Donald Trump doubled down on his decision to launch a global trade war, declaring that he would “never” back off from sweeping tariffs on US trading partners.

The US president’s announced action sent shock waves around the world this week, prompting fierce threats of retaliation and sharp sell-offs in stock markets.

In an all-caps message on his Truth Social social media platform, Trump sought to convey his defiance in the wake of news that Beijing is preparing to hit back with 34% tariffs of its own.

“TO THE MANY INVESTORS COMING INTO THE UNITED STATES AND INVESTING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, MY POLICIES WILL NEVER CHANGE,” he claimed. “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO GET RICH, RICHER THAN EVER BEFORE!!!”

Within hours, however, the president was indicating that he might be prepared to change course. “Just had a very productive call with To Lam, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam, who told me that Vietnam wants to cut their Tariffs down to ZERO if they are able to make an agreement with the U.S.,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, adding that he looked forward to a meeting “in the near future”.

The comments came as markets tumbled for the second straight day after Trump’s move to bring in tariffs on scores of countries. He claims the policy – a blanket 10% tariff from Saturday, with higher rates for specific markets from next week – will bring US manufacturing jobs back to the US and raise trillions of dollars for the federal government. Many economists have cautioned it will trigger economic chaos, and likely raise prices.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that the move may well knock the global economy. Kristalina Georgieva, its managing director, , said: “We are still assessing the macroeconomic implications of the announced tariff measures, but they clearly represent a significant risk to the global outlook at a time of sluggish growth.”

Shortly before Wall Street opened on Friday, Trump claimed China had “panicked” by announcing new retaliatory tariffs on US imports. “CHINA PLAYED IT WRONG, THEY PANICKED – THE ONE THING THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO DO!” he wrote on Truth Social.

China’s industry associations have unanimously condemned the tariffs. The country’s National Textile and Apparel Council said it “supported the government’s forceful measures” and that the US had “damaged the resilience of the global textile industry’s supply chain”.

The S&P 500 fell 4.4% in early trading, exacerbating a decline that began in February. The index, which tracks 500 of the leading US companies, is now down almost 14% from its peak.

Shares in the US bank sector had fallen nearly 6% on Friday, reflecting fears that the trade war could trigger a recession. It could also be an indicator that investors are expecting faster interest rate cuts by the US Federal Reserve, in order to instigate growth.

Crude oil prices also plunged by 8% on Friday, heading for their lowest point since the middle of the pandemic in 2021.

The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, told reporters that the markets “will adjust” to the sweeping tariffs imposed by Trump. “The markets are reacting to a dramatic change in the global order in terms of trade … As long as they know what the rules are going to be moving forward … the markets will adjust.”

Many Democrats have expressed frustration with the early impacts of the tariffs on the US economy. JB Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, wrote on X: “The biggest tax hike in American history. Donald Trump’s tariffs are throwing the economy into the tank.”

California senator Alex Padilla wrote: “I’m not enraged by the stock market crashing because I’m sympathetic towards traders on Wall Street. I’m mad because this hurts the pensions and retirement savings of so many Americans. And Trump couldn’t care less.”

Stock markets around the world plunged for a second day on Friday as China announced retaliatory tariffs of 34% on US imports, signalling a major escalation of a trade war ignited by Donald Trump and feeding fears of a global recession.

“For all imported goods originating from the US, an additional tariff of 34% on top of the current applicable tariff rate will be imposed,” Beijing’s finance ministry said.

China’s commerce ministry said that it would also impose more restrictions on the export of rare earths, which are used in hi-tech manufacturing such as batteries and electric vehicles. It added a further 16 US companies and organisations to its export control list, meaning that Chinese companies are restricted from doing business with them.

China had previously promised “resolute countermeasures” against Trump’s tariffs, which slapped a 10% rate on all imports coming to the US, with extra levies for certain countries, including China.

China’s state council tariff commission said: “On April 2, 2025, the US government announced the imposition of ‘reciprocal tariffs’ on Chinese goods exported to the US. This practice of the US is not in line with international trade rules, seriously undermines China’s legitimate rights and interests, and is a typical unilateral bullying practice.”

Trump responded on Truth Social on Friday. He said: “CHINA PLAYED IT WRONG, THEY PANICKED – THE ONE THING THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO DO!”

Trump’s announcement on Wednesday led to a plunge in world financial markets and fuelled fears of a global recession. Investment bank JP Morgan said it now sees a 60% chance of the global economy entering recession by the year end, up from 40% previously.

Escalation of a trade war featuring the world’s two largest economies sent US stock futures sharply lower on Friday, signalling more losses on Wall Street, after the Trump administration’s sweeping levies knocked off $2.4tn (£1.8tn) from US equities.

The FTSE 100 in London shed more than 300 points since the start of trading on Friday, its biggest one-day decline since March 2023. The Stoxx 600 index of Europe’s largest six hundred companies slumped by 4.4%.

The price of Brent crude oil has dropped 6.6% to $65.50, its lowest since August 2021.

Wang Wen, the dean of Renmin University of China’s Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, said: “China will never give in to Trump, but it does not exclude cooperation with the United States at the level of mutual respect and win-win cooperation. China knows that cooperation is not sought, but fought for.” Wang said that China’s response was “restrained” and limited to trade measures.

However other analysts said that China’s response was forceful.

Stephane Ekolo, a market and equity strategist for Tradition in London, told Reuters: “China comes out swinging with an aggressive response to Trump’s tariffs. This is significant and is unlikely to be over, hence the negative market reactions. Investors are afraid of a ‘tit for tat’ trade war situation.”

Some analysts had expected the US and China to reach a deal before the 9 April deadline for the US’s tariffs to take effect. The Financial Times had reported that Trump was considering using the threat of tariffs to pressure Beijing into allowing ByteDance to sell off TikTok to a US entity.

Shameen Prashantham, a professor at the China Europe International Business School in Shanghai, said the mounting trade war was a body blow to global trade. “I just can’t see how there are going to be many winners in this,” Prashantham said.

China’s industry associations have unanimously condemned the tariffs. China’s National Textile and Apparel Council said that it “supported the government’s forceful measures” and that the US had “damaged the resilience of the global textile industry’s supply chain”.

Chinese fast fashion companies are expected to be particularly badly hit by the new tariffs. Temu and Shein have grown to dominate the e-commerce industry in the US thanks to a loophole in the US’s import rules, which allowed goods valued at less than $800 to be shipped to the US for free. Trump has now closed that loophole, effective from 2 May.

About 60% of duty-free packages coming into the US come from China. But those deliveries will, from May, be subject to a fee of 30% of the value of the goods, or $25, rising to $50 in June.

Temu and Shein have yet to comment.

China has also filed a lawsuit against the US with the World Trade Organization.

The comedian and actor Russell Brand has been charged with one count each of rape, indecent assault and oral rape as well as two counts of sexual assault.

Brand will appear in court in London on 2 May, according to the Metropolitan police, which began investigating him in September 2023 after a range of allegations.

The force said the allegations related to four separate women, as it appealed for anyone affected by the case to come forward.

It is alleged that Brand raped a woman in 1999 in the Bournemouth area, indecently assaulted a woman in 2001 in the Westminster area of London, orally raped and sexually assaulted a woman in 2004 in Westminster and sexually assaulted a woman in Westminster between 2004 and 2005.

Det Supt Andy Furphy from the Metropolitan police, who is leading the investigation, said: “The women who have made reports continue to receive support from specially trained officers.

“The Met’s investigation remains open and detectives ask anyone who has been affected by this case, or anyone who has any information, to come forward and speak with police.

“A dedicated team of investigators is available via email at CIT@met.police.uk. Support is also available by contacting the independent charity Rape Crisis.”

The Met said detectives had begun after receiving a number of allegations, which followed reporting by Channel 4’s Dispatches and the Sunday Times.

Brand has previously denied allegations of rape, assault and emotional abuse that have been made against him. And in a video posted on Instagram released later on Friday, he said that he had “never engaged in non-consensual activity” and was “grateful” for the chance to defend himself in court.

The Crown Prosecution Service said in a statement that it had authorised the police to charge Brand with a number of sexual offences.

Jaswant Narwal, a barrister and prosecutor at the CPS, said: “We carefully reviewed the evidence after a police investigation into allegations made following the broadcast of a Channel 4 documentary in September 2023.

“We have concluded that Russell Brand should be charged with offences including rape, sexual assault and indecent assault.

Narwal added: “The Crown Prosecution Service reminds everyone that criminal proceedings are active, and the defendant has the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”

Brand is believed to have moved to the US, claiming he is being “attacked” and “shut down” by the British authorities. He interviewed Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr, last year in Florida.

The decision to authorise charges follows the confirmation in November 2024 by the CPS that detectives had passed on an evidence file regarding sexual offence allegations against Brand.

Channel 4 and the production company Banijay UK also announced they had launched separate internal investigations into his conduct, after the allegations in 2023, with the BBC also reviewing Brand’s time at the corporation.

In the Dispatches programme, four women alleged assaults had taken place between 2006 and 2013, a period in which Brand was working for the BBC and Channel 4, as well as starring in Hollywood films.

An investigation, launched by Banijay UK – which bought the company that produced some of the Channel 4 shows Brand worked on – found that informally raised concerns about the comedian and actor’s behaviour while he worked on several of the channel’s programmes were “not properly escalated or adequately addressed”.

The Channel 4 investigation found “no evidence” that staff were aware of accusations about the comedian and actor contained in the Dispatches programme. A BBC review, which was published in January, found a number of people “felt unable to raise” concerns about the presenter.

Brand, who presented a BBC Radio 2 show between 2006 and 2008, left the role after his on-air prank that became known as Sachsgate, when he left a voicemail for the Fawlty Towers actor Andrew Sachs about his granddaughter.

The entertainer, who was born in Essex and started a career in entertainment as a standup comedian, became famous in Britain as the host of the television programme Big Brother’s Big Mouth.

He went on to star in Hollywood films such as St Trinian’s and the remake of Arthur. He also delved into politics, endorsing Jeremy Corbyn in the 2015 British general election, but has now emerged as a fervent backer of Donald Trump and has appeared alongside a range of hard-right political commentators.

In recent years he has focused on podcasting and cultivating followers on video platforms. He has reinvented himself as a Christian, after being baptised in the River Thames in 2024 during a ceremony that also involved the adventurer and broadcaster Bear Grylls.

Top congressional Democrats are protesting against the reported firing of Gen Tim Haugh as director of the National Security Agency (NSA), with one lawmaker saying the decision “makes all of us less safe”.

Haugh and his civilian deputy at the NSA, Wendy Noble, have been dismissed from their roles, the Washington Post reported late on Thursday, with CNN reporting likewise, both outlets citing multiple unnamed officials and other senior sources close to the matter who had requested anonymity. The ousting had not been officially confirmed by the government or the individuals by Friday afternoon, but outrage from critics was fulsome.

Senator Mark Warner, vice-chair of the Senate intelligence committee, said in a statement: “General Haugh has served our country in uniform, with honor and distinction, for more than 30 years. At a time when the United States is facing unprecedented cyber threats … how does firing him make Americans any safer?”

Representative Jim Himes, the ranking member on the House intelligence committee, said he was “deeply disturbed by the decision”.

“I have known General Haugh to be an honest and forthright leader who followed the law and put national security first – I fear those are precisely the qualities that could lead to his firing in this administration,” Himes added. “The intelligence committee and the American people need an immediate explanation for this decision, which makes all of us less safe.”

Earlier on Thursday, Donald Trump said he had fired “some” White House National Security Council officials, a move that came a day after far-right activist Laura Loomer raised concerns directly to him about staff loyalty.

Loomer, during her Oval Office conversation with Trump, urged the president to purge staffers she deemed insufficiently loyal to his “make America great again” agenda, according to several people familiar with the matter. They all spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive personnel manner.

Loomer posted on X in the first moments of Friday morning: “NSA Director Tim Haugh and his deputy Wendy Noble have been disloyal to President Trump. That is why they have been fired.”

She added a screed about how they were hired by Joe Biden during his presidency and were, she said, “hand picked” by Mark Milley, then chair of the joint chiefs of staff, the most senior uniformed officer in the military. Milley served Trump in his first term in the White House but has since turned fiercely critical, calling the president dangerous and “fascist to the core”, and was fired in the early days of Trump’s second term. The 47th US president then also revoked Milley’s security clearance. Biden, the 46th US president, had preemptively pardoned Milley in his final days in office, following threats from Trump that the veteran was treasonous and should face the death penalty.

Loomer added Haugh was “referred for firing” and Noble was Haugh’s “Obama loving protégé” who was nominated by Biden and promoted diversity, equity and inclusion at the agency. Loomer noted: “This is called VETTING”.

She also said Noble was a protege of James Clapper, director of national intelligence in Barack Obama’s presidency, and said Clapper should be in prison.

Trump spoke to reporters on Air Force One on Thursday afternoon after the earlier firing of six national security agency staffers below the level of Haugh and Noble, based on recommendations from Loomer, a extremist cheerleader for Trump and a white supremacist with an incendiary social media presence who has no political experience outside of unsuccessfully running for US Congress in Florida twice.

“Always we’re letting go of people,” Trump said. “People that we don’t like or people that we don’t think can do the job or people that may have loyalties to somebody else.”

The firings come as Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz continues to fight calls for his ouster after using the publicly available encrypted Signal app to discuss planning for the sensitive 15 March military operation targeting Houthi militants in Yemen.

Warner said on Thursday night: “It is astonishing, too, that President Trump would fire the nonpartisan, experienced leader of the National Security Agency while still failing to hold any member of his team accountable for leaking classified information on a commercial messaging app – even as he apparently takes staffing direction on national security from a discredited conspiracy theorist in the Oval Office.”

Haugh met last month with Elon Musk, whose so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge, has roiled the federal government by slashing personnel and budgets at dozens of agencies. In a statement, the NSA said the meeting was intended to ensure both organizations were “aligned” with the new administration’s priorities.

Haugh had led both the NSA and Cyber Command since 2023. Both departments play leading roles in the nation’s cybersecurity. The NSA also supports the military and other national security agencies by collecting and analysing a vast amount of data and information globally.

Cyber Command is known as America’s first line of defence in cyberspace and also plans offensive cyber-operations for potential use against adversaries. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth recently ordered the office to pause some offensive cyber-operations against Russia, in another sign of how Trump’s administration is transforming the work of the nation’s intelligence community.

Renée Burton, a cybersecurity expert previously working for the NSA, told CNN the removal of the personnel was “alarming”.

“NSA mission is vast and extremely complicated. General Haugh and Ms Noble have built the expertise and credibility it takes to oversee such a vital part of our national security. Replacing them will not be easy and the disruption will expose the country to new risk,” she told the cable news outlet.

The Associated Press contributed reporting

Party tricks are second nature to Chanel Tapper, who has long wielded the Guinness World Records title for woman with the globe’s longest tongue.

The California native can easily use the 3.8in (9.75cm) organ to remove Jenga blocks from a stack. She can flip red plastic cups with it; touch the tip of her nose as well as under her chin; and raise a spoon by curling it around the utensil.

But nothing quite beats showing her tongue to people and watching them shriek in terror as they realize it is longer than a medium-sized lightbulb – or a credit card.

“Honestly, the best reaction I could ever get when someone sees my tongue is screaming,” Tapper, 34, said recently in an interview published on the Guinness World Records website. “People yell or scream in shock, or horror sometimes, [and] that’s probably my favorite because it’s funny to me because it’s a dramatic response.”

Tapper’s comments to the organization whose database of 40,000 records is a constant source of public fascination came about two decades after acquaintances first clued her into her uniquely prodigious tongue.

She once recounted how she was about 11 when she got into the habit of teasing people around her by sticking her tongue out, and the common reaction was for them to comment on its length. Then, about a couple of years later, she achieved early internet virality after YouTube users spotted her sticking her tongue out on a video and became transfixed by its elongation.

Guinness World Records finally invited her to an event in Los Angeles in 2010 to measure her tongue and see if she merited a spot in the organization’s database. She closely beat two other competitors for the distinction, surpassing the average tongue length for women by about 1.9cm (roughly three-fourths of an inch) – and for men by some 1.2cm (a half-inch or so).

Tapper’s record still stood as of her 31 March interview with Guinness. Even though more than one online commenter has compared her to the slimy-tongued, fictional Marvel Comics villain Venom, she said she held the mark dearly.

“I like little fun, silly things like that,” Tapper said.

Furthermore, the recognition had given her the chance to travel internationally.

One such trip involved visiting the fashion capital Milan and being photographed with her tongue painted blue and green in photos for the Welcome Successful Living campaign from the Italian brand Diesel. Other Guinness World Record holders participated in the campaign, too.

“It’s fun – I get to see the parts of the world I’ve never seen before,” Tapper said.

The editor-in-chief of the Guardian, Katharine Viner, has told the high court there was a “very high public interest” in reporting allegations made against Noel Clarke after he received a special Bafta award.

In a witness statement, Viner said she believed it was conceivable that the actor’s endorsement by the British academy film awards could lead to an escalation of his allegedly abusive behaviour towards women.

Clarke, who is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM), the publisher of the Guardian, for libel over seven articles and a podcast published between April 2021 and March 2022, was given an honorary Bafta award in 2021, which was later suspended.

Viner, who has held the position of editor-in-chief at the Guardian since 2015, said that Clarke’s alleged sexual misconduct appeared to be “something of an open secret in the UK film and TV industry”.

She was made aware of the intention to follow up on leads about Clarke’s behaviour in April 2021 by the Guardian’s head of investigations Paul Lewis.

Two journalists with experience of reporting on matters of sexual misconduct, Sirin Kale and Lucy Osborne, were assigned to the investigation, which developed at pace.

In her witness statement, Viner said she had been made aware that the Daily Mirror were also investigating Clarke but added that “we placed little, if any, importance on that in the timing of the publication”.

Clarke strongly denied the allegations when they were put to him.

Viner said that the number and credibility of the sources as well as the consistency of the accounts and the robustness of the reporting weighed in favour of publication.

She said: “I considered there was a very clear public interest in exposing allegations of misconduct in the context that the individual in question had been recently celebrated and further empowered through the special award that had been made by Bafta.

“In the light of the long period over which allegations had been made, it was conceivable that this endorsement of Mr Clarke and consolidation of his influence in the British film and television industry could enable him to continue or escalate the relevant behaviour, potentially with impunity.

“However, even if the timing of the award had not influenced the timing of publication, I consider we would likely have published the story in any case and perhaps only slightly later.”

Philip Williams, representing Clarke, 49, asked Viner about the role she played in the coverage.

She said: “I would say that I expect the reporters to do the reporting, the editors to do the editing, and then for them to escalate it to me. That is what happened in this case.”

When cross-examined, she added that when judging the public interest of a story that there were formal systems in place and that she sought to take any “emotion out of it”.

The Guardian’s deputy editor, Owen Gibson, told the high court that GNM’s ownership structure ensured that there was no commercial or proprietorial pressure to publish the results of an investigation.

He confirmed that concerns that Clarke and his business partner, Jason Maza, were contacting witnesses and “could cause further intimidation or distress to sources or other women, as well as potentially deterring sources from speaking to us or going on the record” had been a consideration in the timing of the first article.

“We have to look after our sources and I considered that to be a legitimate factor when considering the timing of publication,” he said.

Anna Kaiser, a German film director, was the final witness in GNM’s defence. She told the court that she had been an intern on the film Doghouse in 2008 in which Clarke had played a leading role.

She said: “When he arrived in the morning or when I first saw him each day, he would greet me and, on several occasions, try to pull me in with an arm before going in to peck me on the lips.

“As I recall, I pulled away every time and I can’t remember if he ever actually succeeded at kissing me this way. I think this happened around a handful of times. At first it was cheeky but persistent, but it became less playful and his attitude became less friendly after I avoided it each time. My reaction each time, though I didn’t say it in so many words, was ‘oh, not this again’”.

When asked by Clarke’s barrister whether this was not simply standard behaviour on such an intimate and friendly film set, Kaiser noted that none of the other men on the set had greeted female colleagues by kissing them on the lips.

The closing submissions in the trial will be heard on Friday before a written judgment by Mrs Justice Steyn.

The editor-in-chief of the Guardian, Katharine Viner, has told the high court there was a “very high public interest” in reporting allegations made against Noel Clarke after he received a special Bafta award.

In a witness statement, Viner said she believed it was conceivable that the actor’s endorsement by the British academy film awards could lead to an escalation of his allegedly abusive behaviour towards women.

Clarke, who is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM), the publisher of the Guardian, for libel over seven articles and a podcast published between April 2021 and March 2022, was given an honorary Bafta award in 2021, which was later suspended.

Viner, who has held the position of editor-in-chief at the Guardian since 2015, said that Clarke’s alleged sexual misconduct appeared to be “something of an open secret in the UK film and TV industry”.

She was made aware of the intention to follow up on leads about Clarke’s behaviour in April 2021 by the Guardian’s head of investigations Paul Lewis.

Two journalists with experience of reporting on matters of sexual misconduct, Sirin Kale and Lucy Osborne, were assigned to the investigation, which developed at pace.

In her witness statement, Viner said she had been made aware that the Daily Mirror were also investigating Clarke but added that “we placed little, if any, importance on that in the timing of the publication”.

Clarke strongly denied the allegations when they were put to him.

Viner said that the number and credibility of the sources as well as the consistency of the accounts and the robustness of the reporting weighed in favour of publication.

She said: “I considered there was a very clear public interest in exposing allegations of misconduct in the context that the individual in question had been recently celebrated and further empowered through the special award that had been made by Bafta.

“In the light of the long period over which allegations had been made, it was conceivable that this endorsement of Mr Clarke and consolidation of his influence in the British film and television industry could enable him to continue or escalate the relevant behaviour, potentially with impunity.

“However, even if the timing of the award had not influenced the timing of publication, I consider we would likely have published the story in any case and perhaps only slightly later.”

Philip Williams, representing Clarke, 49, asked Viner about the role she played in the coverage.

She said: “I would say that I expect the reporters to do the reporting, the editors to do the editing, and then for them to escalate it to me. That is what happened in this case.”

When cross-examined, she added that when judging the public interest of a story that there were formal systems in place and that she sought to take any “emotion out of it”.

The Guardian’s deputy editor, Owen Gibson, told the high court that GNM’s ownership structure ensured that there was no commercial or proprietorial pressure to publish the results of an investigation.

He confirmed that concerns that Clarke and his business partner, Jason Maza, were contacting witnesses and “could cause further intimidation or distress to sources or other women, as well as potentially deterring sources from speaking to us or going on the record” had been a consideration in the timing of the first article.

“We have to look after our sources and I considered that to be a legitimate factor when considering the timing of publication,” he said.

Anna Kaiser, a German film director, was the final witness in GNM’s defence. She told the court that she had been an intern on the film Doghouse in 2008 in which Clarke had played a leading role.

She said: “When he arrived in the morning or when I first saw him each day, he would greet me and, on several occasions, try to pull me in with an arm before going in to peck me on the lips.

“As I recall, I pulled away every time and I can’t remember if he ever actually succeeded at kissing me this way. I think this happened around a handful of times. At first it was cheeky but persistent, but it became less playful and his attitude became less friendly after I avoided it each time. My reaction each time, though I didn’t say it in so many words, was ‘oh, not this again’”.

When asked by Clarke’s barrister whether this was not simply standard behaviour on such an intimate and friendly film set, Kaiser noted that none of the other men on the set had greeted female colleagues by kissing them on the lips.

The closing submissions in the trial will be heard on Friday before a written judgment by Mrs Justice Steyn.

South Korea’s suspended president, Yoon Suk Yeol, has been removed from office after the country’s constitutional court voted unanimously to uphold parliament’s decision to impeach him over his ill-fated declaration of martial law in December.

After weeks of deliberations and growing concerns about the future of South Korea’s democracy, all eight justices voted to strip Yoon of his presidential powers.

The ruling means that the acting president, Han Duck-soo, will remain in office until South Koreans elect a new leader within 60 days.

Han vowed to ensure “there are no gaps in national security and diplomacy” and to maintain public safety and order until the vote.

“Respecting the will of our sovereign people, I will do my utmost to manage the next presidential election in accordance with the constitution and the law, ensuring a smooth transition to the next administration,” he said in a televised address.

In a written message to the country’s “beloved citizens” following his removal from office, Yoon said it had been “a great honour” to serve as president.

“I deeply thank all of you who have supported and encouraged me despite my many shortcomings,” he said. “I am very sorry and regretful that I could not live up to your expectations. I will always pray for our beloved Republic of Korea and its citizens.”

While anti-Yoon protesters celebrated the court’s decision – many of them in tears – media reports said some of his supporters had starting damaging police vehicles near the court building.

In the court ruling, broadcast live, the acting chief justice, Moon Hyung-bae, said the decision had been unanimous. “We hereby pronounce the following ruling, with the unanimous agreement of all Justices.“(We) dismiss respondent President Yoon Suk Yeol.”

As crowds outside hung onto his every word, Moon said Yoon had violated his duty as president by taking actions that were beyond the powers granted to him under the constitution. Yoon’s actions, he added, had constituted a serious challenge to democracy.

“(Yoon) committed a grave betrayal of the trust of the people, who are the sovereign members of the democratic republic,” Moon said, adding by declaring martial law, Yoon had created chaos in all areas of society, the economy and foreign policy.

Moon said: “The defendant not only declared martial law, but also violated the constitution and laws by mobilizing military and police forces to obstruct the exercise of legislative authority. Ultimately, the declaration of martial law in this case violated the substantive requirements for emergency martial law.

“Given the grave negative impact on constitutional order and the significant ripple effects of the defendant’s violations, we find that the benefits of upholding the constitution by removing the defendant from office far outweigh the national losses from the removal of a president.”

Yoon, who was not in court for the ruling, cannot appeal and must now turn his attention to a separate criminal trial – linked to his martial law declaration – on charges of insurrection.

His ruling party said it “solemnly accepts” the constitutional court’s decision. “It is regrettable, but the People Power party solemnly accepts and humbly respects the constitutional court’s decision,” lawmaker Kwon Young-se said. “We extend our sincere apologies to the people.”

One of Yoon’s lawyers, Yoon Kap-keun, remained defiant, however, describing the judgement as “completely incomprehensible” and a “purely political decision”.

The long-awaited decision on Yoon’s late-night order to impose martial law in early December has exposed deep divisions in South Korean society and alarmed the US and other allies.

His opponents and supporters have held large rallies in recent days, although an unprecedented police presence meant protesters were unable to access the immediate vicinity of the court building on Friday. Reports said that 14,000 police officers had been deployed in the capital in anticipation of possible violence, irrespective of which way the court ruled.

Yoon’s supporters and lawyers argued that the impeachment proceedings were illegal and that he should be immediately returned to office, three years after the conservative populist was voted to lead Asia’s fourth-biggest economy.

A Gallup Korea poll released last week showed 60% of South Koreans said he should be permanently removed from office. His opponents have accused the former prosecutor of abusing his presidential powers in an attempt to suspend democratic institutions and take the country back into its dark authoritarian past.

The opposition-controlled national assembly voted to impeach Yoon in mid-December, a fortnight after he imposed martial law in an attempt, he claimed, to prevent “anti-state” opposition forces with North Korean sympathies from destroying the country.

Yoon was forced to lift the edict after only six hours, however, after lawmakers defied efforts by security forces to seal off parliament and voted to reject it. Yoon has claimed he never intended to fully impose emergency military rule and has tried to downplay the chaos, pointing out that no one was killed or injured.

Yoon became the second South Korean president to be removed from office through impeachment after Park Geun-hye in 2017. If found guilty in his criminal trial, he faces life imprisonment or the death penalty, although South Korea has not carried out an execution since the late 1990s.

Sean “Diddy” Combs was hit with a new federal indictment on Friday charging the hip-hop mogul with five criminal counts including racketeering and sex trafficking, court records showed.

Combs had previously faced three criminal counts. He has pleaded not guilty. His trial in Manhattan federal court is scheduled to start on 5 May.

Combs previously pleaded not guilty to charges of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. While the new indictment added no new charges, it described what prosecutors called the “forced labor” that Combs demanded in connection with the 20-year alleged racketeering conspiracy.

Prosecutors with the Manhattan US attorney’s office have previously said Combs used his business empire, including his record label, Bad Boy Entertainment, to sexually abuse women between 2004 and 2024.

Combs’s alleged abuse included having women take part in recorded sexual performances called “freak offs” with male sex workers, who were sometimes transported across state lines.

Marc Agnifilo, Combs’s attorney, has said the freak offs were consensual sexual activity.

Combs also faces dozens of civil lawsuits by women and men who accused him of sexual assault and other misconduct. He has denied all wrongdoing.

More details soon …

Reuters contributed reporting

People on the Aegean islands, more used in April to the sight and scent of spring’s blossoms, have been left reeling from flash floods spurred by typhoon-strength gales, with authorities calling a state of emergency in some of Greece’s most popular destinations less than three weeks before Easter.

“It’s a total catastrophe and it happened in just two hours,” said Costas Bizas, the mayor of Paros, the island worst hit by weather not seen in decades. “We need all the help we can get.”

On Paros and Mykonos, two of the country’s most visited islands, officials were racing against the clock to complete clean-up operations before the arrival of tourists for the Easter break.

Scrambling to address the chaos after the area’s heaviest rainfall in 20 years, emergency crews on the Cycladic islands and farther south in Rhodes and Crete reported “apocalyptic” scenes. In Paros, people saw cars, motorcycles and beachside restaurant furniture hurtling into the sea as torrential rain flooded shops and homes and turned streets into debris-filled streams. The picturesque port of Naoussa was transformed into a “lake of mud”, local people said, with the sea and land “becoming one”. Large parts of the road network were devastated.

In Mykonos, another hotspot expected to attract thousands of visitors at Easter, hailstorms triggered landslides, with muddy flood waters cascading through its white-washed alleys. Civil protection services urged residents to restrict their movements and stay indoors. In Crete’s port town of Chania, officials spoke of “biblical destruction” as images of flooded streets, hospitals and courthouses also emerged.

Schools on several islands were closed, and inhabitants were still picking their way through silt-strewn streets on Thursday.

Meteorologists said more rain was dumped on Paros over the course of a couple of hours on Tuesday than would normally fall in an entire month. “It’s incredible, really, that there were no casualties,” said one official.

Climate breakdown is causing extreme rainfall to become more common and more intense across most of the world, and flooding has most probably become more frequent and severe in these locations as a result.

But the devastation at tourist destinations that, thanks to the rise in global travel, increasingly draw record numbers has also highlighted Greece’s lack of preparedness in dealing with natural disasters.

Critics have singled out the absence of proper flood management systems, as well as unregulated development on the Aegean islands, which have attracted ever more visitors seeking villas, swimming pools and other high-end services.

“Yes, the rainfall was intense but what turned it into a disaster wasn’t just nature; it was the result of decades of unsustainable construction,” wrote the Greek environmentalist and former MEP Kriton Arsenis.

“Paros has been overbuilt at a dramatic pace. In the past five years alone, it has topped the Cyclades in new building permits, surpassing even Mykonos and Santorini. Villas, hotels, roads and swimming pools have replaced the dry-stone terraces that once held water, slowed down runoff and kept the soil alive.”

In the effort to construct and to cater to ever more tourists, natural gullies had been cemented over, he said. “They no longer hold or filter water. They simply accelerate it – pushing it downhill with force, until it floods homes, or is lost to the sea.”

It was critical, he said, that a way was found in such heavily built environments to absorb, store and release rainwater slowly. “This wasn’t just a flood. It was a failure of planning … [and] this same story is unfolding all along the Mediterranean coast.”

At a time when anger over the impoverished state of public services has also prompted some of the largest protests in years – with hundreds of thousands of Greeks taking to the streets in fury on the second anniversary of the Tempe rail disaster – others bemoaned the lack of state funding on islands whose populations dwindled drastically in winter.

“Not enough money, clearly, is put into civil protection,” said Mykonos’s former mayor Konstantinos Koukas. “To fix that, funds have to stop being allocated based on the permanent population of a place. It’s why we have the scenes we see today, clearing up after a storm when Easter is just a few weeks away.”

The prominent commentator Nikos Syrigos, who hails from the Cycladic isle of Syros, said that despite tourism being the engine of Greece’s economy, the underdevelopment of its islands meant destinations that were “giants in the summer” became “dwarfs in the winter”.

“Streets that have been turned into streams [by this storm] will be turned into them again,” he said this week. “Unfortunately, the Cyclades have remained years behind when it comes to infrastructure and are completely ill-prepared to withstand any intense [weather] phenomenon, much less any that is extreme.”

Michael Hurley, the American singer-songwriter whose unique path through the US folk scene made him an inspiration to generations of alternative musicians, has died aged 83.

A statement from the family announced his “recent sudden passing”, though no cause of death has been given. It added: “The ‘godfather of freak folk’ was for a prolific half-century the purveyor of an eccentric genius and compassionate wit … There is no other. Friends, family and the music community deeply mourn his loss.”

Born in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, in 1941, Hurley was the son of an operetta director and travelled the country with him as a child. This itinerant nature continued into young adulthood, when he started out as a musician – hitchhiking one day he was picked up by folklorist Fred Ramsey, who ended up producing his debut album First Songs which was released on the storied US label Folkways in 1964. The label, now Smithsonian Folkways, has paid tribute, writing: “His wit and wild imagination, steadfast through the decades, are a beacon for singers and songwriters seeking to express the joys and fantastical idiosyncrasies of the world.”

Hurley spent time in New York’s flourishing folk-revival scene, home to the likes of Bob Dylan, but by his own admission didn’t have the drive to climb the music career ladder. “I didn’t enjoy the process of applying for gigs, that determination to penetrate things, all this trouble you had to go through,” he told the Guardian in 2021. “I preferred playing parties. Little gatherings. Drinking with friends, hopping across the river.”

He shuttled between jobs and locales – “moccasin maker, carpenter, apple picker, tipi maker” was part of a long list of work he related in 2021 – but continued to put out music, eventually releasing more than 30 albums of material featuring his own cover illustrations (often populated by cartoon wolves). The shaggy, spirited energy of these genial records, backed by small ensembles and spanning straightforward folk as well as bluegrass and folk-rock, inspired numerous artists across US alternative music, from folk-leaning singer-songwriters such as Lucinda Williams and Bonnie “Prince” Billy to alt-rockers such as Yo La Tengo.

His most recent album is 2021’s The Time of the Foxgloves, which was a return to original songwriting after 12 years away. He had performed concerts in recent days, in Tennessee and North Carolina.

Mike Quinn, founder of No Quarter Records, said that Hurley had “just finished a new album. It was mastered the week before he died, and he was very proud of it (as he should be… it’s outstanding). Hopeful it will see the light of day soon.”

Twelve US copyright cases against OpenAI and Microsoft have been consolidated in New York, despite most of the authors and news outlets suing the companies being opposed to centralisation.

A transfer order made by the US judicial panel on multidistrict litigation on Thursday said that centralisation will “allow a single judge to coordinate discovery, streamline pretrial proceedings, and eliminate inconsistent rulings”.

Cases brought in California by prominent authors including Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michael Chabon, Junot Díaz and the comedian Sarah Silverman will be transferred to New York and joined with cases brought by news outlets, including the New York Times, and other authors including John Grisham, George Saunders, Jonathan Franzen and Jodi Picoult.

Most of the plaintiffs opposed consolidation, arguing that their cases were too different to be combined. However, the transfer order states that the cases “share factual questions arising from allegations that OpenAI and Microsoft used copyrighted works, without consent or compensation, to train their large language models (LLMs) … which underlie defendants’ generative artificial intelligence products” such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Microsoft’s Copilot.

OpenAI had proposed consolidating the cases in northern California. The judicial panel ultimately transferred the cases to the southern district of New York, stating that centralisation would “serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses” and “promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation”.

“Given the novel and complicated nature of the technology, there likely will be overlapping experts” across the cases, read the order. Consolidation will “conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary”.

Tech companies have argued that their use of copyrighted works to train AI is permitted under the doctrine of “fair use”, allowing the unauthorised use of copyrighted works under certain circumstances.

An OpenAI spokesperson said: “We welcome this development and look forward to making it clear in court that our models are trained on publicly available data, grounded in fair use, and supportive of innovation,” reported Reuters.

Steven Lieberman of the communications firm representing the New York Times said that the company looks forward to “continuing to prove in New York that Microsoft and OpenAI committed widespread theft of millions of Times and Daily News works”.

Many of the prominent authors suing OpenAI have also sued Meta for copyright infringement in its training of AI models. A January court filing by Coates, Silverman and Díaz among others alleged that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg approved the company’s use of a notorious “shadow library”, LibGen, which contains more than 7.5m books.

On Thursday, authors gathered outside the Meta offices in London to protest the company’s use of copyrighted books. Placards at the demonstration included “Get the Zuck off our books” and “I’d write a better sign but you’d just steal it”, according to trade magazine the Bookseller.

Thursday also saw Amazon confirm that a new Kindle feature, “Recaps”, offering users refreshers on storylines and character arcs of a book series to review before they pick up the next book, will be AI-generated. “We use technology, including GenAI and Amazon moderators, to create short recaps of books that accurately reflect book content,” Amazon spokesperson Ale Iraheta told TechCrunch.

“By adding a new level of convenience to series reading, the Recaps feature enables readers to dive deeper into complex worlds and characters without losing the joy of discovery, all while ensuring an uninterrupted reading experience across every genre,” wrote the company in a blogpost. However, Reddit users raised concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated summaries.

Earlier this week, it emerged that the UK government is trying to placate peer and Labour backbencher concerns about its copyright proposals – which involve allowing AI companies to train models on copyrighted materials unless rights holders opt out – by pledging to assess the economic impact of the plans.