Kristi Noem, the US homeland security secretary, said that if Kilmar Ábrego García was sent back to the US, the Donald Trump administration “would immediately deport him again”.

Noem repeated White House assertions about Ábrego García, a Salvadorian man who the Trump administration has admitted was mistakenly deported from Maryland last month, in a new interview with CBS.

“[Ábrego García] is not under our control. He is an El Salvador citizen. He is home there in his country. If he were to be brought back to the United States of America, we would immediately deport him again,” Noem said of the 29-year-old who entered the US illegally around 2011 after fleeing gang violence.

Ábrego García was subsequently afforded a federal protection order against deportation to El Salvador. Despite the order, on 15 March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials deported Ábrego García to El Salvador where he was held in the Center for Terrorism Confinement, a controversial mega-prison.

Though the Trump administration admitted that Ábrego García’s deportation was an “administrative error”, it has repeatedly cast him as an MS-13 gang member on television – a claim his wife, a US citizen, and his attorneys staunchly reject. Ábrego García has no criminal record in the US, according to court documents.

Since Ábrego García’s deportation, the Trump administration has refused to bring him back to the US – despite the supreme court unanimously ordering it to “facilitate” his release. Trump officials claim that US courts lack jurisdiction over the matter because Ábrego García is a Salvadorian national and no longer in the US.

Noem asserted the Trump administration’s claims to CBS, saying: “President Trump and his administration has adhered to the court and respects the court and its decision,” adding, “This individual is not under the United States of America’s jurisdiction and he is not one of our citizens. He is home in his home country. And that’s up to that country to decide what to do.”

Last week, a federal judge accused the White House of “bad faith” in the case, arguing that “defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this court’s orders”.

Yet, Noem maintains that the Trump administration spends “hours and hours” building cases against alleged gang members.

Upon being asked about the administration’s claims against individuals who have been deported without due process, the homeland security secretary said: “Obviously, we’re relying on the expertise of our investigators, our teams, double-checking, triple-checking, going through the paperwork, making sure that we have done everything absolutely correctly.”

Noem also accused federal judges who have issued court orders the Trump administration dislikes as “activist judges”.

“I’m sure that these judges will continue to challenge every single thing that this administration does. We have several activist judges across the country,” she said, despite some of the judges who have ruled against Trump’s immigration policies being nominated by Republicans.

Earlier this month, J Harvie Wilkinson, a Ronald Reagan-appointee and conservative appellate judge, called the Trump administration’s claims in Ábrego García’s case “shocking”, saying: “This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”

A federal judge on Wednesday again directed the Trump administration to provide information about its efforts so far, if any, to comply with her order to retrieve Kilmar Ábrego García from an El Salvador prison.

The US district judge Paula Xinis in Maryland temporarily halted her directive for information at the administration’s request last week. But with the seven-day pause expiring at 5pm, she set May deadlines for officials to provide sworn testimony on anything they have done to return Ábrego García to the US.

Ábrego García, 29, has been imprisoned in his native El Salvador for nearly seven weeks, while his mistaken deportation has become a flashpoint for Donald Trump’s immigration policies and his increasing friction with the US courts.

The president acknowledged to ABC News on Tuesday that he could call El Salvador’s president and have Ábrego García sent back. But Trump doubled down on his claims that Ábrego García is a member of the MS-13 gang.

“And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that,” Trump told ABC’s Terry Moran in the Oval Office.

Police in Maryland had identified Ábrego García as an MS-13 gang member in 2019 based on his tattoos, his Chicago Bulls hoodie and the word of a criminal informant. But Ábrego García was never charged. His attorneys say the informant claimed Ábrego García was in an MS-13 chapter in New York, where he has never lived.

The gang identification by local police prompted the Trump administration to expel him in March to an infamous Salvadorian prison. But the deportation violated a US immigration judge’s order in 2019 that protected him from being sent to El Salvador.

Ábrego García had demonstrated to the immigration court that he probably faced persecution by local Salvadorian gangs that terrorized him and his family, court records state. He fled to the US at 16 and lived in Maryland for about 14 years, working construction, getting married and raising three children.

Xinis ordered the Trump administration to return him nearly a month ago, on 4 April. The supreme court ruled on 10 April that the administration must facilitate his return.

But the case only became more heated. Xinis lambasted a government lawyer who could not explain what, if anything, the Trump administration had done. She then ordered officials to provide sworn testimony and other information to document their efforts.

The Trump administration appealed. But a federal appeals court backed Xinis’s order for information in a blistering ruling, saying: “[W]e shall not micromanage the efforts of a fine district judge attempting to implement the Supreme Court’s recent decision.”

The Trump administration resisted, saying the information Xinis sought involved protected state secrets and government deliberations. She in turn scolded government lawyers for ignoring her orders and acting in “bad faith”.

Donald Trump lashed out at an ABC journalist in a tense TV interview to mark 100 days of his second term in office, in which among other confrontations he angrily pushed correspondent Terry Moran to agree with him that a doctored photo was actually real, telling him: “Why don’t you just say yes.”

The 40-minute interview in the Oval Office veered off course when Moran pressed Trump on the case of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Salvadorian man living in Maryland who was deported despite a protective court order. When Moran pointed out that the supreme court had ordered García’s return to the US, and suggested Trump had the power to comply by making a single phone call, the president bristled.

“I could,” Trump said – contradicting weeks of his administration’s insistence that he could not – but added: “I’m not the one making this decision. We have lawyers that don’t want to do this.”

“You’re the president,” Moran said, then after talking over each other, Trump said: “No, no, no, no. I follow the law. You want me to follow the law. If I were the president that just wanted to do anything, I’d probably keep him right where he is.”

“The supreme court says what the law is,” Moran pointed out.

The exchange deteriorated further when Trump insisted García had MS-13 tattoos on his knuckles, while Moran – after several times gently disagreeing and trying to move to a new topic – eventually pointed out that the image Trump was referring to had obviously been digitally altered.

“Why don’t you just say, ‘Yes, he does’ [have a gang tattoo] and, you know, go on to something else,” Trump said.

The US president added: “You do such a disservice … This is why people no longer believe the news, because it’s fake news.”

He then claimed he picked Moran to do the milestone interview “because frankly, I never heard of you”, and added: “Hey, they’re giving you the big break of a lifetime, you know – you’re doing the interview.”

Throughout, Trump stood by his controversial economic and immigration policies, even as Moran pressed him on potential consequences.

On his steep tariffs against China – which reached 145% on some goods – Trump dismissed widespread economic concerns about price increases for American consumers. “Everybody’s gonna be just fine,” the president insisted, despite analyses from Moody’s and other financial institutions projecting thousands of dollars in additional costs for American families.

“It’ll raise prices on everything from electronics to clothing to building houses,” Moran said.

“You don’t know that. You don’t know whether or not China’s gonna eat it,” Trump countered, claiming his tariffs were necessary to address trade imbalances that made the US economy “not sustainable”.

When it came to his proudest achievement in the first 100 days, Trump pointed to his border policies, claiming his administration had reduced illegal crossings by “99.9%”.

But, when questioned on whether he recognizes the legal procedures for deportations, Trump appeared to challenge established due process requirements. Asked if he acknowledged that under US law every person facing deportation is entitled to a hearing, Trump responded: “If people come into our country illegally, there’s a different standard,” contradicting decades of supreme court precedent establishing that constitutional protections extend to all persons on US soil.

Even when Moran cited concerns from the podcaster and Trump supporter Joe Rogan, who warned that deportations without due process might mean “we become monsters while we’re fighting monsters”, the president offered only vague assurances about being “careful” while doing “something that has to be done”.

On Ukraine, Trump described the ongoing conflict as “Biden’s war” while recounting his recent meeting with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, at St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Though he condemned Russia’s missile strikes on civilian areas, he also expressed belief that the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, “wants peace” – a claim at odds with Russia’s continued offensive operations.

When asked directly if he trusted Putin, Trump deflected: “I don’t trust you. I don’t trust a lot of people. I don’t trust you,” before adding that Putin “respects me”.

Trump also declined to clarify whether the US would continue military aid to Ukraine if peace negotiations fail, saying: “I want to leave that as a big, fat secret, because I don’t want to ruin a negotiation.”

When challenged about his use of presidential powers – including revoking security clearances and targeting law firms with regulatory threats – Trump defended his actions by claiming he had been “persecuted like no other president”.

And as the interview wrapped, Moran asked Trump directly about concerns he was becoming authoritarian, to which the president responded: “I would hate them to think that. I’m doing one thing: I’m making America great again.”

The US economy shrank in the first three months of the year, according to official data, triggering fears of an American recession and a global economic slowdown.

Donald Trump, who returned to the White House promising to “make America great again”, sought to blame Joe Biden for the figure.

However, economists said it was largely driven by an unprecedented surge in imports, as consumers and companies braced for the president to impose his controversial wave of tariffs.

“This is Biden’s Stock Market, not Trump’s,” Trump wrote on social media, adding that the contraction “has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARIFFS, only that he left us with bad numbers, but when the boom begins, it will be like no other. BE PATIENT!!!”

Democrats argued the figures were a damning verdict on the new administration’s handling of the economy. Senator Jeff Merkley said: “Trump has been in office for only 100 days, and costs, chaos and corruption are already on the rise. The economy is slowing, prices are going up, and middle-class families are feeling the pinch.”

Gross domestic product (GDP), a key measure of the US economy, contracted by 0.3% in the first quarter of the year, down from growth of 2.4% in the last quarter of 2024. The contraction – the first since the start of 2022 – puts the US on the brink of a technical recession, defined by two quarters of negative growth.

The drop in activity comes amid a huge fall in consumer sentiment, which in April dropped 32% to its lowest level since the 1990 recession.

US stocks dropped on Wednesday morning. By the end of the day, the S&P 500 and Dow Jones had eked out small gains while the Nasdaq had dropped marginally.

On the eve of Wednesday’s GDP report, Trump claimed at a rally in Michigan that he had built “the greatest economy in the history of our country” during his first presidency, which ended in 2021, adding: “We did great, and we’re doing better now.”

Responding promptly to data suggesting otherwise on Wednesday, Trump tried to argue his predecessor was responsible.

“I didn’t take over until January 20th,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform. “Tariffs will soon start kicking in, and companies are starting to move into the USA in record numbers. Our Country will boom, but we have to get rid of the Biden ‘Overhang.’”

Trump spent much of the first quarter threatening, and fleetingly implementing, sweeping tariffs on Canada and Mexico, and targeting China with higher duties on its exports.

Days into the second quarter, which was not covered by today’s GDP reading, he ordered even higher tariffs on goods from much of the world, before pulling back the tariffs on all countries but China. As it stands, Trump is charging a 10% universal tariff on imported goods from much of the world, along with a 145% tariff on imports from China.

Seemingly responding to deep fluctuations in the US stock market, Trump has shelved a wave of so-called “reciprocal tariffs” of up to 49% on specific countries, which he halted for 90 days.

He offered some relief to US automakers, who were facing a 25% tariff on all auto imports on Tuesday, signing an executive order that would allow them to receive a credit if they import auto parts but assemble the cars in the US.

Last week, stocks rallied on news that Trump said his tariffs of at least 145% against China – which already has exemptions for some electronics – will be reduced “substantially” as the White House negotiates a deal with Beijing, though he said that the tariff would not be eliminated completely. China has placed a 125% retaliatory tariff on American goods.

Some economists are pointing out that the decline in GDP over the last few months is largely due to the oversized amount of imports that American businesses purchased in anticipation of Trump’s tariffs. When calculating GDP, imports are subtracted to account for the amount of consumption that is not from domestic production.

While the International Monetary Fund has downgraded its forecasts for US growth this year because of tariffs, some economists said the plunge in imports the border taxes will cause from April could mean GDP rebounds in the second quarter, sparing Trump a recession for now.

Elon Musk also played a role in the first quarter contraction. A 5.1% fall in federal spending also complicated the data, as the billionaire presidential adviser’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) made huge cuts to the executive branch. And consumption slowed from 4% to 1.8%, amid severe weather and a drop in non-profit spending after election donations stopped.

New data released on Wednesday highlighted how new tariffs appear to be significantly slowing trade. In China, factory activity slowed in April, with Beijing blaming “sharp changes” in the global economy as US tariffs pounded exports. Exports from the Chinese e-commerce companies Temu and Shein to the US have plunged 65%, while exports to the EU rose by 28%. Meanwhile, the British sports carmaker Aston Martin said that it would limit exports to the US in the midst of Trump’s tariffs.

Also on Wednesday, the payroll firm ADP said that payrolls in the private sector went up by just 62,000 in April, the smallest gain since July – an ominous sign ahead of Friday’s release of official employment data for April, often used by economists to gauge the health of the labor market.

While the White House has said in recent weeks that Trump’s tariffs are meant to be a negotiating tactic, leaders around the world have said they will retaliate if Trump continues to try to bully them into negotiations.

“If one chooses to remain silent, compromise and cower, it will only make the bully want to push his luck more,” said the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, on Monday.

Trump has been sensitive to criticism of his tariffs and the impact they are having on the economy. At one point over the last month, Trump threatened to remove Jerome Powell from his role as chair of the US Federal Reserve after Powell said that Trump’s tariffs could lead to permanent price hikes.

After markets fell, Trump eventually backed down, telling reporters that he had “no intention” of firing Powell.

Exports to the US from Chinese online shops such as Temu and Shein have plunged in the face of Donald Trump’s trade war, as shipping from China to the EU has increased.

Official Chinese data showed its total e-commerce shipping to the US dropped 65% by volume in the first three months of the year, but rose by 28% in Europe.

The sharp fall comes amid reports that the fast-fashion discount platform Shein is considering a restructuring in the US to circumnavigate tariffs.

According to the Financial Times, one workaround would be for Shein to move production from China to countries not hit by US tariffs. Such a move could put its upcoming London stock exchange listing on hold.

The figures predate Trump’s April announcement that he was scrapping the tariff exemption on parcel imports worth up to $800 (£598) from 2 May. But they highlight how China’s e-commerce platforms have diverted marketing efforts to Europe in anticipation of US tariffs to come.

From May, US consumers may experience something akin to the Brexit effect that made many low-value imports prohibitively expensive for UK online shoppers, because of the overnight change in trading rules with the EU.

Punishing US tariffs of 145% on Chinese goods have already come into force, sending prices rocketing on both Temu and Shein.

Temu is passing on nearly all its import taxes to the consumer, with the average price of 100 products in two categories – toys and games, and health and beauty – jumping by more than 40% in the last two weeks, according to analysis by Bloomberg.

CNBC reported that a summer dress listed on Temu for $18.47 (£13.83) will cost $44.68 after $26.21 in import charges are added to the bill – a 142% surcharge.

Meanwhile, the cost of a child’s swimsuit almost triples from $12.44 to $31.12 when the $18.68 import charge is taken into account. A handheld vacuum cleaner listed at $16.93 now costs $40.11 when factoring in the additional fee.

On Tuesday, the Chinese government sent a defiant video message to Trump, warning it would not “kneel down” in the face of the punitive tariffs.

“Bowing to a bully is like drinking poison to quench thirst,” it said in the English-language statement.

The tariffs are intended to revive US manufacturing, but look set to hit businesses and consumers hard. Walmart is among the US companies trying to hold on to market share by telling its Chinese suppliers it will shoulder the import taxes, according to the South China Morning Post.

Even the US-based Amazon, which hosts many Chinese third-party sellers, has been scathed by rumours of how it planned to respond to the tariffs. After a report said it would break down prices for consumers to show the tariff cost, the company was called “hostile and political” by a White House spokesperson, before Trump called Jeff Bezos personally.

Amid fears that such a move could directly illustrate the impact of the trade war on consumers’ pockets, Trump said: “Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly. Good guy.”

Amazon said it had “considered the idea” of listing import charges but that the plan had been misreported, as it was never approved.

Temu and Shein were approached for comment.

South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, is setting up an inquiry into whether past ANC governments interfered with the investigation and prosecution of apartheid-era crimes, amid criticism from the families of victims.

A group of 25 relatives and survivors of apartheid-era deaths and violence sued the government in January, claiming that interference from “the highest levels of government” blocked investigations into cases referred to the National Prosecuting Authority by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

On Wednesday, the presidency said in a statement: “Allegations of improper influence in delaying or hindering the investigation and prosecution of apartheid-era crimes have persisted from previous administrations.

“Through this commission, President Ramaphosa is determined that the true facts be established and the matter brought to finality … President Ramaphosa appreciates the anguish and frustration of the families of victims, who have fought for so many years for justice.”

The families suing the government include those of four men known as the Cradock Four, who were beaten, strangled with telephone wire, stabbed and shot to death in one of the most notorious killings of South Africa’s apartheid era.

In 1999, the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) denied six security officers amnesty for their role in the killings of Fort Calata, Sparrow Mkonto, Matthew Goniwe and Sicelo Mhlauli. The officers were never prosecuted and are all now dead.

The families criticised Ramaphosa’s decision that an inquiry should assess their claims for “constitutional damages” – their high court case asked for 167m rand (£7.3m) to fund further investigations and litigation, as well as memorials and public education – and said that their rights were violated.

They said in a statement that an inquiry would have no authority over these areas and would only be able to offer advice. “This fundamental shortcoming was pointed out to the president’s legal team, as well as the fact that it will likely result in the issues remaining unresolved for years. This will perpetuate the pain and trauma that the families and survivors have experienced for many years.”

South Africa’s governments have been led by the African National Congress party of Nelson Mandela since the end of apartheid over 30 years ago.

In March, Thabo Mbeki, who was president from 1999 to 2008, and the former justice minister Brigitte Mabandla applied to intervene in the families’ high court case. Mbeki has repeatedly denied interfering in decisions to prosecute apartheid-era cases.

• Ukraine and the US said they were ready to sign a minerals deal, amid reports that a last-minute obstacle injected uncertainty into the timing. “Our side is ready to sign. The Ukrainians decided last night to make some last-minute changes,” US treasury secretary Scott Bessent told reporters. “We’re sure that they will reconsider that and we are ready, if they are.”

• Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, is on her way to the US to sign the minerals deal, according to a senior source in the Ukrainian presidency. Ukraine’s prime minister, Denis Shmyhal, said on Wednesday that the reworked deal would be signed within the next 24 hours and would have to be ratified by the Ukrainian parliament.

• But later reports claimed the US was pushing Ukraine to sign additional documents, but that Kyiv felt they were not ready yet. The Trump administration urged Ukraine to sign all three documents connected to the deal, Politico reported. A source told the outlet: “All three documents need to be signed today, but the Ukrainians are trying to reopen terms which have already been agreed upon as part of the package — this will be up to the Ukrainians, as the US is ready to sign. The US told Svyrydenko not to travel to Washington on Wednesday unless the agreements were finalised, according to the outlet.

• Vladimir Putin said some small groups of Ukrainian soldiers were still holed up in basements and hideouts in Russia’s western Kursk region. Speaking at an event in Moscow on Wednesday, the Russian leader said radio intercepts suggested that the few Ukrainians left behind were asking commanders to urgently evacuate them to safety.

• The EU is preparing a “plan B” on how to keep economic sanctions against Russia should the US abandon Ukraine peace talks and seek rapprochement with Moscow, according to the bloc’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas. “We see signs that they are contemplating whether they should leave Ukraine and not try to get a deal with the Russians because it’s hard,” Kallas told the Financial Times.

• Russia and North Korea have begun construction of a road bridge between the two countries as part of an effort to strengthen their strategic partnership, Russia’s prime minister, Mikhail Mishustin, said. It comes after South Korean lawmakers said about 600 North Korean troops have been killed fighting for Russia against Ukraine.

• Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, held a call on Wednesday during which the Ukrainian leader congratulated Carney on his victory in the Canadian federal elections on Monday. Zelenskyy, in a post on X, said he and Carney discussed steps that could “bring us closer to a full, unconditional ceasefire and a dignified peace.”

• The Kremlin claimed that president Vladimir Putin was open to peace despite its continuing aggression on Ukraine, but stressed that the conflict is so complicated that the rapid progress that Washington wants is difficult to achieve, Reuters reported. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov insisted that Putin “remains open to political and diplomatic methods of resolving this conflict” started by Russia. But news agency TASS quoted Peskov as saying that the root causes of the war were too complex to be resolved in one day. After the Kremlin’s remark, Ukrainian foreign minister Andrii Sybiha said Kyiv was ready for peace talks in any format if Moscow signed up to an unconditional ceasefire, Reuters noted.

• Ukraine and the US said they were ready to sign a minerals deal, amid reports that a last-minute obstacle injected uncertainty into the timing. “Our side is ready to sign. The Ukrainians decided last night to make some last-minute changes,” US treasury secretary Scott Bessent told reporters. “We’re sure that they will reconsider that and we are ready, if they are.”

• Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, is on her way to the US to sign the minerals deal, according to a senior source in the Ukrainian presidency. Ukraine’s prime minister, Denis Shmyhal, said on Wednesday that the reworked deal would be signed within the next 24 hours and would have to be ratified by the Ukrainian parliament.

• But later reports claimed the US was pushing Ukraine to sign additional documents, but that Kyiv felt they were not ready yet. The Trump administration urged Ukraine to sign all three documents connected to the deal, Politico reported. A source told the outlet: “All three documents need to be signed today, but the Ukrainians are trying to reopen terms which have already been agreed upon as part of the package — this will be up to the Ukrainians, as the US is ready to sign. The US told Svyrydenko not to travel to Washington on Wednesday unless the agreements were finalised, according to the outlet.

• Vladimir Putin said some small groups of Ukrainian soldiers were still holed up in basements and hideouts in Russia’s western Kursk region. Speaking at an event in Moscow on Wednesday, the Russian leader said radio intercepts suggested that the few Ukrainians left behind were asking commanders to urgently evacuate them to safety.

• The EU is preparing a “plan B” on how to keep economic sanctions against Russia should the US abandon Ukraine peace talks and seek rapprochement with Moscow, according to the bloc’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas. “We see signs that they are contemplating whether they should leave Ukraine and not try to get a deal with the Russians because it’s hard,” Kallas told the Financial Times.

• Russia and North Korea have begun construction of a road bridge between the two countries as part of an effort to strengthen their strategic partnership, Russia’s prime minister, Mikhail Mishustin, said. It comes after South Korean lawmakers said about 600 North Korean troops have been killed fighting for Russia against Ukraine.

• Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, held a call on Wednesday during which the Ukrainian leader congratulated Carney on his victory in the Canadian federal elections on Monday. Zelenskyy, in a post on X, said he and Carney discussed steps that could “bring us closer to a full, unconditional ceasefire and a dignified peace.”

• The Kremlin claimed that president Vladimir Putin was open to peace despite its continuing aggression on Ukraine, but stressed that the conflict is so complicated that the rapid progress that Washington wants is difficult to achieve, Reuters reported. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov insisted that Putin “remains open to political and diplomatic methods of resolving this conflict” started by Russia. But news agency TASS quoted Peskov as saying that the root causes of the war were too complex to be resolved in one day. After the Kremlin’s remark, Ukrainian foreign minister Andrii Sybiha said Kyiv was ready for peace talks in any format if Moscow signed up to an unconditional ceasefire, Reuters noted.

Israel’s urgent security needs override its obligations to provide aid to Palestinians in Gaza, a US state department lawyer has told the international court of justice (ICJ).

Joshua Simmons spoke as the United Nations’ top court hears a case on Israel’s ban on cooperation with Unwra, the UN’s main agency for Palestinians.

He said that Israel had no duty under the Geneva convention to cooperate specifically with Unrwa, due to its concerns about the organisation’s links to Hamas – an allegation that has been fiercely contested.

Simmons addressed the ICJ in The Hague on the third day of the hearing and the 60th day of Israel’s complete ban on any aid, food or water entering Gaza. The ban applies to all agencies, but in October the Knesset voted to end all cooperation with Unrwa specifically, bringing its operations to a halt.

Last week, Donald Trump said he had personally urged Benjamin Netanyahu to allow aid into Gaza, but Israel has said the ban would continue until all hostages held by Hamas are released. Trump said he told Israel’s prime minister: “We have got to be good to Gaza.”

In December, the UN general assembly asked the ICJ to give an advisory opinion on Israel’s obligations as an occupying power to provide humanitarian aid, and whether the ban on cooperation and contact with Unrwa breaches its privileges and immunities as a UN body.

Simmons insisted in his alloted half-hour presentation that the US did want to see aid enter Gaza, but denied there was any unqualified legal obligation for Israel to allow this, either as the occupying power or as a UN member state.

He argued that an “expansive” ruling by the ICJ setting out Israel’s obligations and any remedies would be damaging to the credibility of international law.

“Novel legal interpretations will not bring an end to the ongoing conflict. They will not bring the hostages home. They will not create a better tomorrow for Israelis, Palestinians and the region,” he said.

“To be clear, the United States supports the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza, with the safeguards to ensure it is not looted or misused by terrorist groups. We encourage the international community to focus on advancing a ceasefire and on fresh thinking for a better future for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

He said the only issues to be addressed were whether Israel was obliged under the law of occupation to cooperate with a third party such as Unrwa to provide aid, and whether Israel had been directed to supply aid by the UN security council.

Arguing that the court had heard little about Israel’s legitimate security fears regarding Unwra, he added: “You have heard concerns about Israel’s decision to cease engagement with Unrwa. You have heard little, however, about the serious, credible concerns about Hamas misusing Unrwa facilities and humanitarian assistance. You have also heard little of Israel’s security needs after the terrorist attacks on 7 October, 2023. These security needs persist today.”

He said the evidence provided ample grounds for Israel to be concerned, and argued that nothing in the Geneva convention placed unqualified obligations on an occupying power to provide aid.

“An occupying power has obligations related to maintaining public order and safety and protecting the civilian population. It also has the right, while an occupier, to pursue its military objectives and govern enemy territory,” he said. “The occupying power does not lose its right to ensure its own security.”

He added that Israel has no obligation to permit Unrwa specifically to provide humanitarian assistance. “Unrwa is not the only option,” he said. “In sum, there is no legal requirement that an occupying power permit a specific third state or international organisation to conduct activities in occupied territory that would compromise its security interests.”

He also questioned the right of the UN general assembly – representing all member states, as opposed to the 15-strong UN security council – to place any obligation on Israel to cooperate with Unrwa.

“The general assembly does not have the power to impose a perpetual obligation to cooperate with Unrwa,” he said. “There should be no finding either as to compliance with any obligations identified in this proceeding, or as to the legal consequences of any alleged breach.”

Israel, in its written submission to the court, argued that the ICJ does not have the necessary investigative tools to determine the competing claims, and that there is no full obligation on Israel to provide aid.

It claimed that the case “is part of an abusive and systematic campaign that regrettably weaponises international law, and international legal institutions, with the aim of depriving Israel of fundamental rights accorded to all sovereign states, including the right to defend itself.”

It added: “The obligations on a state under humanitarian international law are not unqualified and include the obligation of a state in acting to defend its existence, its territory and its people. Israel is fully committed to complying with international law, but that law is not a suicide pact.”

Israel submitted written but not oral evidence to the court by a 28 February deadline, before the total ban came into effect.

The ICJ’s newly elected president, Yuji Iwasawa, a Japanese judge and professor of international law, is sitting with 12 other judges in the five-day proceedings.

A retired restaurant owner alleged to have been the ringleader of an armed robbery of American reality TV star Kim Kardashian in Paris, has told a court he was in part driven by a taste for easy money.

Aomar Aït Khedache, 68, known as “Old Omar”, has admitted to police that he took part in the robbery in which Kardashian was tied up and held hostage at gunpoint in her Paris hotel bedroom during Paris fashion week in 2016. But he has denied the prosecution’s accusation that he was the organiser or ringleader of the jewel heist in the early hours of 3 October 2016, which was the biggest robbery of an individual in France in 20 years.

The robbers, dressed as police officers, escaped with up to an estimated $10m (£7.5m) in jewellery, including a 18.88-carat diamond engagement ring given to Kardashian by her then husband, the rapper Kanye West, estimated to be worth $4m.

Aït Khedache is part of a group five men aged over 60 who allegedly went to Kardashian’s Paris hotel by bike or on foot for the hold-up, and who French media have nicknamed “the grandpa robbers”. Like several other accused men, he has serious health problems. He is deaf and cannot speak, so he read the court’s questions on a typed transcript, writing his answers with a pen and paper, projected on to a screen.

The court heard that Aït Khedache, who ran restaurants in France and Spain, had served several prison sentences for robbery from the 1970s.

The lead judge, referring to Aït Khedache’s past convictions, asked him why he turned to crime. He replied that he did not know, saying it was largely due to keeping bad company. Asked by the judge whether he was driven by a taste for easy money, Aït Khedache wrote: “Not particularly, but that too.”

The court heard that at the time of the jewel heist, Aït Khedache was already a wanted man, living under a stolen identity in order to escape prison for a drug-trafficking conviction from 2010.

A total of 10 people, aged from 35 to 78, are on trial over their alleged part in the Kardashian robbery. Eight deny involvement.

One of the accused is Aït Khedache’s eldest son, Harminy, who is alleged to have been a getaway driver. Harminy Aït Khedache, who had previously worked as an Uber driver, has denied involvement in the robbery. He told police he had been asked by his father to collect him one night in Paris, something he often did, and that he knew nothing of the heist.

The court heard that Aomar Aït Khedache was born in Algeria and arrived in France as a young child. He and his nine siblings were “paralysed by fear” of their violent father.

The older Aït Khedache was convicted for robbery for the first time 1977, and while he was in prison for 10 months, his pregnant wife died in a fire. Aït Khedache had a psychiatric breakdown over her death and received electric shock therapy, which he said caused the start of his hearing problems. Later he met a woman with a young baby, Harminy. He married her, adopted Harminy, and had another son, Haris.

Harminy Aït Khedache, in his early 40s, broke down in tears in court on Tuesday. He said he had found out from a relative when he was aged six that Aomar wasn’t his biological father but had been scared of asking his parents for details for fear of upsetting them. He said he considered Aomar his father and had always wanted to please him. He told the judge that, in general: “I wanted to show that I’m devoted to him.”

Haris Aït-Khedache, 39, a bus driver, was called as a character witness for his father. He said of his father’s role in the robbery: “He made a mistake. He found himself in a situation where he didn’t have the choice, I think.” He said his father had said that the victims “must have been traumatised” and that he “regrets the repercussions of this”.

The trial continues.

A Turkish court has handed a Swedish journalist an 11-month suspended sentence for insulting the president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, but he remains behind bars awaiting trial on a second more serious charge.

Joakim Medin, who works for the Swedish newspaper Dagens ETC, was detained at Istanbul airport on 27 March when he flew in to cover the mass protests gripping Turkey.

He was arrested on two separate charges: insulting the president and belonging to a terror organisation, and jailed a day later at Silivri prison in Istanbul.

After handing Medin the suspended sentence, the judge ordered his release, according to the correspondent and MLSA, the Turkish rights group defending him.

But because of the second charge he is facing – for which a trial date has not yet been set – Medin will remain behind bars.

Prosecutors say Medin attended a protest in Stockholm in January 2023 where protesters strung up an effigy of Erdoğan. That effigy reappeared months later, holding an LGBTQ flag on a Kurdish activists’ float at Stockholm’s Pride parade.

According to the indictment, which Medin said he had not seen, the offending images were used to illustrate several of his articles that he had posted online.

Addressing the court via video link from Silivri prison, Medin said he had not been in Sweden at the time of January rally.

Although he posted links to articles he had written about Sweden’s Nato accession – which was initially blocked by Turkey – he said he was not responsible for the photo selection.

“I was not at this event, I was in Germany for work. I didn’t know about plans for his event, and I didn’t share any photo or video about it on social media,” Medin told the court via video link.

“I did not insult the president. I was assigned to write the article. The photo was selected by editors, I was just doing my job,” he said, asking to be released so he could return to his wife, who is seven months pregnant with their first child.

His lawyer, Veysel Ok, urged the court to acquit him.

“Medin has no motivation to knowingly and willingly insult the president. The Nato process was vital for Sweden because a Russian attack was on the agenda; my client reported on this process,” Ok told the court.

“He has nothing to do with the photos; he just shared the news. I demand my client’s acquittal,” the lawyer added.

Many people, from teenagers to journalists and even a former Miss Turkey, have been charged with insulting the president, an offence often used to muffle dissent.

Because of the second charge against him, Medin will remain in prison until a trial date is set.

“It’s undemocratic he was convicted in this first case and we deeply regret that the decision to free him isn’t enough to ensure his release today because of the second case,” said Erol Önderoğlu from Reporters Without Borders.

“We urge the Turkish authorities to release the journalist, to quickly set a date for the second trial and drop the charges,” he said.

The charge of belonging to a terror organisation is much more serious. If convicted, Medin could face up to nine years in prison. He denies the charges.

King Charles has reflected on his experience with cancer, saying it brought into “sharp focus the very best of humanity”, while acknowledging that each new case is “a daunting and at times frightening experience” for those receiving a diagnosis and for their loved ones.

In a personal written message, released to coincide with a Buckingham Palace reception celebrating organisations that help people with the disease, he described himself as one of the “statistics” among the 390,000 who “sadly” receive a cancer diagnosis in the UK each year.

He said it “can also be an experience that brings into sharp focus the very best of humanity”. He told representatives of cancer charities: “You have my whole family’s deepest admiration.”

Charles, 76, who is still undergoing treatment more than a year after his diagnosis, said his cancer journey had given him “an even deeper appreciation of the extraordinary work” of the charities. He added that it had reinforced how “the darkest moments of illness can be illuminated by the greatest compassion”.

He hailed the late Dame Deborah James as an inspiration, quoting her final message and encouraging everyone to follow her example: “Find a life worth enjoying; take risks; love deeply; have no regrets; and always, always have rebellious hope.”

James died in June 2022 at the age of 40, five years after she was diagnosed with bowel cancer. Her Bowelbabe fund has raised more than £16m since its launch.

His message was printed in a booklet given to guests at the palace’s evening reception, including James’s parents Heather and Alistair.

A royal source said there was no update on the king’s condition or treatment, but that it continued in a “very positive direction”, reflected in his “very full” national and international diary. They described the words and subject of the message as “deeply personal” for the king.

“Our flag will never be red!” rightwing Brazilians took to chanting during the heyday of the left-bashing former president Jair Bolsonaro.

But their football shirts soon might be, amid incendiary reports that the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF) is considering introducing a crimson jersey for the national team ahead of the 2026 World Cup.

Those claims have sparked predictable outrage among hardcore rightwingers who consider red the anti-patriotic colour of Brazil’s leftwing president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, his Workers’ party (PT) and the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST).

“Our team’s shirt will never be red – and neither will our country!” thundered Romeu Zema, a conservative governor hoping to claim the mantle of Bolsonaro, who faces jail for allegedly masterminding a failed rightwing coup after losing the 2022 election. In a social media video, Zema hurled a mock-up of the red shirt on to the ground in theatrical disgust.

Bolsonaro’s politician son, Flávio Bolsonaro, said the supposed plans needed “vehemently repudiating”, insisting: “Our flag isn’t red – and it never will be.”

But Bolsonaristas are not the only ones up in arms about the reported attempt to swap Brazil’s blue away shirt – in use since the country won the first of its five World Cup, in 1958 – for a red one.

Football purists of all political stripes have clobbered the “leaked” plans since they surfaced on Monday in a viral report by the football website Footy Headlines.

The idea has proved so controversial that the CBF was forced to deny it on Tuesday insisting online images of the red jersey were not official and that it remained committed to yellow and blue shirts. The kit for next year’s World Cup had yet to be designed in partnership with Brazil’s official kit supplier Nike, the CBF claimed.

Walter Casagrande, a Lula-voting former player and commentator who is associated with Brazil’s left and pro-democracy movement, called the scheme “idiocy”.

Sports writer Paulo Vinícius Coelho said the move showed “a complete lack of sense” and was almost certainly commercially driven.

Galvão Bueno, Brazil’s most famous TV commentator, called the idea “a crime” and a “gigantic insult” to the glorious history of a national team which has won more World Cups than any other country.

Some leftwing Brazilians were more receptive to the idea of a crimson kit. Over the past decade the country’s iconic yellow jersey has become a symbol of the far right and is regularly worn at pro-Bolsonaro rallies. Many progressives now refuse to wear it.

In a pro-red shirt manifesto, columnist Milly Lacombe declared that she would wear the jersey with pride and rejected the outbreak of “collective hysteria” over the mooted shirt. “Red is a strong colour that stands for revolution, change, transformation, blood, struggle, life, death, rebirth,” she wrote.

Juca Kfouri, a left-leaning football writer who is among those who shun the yellow shirt, also rejected the “bad taste” change, arguing that a red shirt would further fuel the toxic politics swirling around the national team’s attire and divide supporters.

“Red doesn’t have anything to do with Brazil,” Kfouri said, although he noted that Brazil took its name from a redwood tree called pau-brasil (brazilwood in English) and, in the early 19th century, had red in its first flag.

Kfouri suspected the red shirt story was “a trial balloon” devised to see how the money-making ruse went down with fans. “Just like politicians sometimes leak a policy, wait to see how the social networks react and, depending on that reaction, give up or move ahead,” he said.

For the CBF, the hoo-ha was also a helpful diversion as it sought to shift attention away from its apparent failure to recruit the Real Madrid manager, Carlo Ancelotti, as Brazil’s next manager and a compromising exposé in a Brazilian magazine. “It distracts from the things that really matter,” Kfouri said.