, including accrued interest, according to a statement issued by Shakira’s legal team.
The dispute centered on whether the singer’s personal and professional ties—particularly her relationship at the time with former Gerard Pique—amounted to a primary base of operations in Spain. Tax authorities had argued that her activities were sufficiently anchored in the country to justify residency status. The court rejected that position, concluding the claim lacked adequate proof.
The judgment applies strictly to the 2011 tax year and may still be challenged before Spain’s Supreme Court. It does not affect separate proceedings tied to later years.
In a statement, Shakira’s attorney, Jose Luis Prada, described the outcome as the end of a prolonged legal battle that placed significant strain on his client, pointing to what he called shortcomings in administrative handling of the case. The singer, quoted in the same statement, expressed hope that the decision would serve as a broader example for individuals facing similar disputes with tax authorities.
The case forms part of a wider crackdown by Spanish officials over the past decade targeting high-profile figures in sports and entertainment. Players such as Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo were previously found guilty in separate tax cases, though both avoided prison sentences under provisions for first-time offenders.
Separately, Shakira reached an agreement with prosecutors in November 2023 to resolve allegations tied to unpaid taxes between 2012 and 2014. She accepted responsibility in that case and paid a fine exceeding 7.3 million euros to avoid trial proceedings in Barcelona.
The court’s decision marks a significant moment in Spain’s aggressive enforcement of tax compliance among global celebrities. While authorities have secured convictions in several high-profile cases, this ruling underscores the legal limits of pursuing residency-based claims without clear evidence of physical presence.
The distinction is crucial. Spain’s tax framework relies heavily on the 183-day rule, and the court’s emphasis on verifiable time spent in the country reinforces the importance of measurable criteria over circumstantial ties such as relationships or business activity.
For Shakira, the outcome offers partial vindication after years of legal scrutiny. However, her earlier settlement over subsequent tax years complicates the broader narrative, highlighting how high-income individuals with international lifestyles often face overlapping legal challenges across different jurisdictions.
The case may also influence future enforcement strategies. Authorities could face greater pressure to strengthen documentation and avoid reliance on indirect indicators of residency. At the same time, the ruling may embolden other defendants to contest similar claims rather than pursue settlements.
Beyond Spain, the decision reflects a growing global tension between tax authorities and internationally mobile earners. As governments tighten oversight, disputes over residency, income allocation, and jurisdiction are likely to become more frequent and more complex.
NAIROBI, Kenya — Fires burned on major roads, a car was set ablaze in traffic, guardrails were torn from highways, and hundreds of young protesters blocked streets across Kenya on Monday as a nationwide public transport strike over record fuel prices paralyzed Nairobi and other major cities, stranding thousands of commuters and forcing most businesses to shut their doors from dawn.
The Transport Sector Alliance had announced the strike Sunday evening, giving Kenyans overnight notice that matatus, buses, and other public service vehicles would not operate in protest of fuel price increases the government’s energy regulator imposed the previous Friday. The increases were steep. Diesel rose by 23.5 percent. Petrol climbed 8 percent. In Nairobi, a liter of petrol now costs 214.25 shillings. Diesel stands at 242.92 shillings per liter — levels that transport operators said had pushed their businesses to the breaking point.
By daybreak Monday, the streets told the story. Nairobi’s city center was largely deserted. Private motorists stayed home rather than navigate roads blocked by burning tires and stone barricades. Schools assessed the safety situation and most shifted to online learning, following guidance from the Kenya Association of Private Schools. Commuters in major suburbs faced the choice between walking long distances or paying sharply inflated fares from the handful of vehicles that did operate.
In Kitengela, a busy township in Kajiado county on the southern edge of Nairobi, the shutdown was total. Not a single shop, office, or business opened its doors Monday morning, The Star confirmed from the ground. Hundreds of young people sat in the road or camped in front of supermarkets and shops along Namanga Road, where protesters pulled down billboards and tore out guardrails. Police officers maintained their position without engaging the crowd despite being subjected to insults and taunts. There were no running battles in Kitengela as of the morning hours.
The situation was less contained elsewhere. On Thika Superhighway around Roysambu, youth protesters erected roadblocks using stones and burning tires, forcing motorists to reverse and find alternate routes. A black Mazda was set on fire in the middle of the road in Githurai, thick smoke rising above one of Nairobi’s busiest corridors as stunned commuters looked on. The circumstances that led to the burning car were not immediately established, and police had not confirmed by press time whether it was deliberately torched or caught in the surrounding disorder. No casualties from the vehicle fire were officially reported.
Running confrontations between demonstrators and police broke out in sections of Thika Road and along the Nairobi-Namanga Highway. The National Police Service had assured Kenyans of their safety early Monday and warned that disruptive conduct would be dealt with firmly under the law. The assurance did not calm the streets.
Transport stakeholders directed their anger specifically at the government and the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority, known as EPRA, which sets Kenya’s fuel prices. Operators argued the government had ignored their repeated warnings that rising operational costs were making public transport unviable, and that the latest price adjustment was the tipping point many had been dreading.
The Numbers Behind the Anger
The Kenya National Chamber of Commerce and Industry put the fuel increase in stark perspective Friday when the new prices were announced. While global crude oil prices rose by roughly 10.7 percent between April and May, Kenya’s diesel price rose by 23.5 percent over the same period. The chamber pointed to domestic cost buildup as the primary driver of the gap between international oil prices and what Kenyans pay at the pump.
“The April-May comparison shows that while global crude oil prices increased by about 10.7%, Kenya’s diesel price rose by 23.5% over the same period. This points to the continued role of domestic cost buildup,” the chamber said in a statement.
President William Ruto was out of the country and had not commented on the new prices as of Monday. In the previous price review cycle in April, Ruto attributed fuel cost increases to the Iran war and reduced taxes to cushion the impact. No similar relief accompanied Friday’s announcement.
Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, who was impeached and has since aligned himself with the political opposition, attributed the sharp increase to corruption and profit-seeking by fuel business interests rather than external cost pressures alone. He pointed to neighboring Uganda, a landlocked country that imports fuel through Kenyan ports, as evidence that lower prices were achievable. Uganda, despite paying transport costs to reach Mombasa and then road freight to its interior, is retailing fuel at prices below what Kenyans pay in Nairobi.
Kenya sits at the center of East Africa’s import supply chain. Its port of Mombasa is the primary entry point for goods reaching Uganda, Rwanda, eastern Congo, and South Sudan. When Kenyan fuel prices rise, the effect cascades across the region. When Kenyan transport operators go on strike, that regional supply chain locks up with them.
Kisumu and the Broader National Picture
The disruption was not limited to Nairobi. In Kisumu, Kenya’s third-largest city on the shores of Lake Victoria, a tense calm settled over the usually busy main bus terminus, which operated at a fraction of its normal capacity. Buses and matatus heading to western Kenya were largely absent from their usual stops. Passengers who needed to travel paid sharply higher fares to the limited vehicles that did operate, absorbing the cost of a crisis not of their making.
The pattern in Kisumu mirrored what played out in city after city across Kenya on Monday: nearly empty streets where normally packed public transport routes operate, passengers walking distances measured in kilometers, and an economic stillness that cost the country in ways that will be visible in business receipts and supply disruptions for days after the strike ends.
Fuel Prices as the Fuse Kenya Cannot Keep Defusing
Kenya has been through versions of this before. Fuel price protests are not new. Transport strikes are not new. But the combination of factors at play Monday carries a specific weight that distinguishes it from earlier cycles.
The Iran war has sent global oil prices higher and given the Kenyan government a ready external explanation for domestic price increases. But the chamber of commerce’s data cuts through that framing with precision. A 10.7 percent rise in global crude prices does not explain a 23.5 percent rise in Kenyan diesel prices. The difference lives in domestic policy choices, taxation, and what the chamber called cost buildup within the supply chain. Ruto’s government chose not to absorb those costs this time.
That choice landed on a population already squeezed by two years of cost-of-living pressure that stretches from food prices to utility bills to school fees. The fuel increase was not the only hardship Kenyans have been carrying. It was the one that finally hit the road in the most literal sense.
Gachagua’s intervention is also worth reading in context. His comparison to Ugandan fuel prices is politically pointed but substantively relevant. If landlocked Uganda, paying for sea freight to Mombasa and then road transport north, can retail fuel more cheaply than Nairobi does, the argument that global oil prices explain Kenya’s pump prices becomes harder to sustain in public debate.
What Monday demonstrated most clearly is that Kenya’s fuel pricing structure has accumulated enough public grievance to put thousands of people on the streets with very little notice. The Transport Sector Alliance announced the strike on a Sunday evening. By Monday morning, the country’s transport network was functionally paralyzed and guardrails were being pulled off highways.
President Ruto will return from travel to a set of choices that have no comfortable option. Reversing the price increase would cost the government revenue it has already committed. Sustaining it risks further protests in a country that has shown in recent years that street pressure can move policy faster than the legislative calendar. Finding a middle path between fiscal necessity and public anger is the governing challenge every Kenyan administration faces when fuel prices spike. This one is no exception.
At least 17 police trainees were killed after armed militants stormed a military training facility in northeastern Nigeria, authorities said, in one of the deadliest recent assaults targeting security institutions in the region.
The attack occurred Friday at the Nigerian Army Special Forces School in Buni Yadi, located in Yobe State. Police spokesperson Anthony Okon Placid said the victims were officers undergoing specialized training when gunmen launched a coordinated assault from multiple directions.
Placid said several soldiers were also killed during the raid, though he did not provide a confirmed number. The Nigerian military has not issued an immediate response.
The strike highlights the persistent threat posed by militant groups operating in the northeast, where violence has continued for more than a decade. The conflict began in 2009 with the uprising of Boko Haram, which later fractured into rival factions, including the Islamic State West Africa Province.
The attack comes as regional and international forces intensify operations against armed groups. U.S. President Donald Trump and Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu both confirmed that a senior militant leader was killed in a separate joint operation in the Lake Chad Basin earlier Saturday.
Officials identified the slain figure as a senior commander linked to the Islamic State affiliate active in West Africa, underscoring the ongoing effort to weaken leadership structures within the group.
Nigeria has established specialized training centers such as the Buni Yadi facility to strengthen its response to insurgency threats. However, the latest attack raises concerns about the vulnerability of even fortified institutions tasked with preparing security personnel.
The assault on a military training school signals a strategic shift by militant groups, which are increasingly targeting not only civilian populations but also the infrastructure used to build state security capacity. By striking trainees, attackers may be attempting to disrupt recruitment pipelines and weaken morale among security forces.
The timing is also notable. The attack coincided with the reported killing of a senior militant leader, suggesting a possible retaliatory motive or an effort to demonstrate continued operational capability despite leadership losses.
While Nigeria has recorded tactical successes through joint operations with international partners, the persistence of large-scale attacks indicates that militant networks remain resilient. Their ability to coordinate multi-directional assaults on secured facilities points to ongoing gaps in intelligence and perimeter defense.
The broader implication is that Nigeria’s security crisis remains deeply entrenched. Even as high-profile targets are eliminated, the underlying conditions that sustain insurgency—such as remote terrain, limited state presence, and fragmented armed groups—continue to allow violence to persist.
For residents in the northeast, the attack reinforces a grim reality: progress against militant groups remains uneven, and the threat to both civilians and security personnel is far from over
President Donald Trump issued a stark warning to Tehran on Sunday, declaring that time is running out for its leadership to reach an agreement with the United States following a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In a message posted on Truth Social, Trump said Iran must act quickly or face serious consequences, emphasizing that negotiations cannot drag on indefinitely. He later reinforced the warning in remarks to French media, cautioning that failure to strike a deal would lead to what he described as severe repercussions.
The warning came after a phone conversation between Trump and Netanyahu, who was meeting with his security cabinet to review ongoing tensions in the region, Israeli media outlets indicated.
According to The Hill, the president’s remarks reflect growing frustration within the administration as talks between Washington and Tehran remain stalled. Trump recently rejected Iran’s latest response to a U.S. proposal, describing it as unacceptable after Iranian officials sought to separate nuclear discussions from broader peace negotiations.
Throughout the current standoff, Trump has repeatedly called on Iran to abandon its nuclear enrichment efforts. He has also suggested that Tehran’s negotiating position has weakened following sustained pressure on its military infrastructure.
The Associated Press and other outlets have reported that diplomatic efforts have struggled to gain traction, with a fragile ceasefire described by Trump as being in a precarious state after it was extended last month.
The president also referenced his recent discussions with Xi Jinping, noting that China had offered assistance in resolving the conflict. Trump indicated he declined the offer, suggesting that outside involvement often comes with conditions.
Separately, regional tensions were underscored by a drone-related incident that caused a fire at the Barakah nuclear power facility in Abu Dhabi. Authorities confirmed there were no injuries and that safety systems remained intact.
Trump’s latest remarks signal a sharper tone at a time when diplomatic channels appear increasingly strained. By framing the situation as urgent, the administration may be attempting to pressure Iran into concessions, particularly on nuclear issues that remain central to the dispute.
The involvement of Israel adds another layer of complexity. Netanyahu’s government has long taken a hard line on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and coordination between Washington and Jerusalem suggests a unified front, at least publicly.
At the same time, the stalled negotiations highlight deeper challenges. Iran’s insistence on separating nuclear talks from broader political agreements reflects a strategic effort to narrow the scope of concessions, while the United States continues to push for a more comprehensive framework.
The rejection of China’s potential role also points to broader geopolitical competition. While Beijing has positioned itself as a possible mediator in global conflicts, Washington’s reluctance underscores concerns about influence and leverage in any negotiated outcome.
The situation remains fluid, with the risk of escalation still present. While both sides continue to signal openness to dialogue, the increasingly forceful rhetoric suggests that the window for a diplomatic resolution may be narrowing.
A drone pierced the air defenses surrounding the Arab world’s only nuclear power plant on Sunday and started a fire on its outer grounds, while Saudi Arabia intercepted three separate drones that crossed from Iraqi airspace, as the diplomatic standoff between the United States and Iran hardened into something that looked increasingly like the prelude to renewed war.
The strike on the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the UAE caused no injuries and released no radioactive material, Emirati officials confirmed. The drone hit an electrical generator outside the plant’s inner perimeter. The UAE’s Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation said all units continued operating normally. The International Atomic Energy Agency said emergency diesel generators were supplying power to one reactor and called for maximum military restraint near any nuclear facility, adding that it was monitoring the situation closely.
UAE authorities said they were investigating the source of the strike, which the Abu Dhabi Media Office characterized as an unprovoked terrorist attack. Two other drones were intercepted before reaching the plant. The UAE defense ministry said all three had been launched from its western border but did not elaborate on their origin.
Anwar Gargash, a diplomatic adviser to the UAE president, framed the attack in terms that left little ambiguity about where suspicion pointed. The strike, he said on social media, “whether carried out by the principal actor or through one of its proxies, represents a dangerous escalation.”
Saudi Arabia condemned the Barakah strike and separately confirmed its forces had intercepted three drones entering from Iraqi airspace. Iran and allied militia groups based in Iraq have been launching drone attacks on Gulf Arab states throughout the war that began with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.
Trump’s Warning, Israel’s Preparations
Within hours of the Barakah attack, President Donald Trump posted a blunt threat on Truth Social shortly after a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!” Trump wrote.
Trump is expected to meet with senior national security advisers Tuesday to review military options against Iran, Axios reported. He has previously threatened to resume attacks if Iran refuses a deal and has set and then retreated from multiple deadlines throughout the conflict. Whether this one is different is a question his own officials have not answered publicly.
Two people familiar with the situation, including an Israeli military officer, told the Associated Press that Israel was actively coordinating with the United States on a possible resumption of strikes. Both spoke anonymously because they were discussing confidential military planning. Netanyahu, addressing his Cabinet Sunday, said Israel’s eyes were open regarding Iran. “We are prepared for any scenario,” he said.
Iranian state television offered its own image of where the country’s mood stood. On at least two channels, presenters appeared on air while armed. On one, a host named Hossein Hosseini received basic firearms training from a masked member of the Revolutionary Guard during a live broadcast and mimed firing toward a UAE flag. On another channel, host Mobina Nasiri said a weapon had been sent to her from a public gathering in Tehran. “From this platform, I declare that I am ready to sacrifice my life for this country,” she said.
Mohsen Rezaei, a military adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, said on state television: “Our armed forces’ fingers are on the trigger, while diplomacy is also continuing.”
A Deadlock With No Exit
The drone attack landed in a diplomatic environment that has produced no meaningful progress since a ceasefire took effect in April. More than five weeks have passed without the two sides closing the gap between their core positions.
Washington is demanding Iran dismantle its nuclear program and release its grip on the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran is demanding compensation for war damage, termination of the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports, and a halt to fighting across all fronts including Lebanon, where Israel continues battling the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah despite a nominal ceasefire there. Israel and Lebanon agreed Friday to a 45-day extension of that ceasefire, though clashes have continued regardless.
Trump held talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping earlier in the week without securing any commitment from Beijing to help broker a resolution. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei said Sunday that the United States and Israel had tried to blame others for destabilizing global energy markets after what he called their unprovoked military aggression against Iran.
Ebrahim Azizi, who chairs the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, said Saturday that Tehran had developed a mechanism to manage traffic through the Strait of Hormuz along a designated corridor and planned to announce the details soon. That statement, if implemented, would further formalize Iranian control over the waterway and deepen the legal and operational conflict with Washington over who holds authority in the strait.
The U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports remained in effect Sunday. American forces said they had redirected 81 commercial vessels and disabled four since the blockade began.
The Barakah Plant and What It Represents
The $20 billion Barakah Nuclear Power Plant was built with South Korean assistance and went online in 2020. It is the only nuclear power plant in the Arab world and can supply approximately a quarter of the UAE’s total energy needs. The facility sits in the emirate of Abu Dhabi and represents the most significant piece of civilian energy infrastructure in a country that has positioned itself as a model for non-weapons nuclear energy development in the region.
Unlike Iran’s nuclear program, which has enriched uranium close to weapons-grade levels and has long been the subject of international proliferation concerns, the UAE’s program operates under a strict agreement with the United States known as a 123 agreement. Under its terms, the UAE agreed to forgo domestic uranium enrichment and reprocessing of spent fuel entirely. Its uranium comes from abroad. The agreement was designed specifically to preclude the kind of ambiguity that surrounds Iran’s nuclear activities.
The IAEA said the Sunday strike caused a fire in an electrical generator at unit 3, which was subsequently powered by emergency diesel generators. The agency confirmed no radiological release occurred. It was the first confirmed strike on the four-reactor facility during the current war. Yemen’s Houthi rebel movement claimed in 2017 to have targeted the plant while it was under construction, a claim Abu Dhabi denied.
The targeting of nuclear facilities in warfare has become more common in recent years. Russia has repeatedly struck near Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure since its 2022 invasion. Iran has claimed its own Bushehr nuclear power plant came under attack during the war, though no direct damage to its Russian-operated reactor or any radioactive release was confirmed.
The strike on Barakah crossed a threshold that both military planners and international law have long treated as categorically distinct from other forms of infrastructure targeting. Nuclear power plants present a specific category of risk that conventional military logic does not fully capture. A direct hit on a reactor, a cooling system failure caused by sustained attack on electrical infrastructure, or a radiological release triggered by secondary explosion near nuclear material represents a consequence that cannot be undone and cannot be contained within the borders of the country being targeted.
The IAEA’s call for maximum military restraint was measured in tone but urgent in implication. The agency does not issue that kind of appeal casually. It does so when it calculates that the trajectory of events near nuclear facilities has reached a point where a catastrophic accident becomes a realistic possibility rather than a distant theoretical risk.
The UAE’s 123 agreement with the United States is relevant beyond its nonproliferation purpose. It creates a specific American interest in the security of Barakah that goes beyond the UAE’s sovereignty. If a nuclear facility built under U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation terms is attacked and damaged in ways that cause radiological harm, the legal, reputational, and strategic consequences for American policy across the entire global civilian nuclear enterprise are severe.
Whether Iran directed Sunday’s strike, tolerated it from a proxy, or had no operational knowledge of it in advance will shape what follows. Gargash’s framing — “whether carried out by the principal actor or through one of its proxies” — was careful, but its meaning was clear. The UAE holds Iran responsible regardless of which hand held the controller.
Trump’s Tuesday meeting with national security advisers will be closely watched. He has threatened and retreated before. But the combination of a drone reaching a nuclear power plant, Iranian state television hosts brandishing weapons on live broadcasts, and Israeli military coordination on strike options creates a set of signals that looks different from the diplomatic theater of recent weeks.
The ceasefire is not holding. The diplomacy is stalled. The drones are getting through. And the plant that can power a quarter of the UAE just took a hit.
More than 80 children are unaccounted for following a series of armed attacks on schools across Nigeria, officials and a rights organization said Sunday, marking a troubling escalation in a long-running pattern of school abductions.
The most recent assault took place in the northeastern state of Borno State, where fighters raided a primary school between Wednesday and Thursday in the Askira Uba and Chibok areas. At least 42 children were taken during the attack, local authorities said.
Amnesty International said the incident occurred in Mussa village near the Sambisa Forest, a region known as a base for militant groups including Boko Haram and its offshoot, the Islamic State West Africa Province.
In a separate development, armed groups struck two secondary schools in Oyo State in the southwest, abducting at least 40 students within hours on Friday, Amnesty’s Nigeria office said. Such attacks are uncommon in that part of the country, raising fresh concerns about the spread of insecurity beyond its traditional hotspots.
Peter Wabba, a local official in Mussa, said community reports suggest the number of children taken in Oyo may be higher, placing the figure at 48. He told The Associated Press that families remain in distress as authorities work to locate the missing students.
Police spokesperson Ayanlade Olayinka said three suspects were detained in connection with the Oyo attacks in the Oriire area. He added that the arrests followed information provided by local residents, though it remains unclear whether more individuals were involved.
Amnesty International criticized what it described as a failure by authorities to consistently investigate such incidents and prosecute those responsible. The group warned that repeated attacks are forcing families to withdraw children from school, with some girls being pulled out of classrooms and married off early out of fear for their safety.
The Associated Press has previously documented similar incidents in the region, including attacks in Borno where students fled during raids and others were taken by armed groups. In some cases, families reported children as young as under 10 among those abducted.
Kidnappings targeting schools have become a defining feature of Nigeria’s broader security crisis. Armed groups frequently focus on educational institutions, viewing them as high-impact targets that attract attention and can generate ransom payments.
The latest wave of school attacks signals a troubling expansion of insecurity in Nigeria. While the northeast has long been affected by insurgent violence, incidents in southwestern states such as Oyo suggest that armed groups may be extending their reach or that copycat criminal networks are adopting similar tactics.
Schools have become symbolic targets in the conflict. Beyond the immediate harm to victims, these attacks disrupt education systems, deepen poverty, and create long-term social instability. Each abduction reinforces fear among families, undermining confidence in public safety and limiting access to education, particularly for girls.
The repeated targeting of children also places pressure on the government, both domestically and internationally. While security operations have intensified in some regions, gaps remain in intelligence, rapid response, and rural protection, especially in isolated communities near forested areas that serve as hideouts for armed groups.
Another emerging concern is the normalization of such attacks. As incidents recur, communities may begin to adapt by keeping children out of school or seeking alternative arrangements, which could have lasting consequences for literacy, workforce development, and national growth.
The arrests in Oyo may offer a measure of accountability, but broader systemic challenges remain. Without sustained security reforms and community-based protection strategies, analysts warn that school abductions could continue to spread geographically.
For now, families across affected regions are waiting for updates, hoping for the safe return of their children as search efforts continue.
Three people were killed and several others injured late Saturday when a vehicle veered into pedestrians and parked cars in Oakland, authorities said.
Emergency crews responded shortly after 11 p.m. to reports of a major collision near the intersection of International Boulevard and 85th Avenue, where a vehicle struck multiple people and at least one parked car, the Oakland Fire Department said in a public update.
Police said three victims were pronounced dead at the scene. Several others were taken to nearby hospitals, with injuries ranging from critical to stable. Fire officials indicated that at least two victims were in critical condition following the crash.
Investigators said the driver, a minor whose identity was not released, was taken into custody. The driver was also transported to a hospital for treatment.
Preliminary findings indicate the vehicle was traveling north on 85th Avenue at a high rate of speed before turning onto International Boulevard, where it collided with a parked car and a group of pedestrians. Authorities have not determined whether alcohol or drugs played a role.
The Associated Press confirmed that the crash remains under active investigation, while ABC News cited fire officials who described a chaotic scene with multiple victims requiring urgent medical attention.
The incident highlights ongoing concerns about traffic safety in urban corridors like International Boulevard, a major artery in Oakland that has long been associated with heavy traffic and pedestrian risk. Late-night conditions, combined with speed and limited visibility, often increase the likelihood of severe crashes in such areas.
The involvement of a driver under 18 raises additional questions about access to vehicles, supervision, and enforcement of driving laws for minors. Cases like this frequently prompt renewed scrutiny of licensing rules and parental responsibility, particularly when high-speed driving is suspected.
Urban safety advocates have increasingly pushed for traffic-calming measures in cities across California, including better lighting, speed enforcement technologies, and redesigned intersections to reduce pedestrian exposure. Incidents involving multiple fatalities often accelerate calls for such reforms.
Beyond infrastructure, the emotional toll on families and communities is significant. Fatal pedestrian crashes tend to have ripple effects, particularly in densely populated neighborhoods where residents rely on walking as a primary mode of transportation.
As investigators work to determine the exact cause, the case is likely to become part of a broader conversation about road safety, youth driving accountability, and the need for preventive measures in high-risk urban zones.
A former mayor and a campaign aide were shot dead in central Colombia, authorities said, in an attack that underscores rising political violence days before the country heads into a closely watched presidential vote.
Rogers Mauricio Devia Escoba
The victims, identified as Rogers Mauricio Devia Escoba and his adviser Eder Fabian Cardona Lopez, were killed Friday night in the rural municipality of Cubarral in Meta department, about 105 miles south of the capital, Bogota. Officials said gunmen on motorbikes carried out the shooting.
The Associated Press reported that Devia, who served as mayor of Cubarral from 2020 to 2023, had aligned himself with presidential candidate Abelardo de la Espriella of the National Salvation Movement. The country’s Public Defender’s Office confirmed the killings and warned the attack could undermine political participation ahead of the May 31 election.
Interior Minister Armando Benedetti said investigators have yet to establish a motive. He added that security forces recently disrupted a separate plot targeting a staff member linked to another candidate, Paloma Valencia, in the same region.
Al Jazeera cited Colombia’s citizens’ rights office as cautioning that the violence threatens the “exercise of political rights” as campaigning enters its final stretch. The ombudsman’s office noted that intimidation and attacks against candidates and their teams could weaken public debate and deter voter engagement.
The Meta region, where the killings occurred, has long been contested by armed groups, including factions that split from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia after a 2016 peace accord. The area is also tied to drug trafficking routes, adding to persistent instability.
The attack comes amid heightened tensions in a race to succeed President Gustavo Petro. Polling has shown left-leaning Senator Ivan Cepeda leading the field, while de la Espriella has drawn support from voters seeking a tougher stance on crime. At least three candidates have disclosed receiving death threats, and leading contenders are traveling with extensive security details.
Colombia has faced a pattern of election-related violence in recent years. In June 2025, presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe was shot during a rally in Bogota and later died from his injuries, highlighting the risks confronting political figures.
The killings point to a broader security challenge that continues to shape Colombia’s political landscape. Despite the 2016 peace agreement, splinter groups and criminal networks have filled power vacuums in several regions, often targeting local leaders and political actors.
Meta’s strategic location makes it a focal point for armed factions seeking influence over territory and resources. Attacks in such areas are not only acts of violence but also signals intended to assert control and intimidate communities ahead of elections.
The timing is particularly significant. With voters preparing to choose a new president, incidents like this can alter campaign dynamics by shifting attention toward security concerns. Candidates may be compelled to harden their rhetoric, while voters weigh safety alongside economic and social issues.
There is also a risk that continued violence could suppress turnout in affected regions, potentially shaping electoral outcomes. Historically, fear and insecurity have discouraged participation, especially in rural areas where state presence is limited.
The Colombian government faces a delicate balance between maintaining order and preserving democratic processes. While security forces have increased protection for candidates, the persistence of attacks suggests deeper structural issues remain unresolved.
As the election approaches, the trajectory of violence will be closely watched, both domestically and internationally, as a measure of Colombia’s progress in stabilizing regions long affected by conflict.
At least four people were killed in a sweeping overnight drone assault attributed to Ukraine, marking one of the most extensive strikes on Russian territory since the war began, regional officials said.
Authorities in the Moscow region said a woman died when a drone struck a residential property in Khimki, a city northwest of the capital. Regional governor Andrei Vorobyev indicated that two men were also killed in the village of Pogorelki, about six miles north of Moscow, while emergency crews searched debris for possible additional victims.
City officials in Moscow said at least 12 people were wounded in the barrage, many near the entrance to an oil refinery. Mayor Sergei Sobyanin stated that while nearby structures were affected, key refinery operations remained intact.
State media, citing municipal officials, said air defense systems intercepted 81 drones approaching Moscow overnight. Russia’s Defense Ministry later indicated that hundreds of drones were destroyed or disrupted across the country, with more than 1,000 reportedly intercepted over a 24-hour period.
In the Belgorod region, which borders Ukraine, local authorities said a separate drone strike hit a truck, killing one person. Elsewhere, officials said debris from intercepted drones landed at Sheremetyevo Airport without causing damage.
The Associated Press described the assault as one of the largest aimed at the Russian capital since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Reuters cited regional authorities who confirmed casualties and structural damage in multiple locations, including residential buildings and infrastructure.
Ukraine also faced a wave of attacks. The Ukrainian air force said Russia launched nearly 300 drones overnight, most of which were intercepted or disabled. Emergency services in Ukraine said at least eight people were injured in the Dnipropetrovsk region, including residents in the cities of Dnipro and Kryvyi Rih. Damage to homes was recorded in several areas.
The escalation follows a pattern of intensifying drone warfare by both sides. The Associated Press previously documented a large-scale Russian drone assault earlier in the week that struck multiple Ukrainian regions, causing deaths and widespread destruction. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said at the time that the aim was to overwhelm air defense systems and warned that further strikes could follow.
The latest exchange underscores how drone warfare has become central to the conflict, allowing both sides to strike deep into each other’s territory with increasing frequency. What was once limited to front-line engagements has expanded into a broader campaign targeting infrastructure, logistics hubs and urban centers.
For Russia, the scale of the strike near Moscow highlights growing vulnerabilities in areas once considered relatively secure. Repeated incursions into the capital’s airspace could carry political implications, raising pressure on defense systems and public confidence.
For Ukraine, such operations appear designed to stretch Russian defenses and shift the psychological balance of the conflict. By forcing Moscow to divert resources toward homeland protection, Kyiv may be seeking to offset disadvantages along the front lines.
The intensifying cycle of attacks also complicates diplomatic efforts. Despite statements from President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin suggesting the possibility of a negotiated end to the war, continued large-scale strikes signal that both sides are still pursuing military leverage.
As drone technology evolves and production expands, analysts expect these types of attacks to grow in scale and frequency. The result is a conflict increasingly defined not only by territorial battles but by sustained long-range strikes that blur the line between battlefield and civilian space.
Global pop star Shakira and Afrobeats performer Burna Boy have released “Dai Dai,” the official anthem for the 2026 FIFA World Cup, blending Latin pop and African rhythms in a track designed to reflect the tournament’s worldwide appeal.
The song, launched across major streaming platforms, brings together energetic beats and multilingual lyrics that celebrate football’s global reach. In one verse, the artists highlight competing nations, naming countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and Japan, underscoring the tournament’s international character.
The release follows a teaser shared by Shakira from Rio de Janeiro’s Maracanã Stadium, where she previewed part of the track while performing alongside dancers. The full version debuted days later, coinciding with growing anticipation for the tournament, which will be co-hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico.
The Associated Press previously noted that the track features alternating verses from both performers before merging into a joint chorus, creating a call-and-response dynamic. FIFA confirmed the song’s role as the tournament’s official anthem, describing it as a reflection of the competition’s “energy, passion and global spirit.”
Shakira, who previously delivered the widely recognized 2010 World Cup anthem “Waka Waka,” returns to the global stage with familiarity and experience in crafting tournament-defining music. Burna Boy adds a contemporary edge, reinforcing the event’s outreach to younger audiences and diverse markets.
The anthem’s release also aligns with plans for the first halftime show in a World Cup final, scheduled for July 19 at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. Organizers have announced that Shakira will headline the performance alongside Madonna and the South Korean group BTS, with creative direction led by Chris Martin.
FIFA said the song will support the Global Citizen Education Fund, an initiative aimed at raising $100 million to expand access to education and sports opportunities for children worldwide. The organization indicated that proceeds from the track, along with matching contributions from Sony Music, will contribute to the effort.
Additional World Cup-themed music has also emerged ahead of the tournament. A separate anthem backed by Coca-Cola reimagines the song “Jump,” featuring J Balvin and Travis Barker, illustrating how commercial partners are expanding the event’s cultural footprint.
The release of “Dai Dai” highlights a broader shift in how global sporting events position music as a central part of their identity. By pairing artists from different continents, FIFA appears to be leaning into a strategy that mirrors the tournament’s geographic diversity while strengthening its cultural influence beyond the field.
Shakira’s return signals continuity, linking the 2026 tournament to past World Cup moments that achieved lasting global recognition. At the same time, Burna Boy’s involvement reflects the growing prominence of African music on the international stage, suggesting a deliberate effort to engage audiences in emerging markets.
The introduction of a halftime show further indicates FIFA’s ambition to rival entertainment elements seen in events such as the Super Bowl. This evolution points to a more commercial and entertainment-driven approach that could reshape how future tournaments are packaged and consumed.
Taken together, the anthem, expanded music collaborations and new entertainment formats underscore how the World Cup is increasingly positioned not only as a sporting event but also as a global cultural showcase.
