Mediaboss Marketing

There is no shortage of candidates to host the trans-Saharan gas pipeline. The project, valued at 13 billion euros, is succulent. It could supply around 30 billion cubic metres of gas per year to Europe, according to initial estimates. This is almost double the amount of gas imported from Russia by EU members in 2021. Its implementation would provide a solid alternative to Russian gas, whose dependence has undermined the ability of continental allies to act in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine.

The plan was first proposed just over four decades ago. In 2009 some agreements were signed between countries, but did not come to fruition. This time, with Europe in the midst of an unprecedented energy crisis, the project to build the trans-Saharan gas pipeline makes sense again. This explains why Nigeria, the country with the largest energy reserves in Africa and the main promoter of the plan, has restarted contacts to put the pipeline into operation as soon as possible, in record time. Brussels is calling for cruising speed in order to have everything ready within two years.

The route has yet to be mapped out. According to experts, there are two viable proposals on the table. The first is from Algeria and the second from Morocco. Nigeria has already signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the two countries, which are locked in a perpetual standoff over the Western Sahara dispute and rivals for hegemony in the Maghreb. Bilateral relations have been formally severed since August 2021. Therefore, beyond the geographical conditions, it is incompatible that the two initiatives could coexist or converge at any point. Only one can remain.

Algiers has an advantage. The length of the infrastructure is shorter than that proposed by Rabat, and it would only need to pass through Niger, the backbone of the tripartite MoU signed in July. For its part, the Moroccan proposal includes a dozen countries, those of the Gulf of Guinea plus Mauritania, Senegal and Gambia, among others. Too many actors, most of them quite unstable. It is true that the jihadist insurgency has been shaking Niger's foundations for years, but the crisis, though acute, is more or less manageable. No firm decision has yet been taken.

However, Libya has, against all odds, entered the running to host the trans-Saharan gas pipeline. The Government of National Unity (GNU) revealed in September that it had formally submitted its bid to Nigeria during the African Petroleum Producers Organisation (APPO) ministerial summit. This was announced at a press conference by the Libyan oil minister, Mohamed Aoun, whose ministry had months earlier launched "technical and economic studies on the feasibility of the project", according to the spokesman for the acting government, Mohamed Hammouda.

The starting conditions, at least from a geographical perspective, would be more profitable than those envisaged in the Algerian proposal. The distance would be shortened by approximately 1,000 kilometres and it would only be necessary to cross Chad, a country also threatened by jihadism and the political crisis reopened after Mahamat Dby's coup d'tat. Less distance translates into lower costs and shorter construction times. And that, in turn, means lower gas prices. These characteristics make the Libyan proposal feasible.

But there are major hurdles to overcome on this route. First, the political instability that has plagued the country since the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Libya has been a wasteland ever since. The current institutional division and the duplicity of administrations, one in the west based in Tripoli and the other in the east based in Tobruk, undermine any chance of development. The rift between Abdul Hamid Dbeib's Government of National Unity (GNU) and Fathi Bashagha's Government of National Stability (GSN), allied with Parliamentary Speaker Aguila Saleh and General Khalifa Haftar, is complete.

The presence of Russian mercenaries from the Wagner Group in Libya also threatens Tripoli's plans. The Kremlin's PMC controls much of the oil installations and prevents the Dbeib government from accessing the oil fields. They are acting on behalf of General Khalifa Haftar's Libyan National Army, their host on Libyan soil. Analyst Robert Uniacke writes in Foreign Policy that their presence 'positions the Kremlin as a spoiler in these future calculations, or at least as a card to play in the negotiations'.

It is by no means out of the question that Russia will use its destabilisation capacity to sabotage the trans-Saharan gas pipeline in the event that Libya succeeds in getting its project approved. All the more so given that its implementation would provide a clear alternative to Russian gas, which is still flowing to Europe in dribs and drabs. This factor is compounded by the presence of Daesh-affiliated militants in the far south of Libya, an area that the infrastructure should also pass through. Attacks against the security forces are a regular occurrence there, although normality is trying to make inroads.

With all the facts on the table, the undertaking seems complicated. But Tripoli is not alone in this persuasion campaign. According to the pan-Arab daily Al Arab, Ankara is on its side. Recep Tayyip Erdoan's circle could be putting pressure on Abuja to fulfil the plans of Dbeib's Government of National Unity (GNU). The Turkish business sector could benefit from a project that would turn the vast Maghreb country into the energy nexus between Africa and Europe. Big words.

Algeria is well advanced in the negotiations and is unlikely to give in. Even less so in this area, even if there are fluid relations between the Algerian leadership and Dbeib's Government of National Unity. Algeria backed Fayez al-Sarraj's Government of National Accord (GNA) and before that, the Islamists. It also has good relations with Erdoan's Turkey, but here there are insurmountable cross-interests.

The alliance between Ankara and Tripoli was strengthened after Monday's diplomatic visit, which resulted in the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for hydrocarbon exploration, implying a consolidation of support for the interim government of Dbeib, but in reality "Turkey does not agree with the time that the acting prime minister has been in power", explains Jalel Harchaoui, a Libya specialist and associate member of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). Turkey is thus playing both sides of the fence, maintaining contacts with both factions so as not to irritate its internal and external partners.

Harchaoui stresses that Turkey "acts according to Erdoan's needs". The president needs political capital to be re-elected in the next elections, and the polls are not favourable for the Islamist leader. This type of agreement "improves his image", the analyst told Atalayar, because, among other things, "Libya is really useful for Turkey, especially from a nationalist point of view", he added.

The MoU signed by the parties on Monday put Turkish businessmen in the front line to take advantage of Libya's vast energy resources, both on land and sea. "At the moment, nothing has been done to favour Turkish companies," Harchaoui says. In the hypothetical future, if the institutional rift is resolved and the Dbeib government takes back control of the National Oil Company (NOC), this is likely to be the case. If the Libyan plan for the trans-Saharan pipeline is approved, Ankara stands to gain because, among other things, 'Dbeib cannot refuse any deal. He is not in a position to say no because of his position of vulnerability", the analyst argues.

See the original post here:
Is Turkey behind Libya's bid to host the trans-Saharan gas pipeline? - Atalayar

The Government of National Unity's Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah called on the High National Elections Commission (HNEC) and its Head Emad Al-Sayeh to update the voters' registry to register those who didn't have the chance to register before and those who turned legal by age to vote.

Dbeibah addressed a letter to Al-Sayeh, asking him to continue the process of checking the candidates registration for the parliamentary and presidential elections before announcing the electoral lists, and to inform the local public opinion of developments in this regard, as well as to consider the proposed election law prepared by the "Committee for the Return of the Trust to the People".

Dbeibah also asked Al-Sayeh that he needed to start the logistical and organizational preparations according to the electoral laws and the postponement of all preparations that are expected to change, in addition to planning for an electoral simulation day with the Ministries of Interior and Education and the rest of the concerned sectors as per a date set by the HNEC. He also asked for a cooperating with the National Libyan Channel and to provide the opportunity for candidates to present their vision and electoral program.

Dbiebah said that his statement to the HNEC came as a motivation for all official and popular parties to push for the speedy holding of the elections and the transition in Libya from the transitional phase to the permanent one based on electoral legitimacy.

View original post here:
Dbeibah urges HNEC to update voters' registry and candidates' information - The Libya Observer

The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees gun rights for millions of Americans and has contributed to the United States becoming the most heavily armed population in the world.

However, every state interprets the "right to bear arms" and a "well-regulated militia" differently. More recently, Congress passed the most significant gun control bill in 30 years that incentivizes states to enforce more red flag laws and expands background checks for gun owners between 18-21-years-old. The legislation directly results from the Uvalde shooting in Texas that left dozens of children dead.

Although The Supreme Court has thrown out state gun regulations that they view as unconstitutional, like in the recent case of New York, where the Court ruled 6-3 against a law that made it difficult to obtain a concealed carry handgun license. Nevertheless, the Second Amendment is at the center of the gun control debate and is blamed by Democratic politicians for the rise of mass shootings.

The original text of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The text has been interpreted as the right for individuals to buy and protect themselves with guns. In 2008, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that individuals may use this right for self-defense and other lawful purposes.

The United States has the most heavily armed citizenry in the world. (iStock)

HOUSE PASSES SWEEPING GUN CONTROL BILL AMID SERIES OF MASS SHOOTINGS

The Court also ruled state governments, like the federal government, may not infringe upon this right.

Why was the Second Amendment created? In modern times a common belief is that the Second Amendment was made to protect the right of citizens to hunt or defend their homes from unlawful entry. While these are examples of rights the Second Amendment protects, the historical purpose is broader.

SENATE PASSES BIPARTISAN GUN CONTROL BILL

The historical purpose of the Second Amendment, according to constitutional scholars, was to give the citizenry of the newly formed nation the ability to fight against a tyrannical government and defend itself against unlawful violence. This mindset comes from the framers of the Constitution, who had just defeated the British Empire and wanted to ensure a tyrannical government would be less likely in the future.

James Madison, one of the founding fathers and framers of the Constitution, proposed the Second Amendment at the Constitutional Convention because he feared the government could use a centralized military to oppress an unarmed citizenry.

Visit link:
What is the Second Amendment? | Fox News

As reported here yesterday, the legal editing software WordRake released a new version 4.0 that expands its functionality, adds new pricing options for less-frequent users, and introduces a new Simplicity editing mode for simplifying complex language.

With this release, WordRake now has two editing modes: Brevity and Simplicity. You might consider the Brevity mode to be classic WordRake, in that it does what WordRake has always done suggest edits that can make a document more concise.

The new Simplicity mode focuses on making suggestions designed to simplify complex language. It converts jargon, bureaucratic language and difficult words into words that are more familiar, WordRake says.

Read about WordRake in the LawNext Legal Technology Directory.

In previous blog posts, I have tested WordRake by using it to evaluate suggested edits to Supreme Court opinions. To read those previous reviews, see:

WordRake gave me a preview copy of this new version 4.0, so, in keeping with those prior posts, I decided to do the same.

Having recently used a different legal editing software,BriefCatch, on the leaked draft of Justice Samuel Alitos opinion overturning Roe v. Wade(I Ran Justice Alitos Draft Abortion Opinion through the BriefCatch Legal Editing Software. Heres What Happened), I chose another controversial opinion from the courts most-recent term, the Second Amendment case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, written by Justice Clarence Thomas.

I downloaded the PDF and converted it to Word, selected WordRakes new Simplicity mode, and hit the Rake button. It took roughly 10 minutes for WordRake to analyze the lengthy opinion (132 pages in Word, including dissents). When it was done, it told me that it had analyzed 2,585 sentences and made 232 suggestions.

In fairness, a Supreme Court opinion may not be the best document for testing the Simplicity mode, as it has most certainly been through multiple rounds of editing and editors before it is released to the public. On the other hand, if an editing program can find ways to clean up a document such as a Supreme Court opinion, imagine what it can do for your brief.

What Simplicity mode found were a number of repetitive and relativity minor editing suggestions. They included, for example:

As you can see, none of the suggestions are particularly substantive, but that may be the point, and it certainly may be due to the nature of the document I analyzed.

As I have previously noted in writing about this and other legal editing programs, users should never blindly accept an editing programs suggestions, as they are sometimes wrong. In the snippet above, for example, the suggested change of possessing a to with a, results in a sentence that makes no sense.

Similarly in this example, the change of methodology to methods changes the meaning to something the author did not intend.

Here is one more example, where WordRake suggests changing the phrase justices of the peace to just the single word justices. The problem, of course, is that these are terms of art that have different meanings.

I also ran the document through the original Brevity mode. This time, it took 11 minutes, and from the 2,585 sentences it analyzed, it made 499 suggestions.

Many of the suggestions in Brevity mode were the same as those in Simplicity mode, such as changing nevertheless to still and the like. A number of other suggestions were to eliminate transitional words and phrases such as moreover or in other words. In other places, it suggested a different transition, such as changing that said to however.

Here again, WordRake made some erroneous suggestions. For one, it recommended changing the phrase, the courts generally proceed to step two, to, the courts generally step two.

If I accepted all of the suggestions in Brevity mode (without regard to whether I should accept them), it reduced the word count from42,448 words to 41,564, or 884 words.

The use of any editing software should be guided by your own editorial judgment. Just because a program says you should do something, that doesnt always mean you should.

That said, my experiences using WordRake suggest that it can be a useful product for honing and editing ones writing. Not only does it provide an extra level of review for your writing, but it can also show you how you can make your writing more concise and direct. Given its affordable cost, and especially with its new monthly pricing, it is worth adding to your toolkit.

More:
I Put WordRake's New Version 4.0 to the Test Against the Supreme Court's Second Amendment Opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association -...

Ill say this much for US appeals court Judge James Ho: Hes defying the stereotype that Asian Americans are quiet worker bees who fade into the background.

Ho, who sits on the Fifth Circuit, has been throwing himself under klieg lights. I will no longer hire law clerks from Yale Law School, he declared at a Federalist Society conference in Kentucky last week. Ho miffed that the school not only tolerates the cancellation of viewsit actively practices it.

What better way for an up-and-coming judge to get attention than to plunge into Americas culture wars?

Judge Ho certainly comes across as very partisan, said Kermit Roosevelt, a professor at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. And the growing numbers of judges like him do suggest that something about the judiciary has changed. My sense is that its a sign of polarization within the elite legal community.

Taking a page from the right-wing handbook, Ho is going to town. I would contend that cancel culture is one of the leading reasons why citizens no longer trust a wide variety of once-leading institutions, he said. It turns out that, when elite institutions make clear that people who think like you and me shouldnt even exist, we return the favor, urging his fellow jurists to join the Yale boycott.

So take that, numero uno law school! Unless you renounce cancel culture, your graduates will go begging for federal clerkships.

Gimme a break.

Perhaps Im underestimating Hos clout, but I cant imagine students turning down coveted seats at the nations most prestigious law school because he put it on his personal blacklist. And what are the odds that other federal judges, even unabashed conservative ones, will trash the resumes of awesome Yalies because of the schools woke reputation?

As for the idea that Yale Law School operates a torture chamber for conservative students, well, the likes of Josh Hawley, J.D. Vance, and Brett Kavanaugh seem to be doing just fine. And lets not forget Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers, whos also a proud graduatealbeit on trial charged with seditious conspiracy for his role in the Jan. 6 riots.

Judges tend to speak through their opinions, Roosevelt said. Its rare to have judges speak outside the job. ... Its unusual for Ho to suggest a general liberal-conservative conflict and take a side in it.

Whats fueling this polarization is simple, said Saul Cornell, a professor at Fordham University who specializes in legal history: This is part and parcel of the age of Trump.

Indeed, Ho, who was appointed by Trump, has been polishing his act as the cultural warrior judge extraordinaire. In February, at another Federalist Society event, Ho went out of his way to defend libertarian Ilya Shapiro, who got into trouble for using the term lesser black woman to describe President Joe Bidens plan to appoint a Black woman to the Supreme Court.

Though the topic at the event was supposed to be originalism, Ho used the occasion to rail against cancel culture, declaring, I stand with Ilya.

Even as far back as 2018, NPR asked whether Ho in his opinions and dissents was writing legal opinions or political commentary, citing his aggressive rhetoric on abortion, which hes called a moral tragedy, and the Second Amendment, which he claims has been relegated to a second class right.

Ho is a performance artist. It seems hes been trying to break out of the overcrowded pack of ambitious young conservative judges to burnish his brand as the leading firebrand. I couldnt help but wonder if Hos latest outburst was a check on the commotion surrounding Aileen Cannon, the judge in the Mar-a-Lago documents case, whos now creaming him as the most Trumpian of Trump judges.

Hes looking for headlines, Cornell said. Once upon a time, the judiciary was the most trusted branch of the federal government, and now we have these cowards. It used to beduring the William F. Buckley eraconservatives could dish it out as well as take it. Now theyre wimps, yet they call liberals the culture of victimhood.

Ho is exploiting the moment for his own career, but isnt he also wreaking havoc on our trust in the judicial system?

I think that public faith in the judiciary is affected much more by the Supreme Court than by lower judges, Roosevelt said. But Judge Ho doesnt help.

Read more here:
Yale Law Students Must Be Quaking in Their Boots - Bloomberg Law