French Presidential Elections: Emmanuel Macron elected French president with a landslide 65.5% of the vote

France's newly elected President: Emmanuel Macron

With polls now closed across France, centrist Emmanuel Macron has been elected French President with an estimated 65.5% of the vote, with his rival, far-right Marine Le Pen, taking 34.5%.

• Macron, 39, has become the youngest president of France's Fifth Republic.France's 47 million 
• voters chose between radically different platforms: the free-trade, pro-EU policies of Macron's
• En Marche! (Forward!) party, and the protectionist nationalism of Le Pen's National Front.
• Voting stations opened at 8am (6am GMT) in mainland France Sunday, and most closed at Frenchj7pm, while those in larger cities closed at 8pm. Voters overseas began voting SatOfficial turnout figures have been lower than in the April 23 first round. The noon turnout was 28.2%, slightly less than the 28.5% in the first round. At 5pm, the turnout was 65.3%, lower than the 69.4% at the same time on April 23.
• It has been a historic election by several measures: both candidates were from parties outside the political mainstream. It follows an unprecedented campaign marked by scandal and repeated surprises.
• French law prohibited French media from quoting the presidential candidates or their supporters until the polls closes at 8pm Sunday.

Macron has reportedly told Germany’s Angela Merkel on the phone that he will soon travel to Berlin for a face-to-face meeting to get Europe moving again.

Spanish PM Mariano Rajoy tweets: “Congratulations to @EmmanuelMacron, France’s new president. France and Spain should work together for a more stable, prosper and united Europe.”

President Trump used Twitter Sunday to extend a hand to France's new president-elect, Emmanuel Macron.  'Congratulations to Emmanuel Macron on his big win today as the next President of France. I look very much forward to working with him!' Trump wrote.

The former deputy national security adviser to President Obama believes the defeat of Marine Le Pen, and victory for Emmanuel Macron, in the French presidential election shows the end of a wave of nationalistic populism.

The European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, tweeted his congratulations, saying: “Happy that the French have chosen a European future. Together for a stronger and fairer Europe.”
J
uncker also sent a letter to Macron only 15 minutes after the exit poll result was published, in which he told the new French president that he welcomed “the ideas that you have advocated, a strong Europe, and progressive, that protects all its citizens”.

A spokesman for the German chancellor Angela Merkel was also quick to hail the result as a “victory for a strong and united Europe”. “Congratulations, @EmmanuelMacron. Your victory is a victory for a strong and united Europe and for French-German friendship,” tweeted Steffen Seibert in French and German.

Merkel’s chief of staff, Peter Altmaier, wrote: “Vive la France, Vive L’Europe!”, adding that it was a “a strong signal for our common values.” Separately, the German foreign minister Sigmar Gabriel celebrated Macron’s win for keeping France “at the heart of Europe”.

“Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité! France chose that today. The great nation was, is, and remains in the middle and at the heart of Europe,” wrote Gabriel on Twitter, using France’s national slogan.

European council president Donald Tusk also offered his congratulations, saying the French had chosen “liberty, equality and fraternity” and “said no to the tyranny of fake news”.

EU-Digest

Visit USA ? Have you ever smoked pot? Saying yes can get foreigners barred for life at US border - by Rob Hotakainen

USA Tourism: Pot smokers will be banned for life

Canada's likely move to completely legalize marijuana next year promises to produce immediate spillover effects in the United States, starting with increased confusion at the U.S.-Canadian border.

"I'm expecting my business to boom," said Len Saunders, an immigration attorney from Blaine, Wash.

With recreational marijuana already legal up and down the West Coast, from Alaska to California, he said, more Canadians may let down their guard and admit to U.S. authorities that they've used marijuana, reason enough to get foreigners barred from entering the country. Beyond that, pot retailers and legalization backers say it's difficult to predict exactly what might happen if Canada, as expected, becomes only the second nation in the world to fully legalize pot for anyone over 18 on July 1, 2018.

Even with such a big move, Jacob Lamont figures the Canadian customers will keep coming to Evergreen Cannabis, his pot shop in Blaine, just a few blocks from the U.S.-Canadian border.

"I enjoy my brothers and sisters from the north — obviously they support my business quite well," said Lamont, who estimates that Canadian customers make up 60 percent of his year-round business. "They still come down here. They buy a lot of milk, they buy cigarettes and they buy alcohol, because the taxation is so high up there. And I have a feeling they're going to follow suit with marijuana."

Oregon Democratic Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a longtime champion of legalization, said it could be a game changer for Congress.

"It completely changes the dynamic," he said. "Some regard Canada as the 51st state. This is going to make a big difference in terms of adjusting attitudes and accelerating progress. ... It's going to help us bring these things to a head."

Saunders scoffed at the idea that the United States would ever legalize marijuana with President Donald Trump, a teetotaler, in the White House.

"You have a president who not only has an attorney general (Jeff Sessions) who is going to fight drugs, but you have a president who's never even had a sip of alcohol," Saunders said.

One of Saunders' clients, Alan Ranta, 36, a freelance music journalist from Vancouver, British Columbia, got barred last year as he tried to drive his Toyota Yaris into Washington state. During questioning, he was handcuffed and told a U.S. border guard he had smoked marijuana in the past. Even though he was not carrying the drug with him at the time, Ranta said, he was told that under U.S. law he had committed "a crime involving moral turpitude."

"It lulls you into a false sense of security when you don't have anything on you and you've done nothing wrong and you're going to a place where it's legal," Ranta said. "You keep thinking, 'This is crazy, why am I getting in trouble?'"

He figures he was stopped because he and a friend were headed to a music festival, with a banana suit, tutus and a psychedelic top hat visible in the car: "If it's an electronic music festival, we like to dress up in weird things that we'd never wear day to day."

Saunders said that even Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, as a private citizen, could be denied entry since he had admitted to smoking marijuana in the past. Saunders is advising people not to lie to border authorities but to refuse to answer any questions about past pot use.

Note Almere-Digest: It is up to you now dear US visitors: either you lie, or choose another  tourist destination than Trumpland.

Read more: Have you ever smoked pot? Saying yes can get foreigners barred for life at US border

French Pres.Elections: Macron launches legal suit after Le Pen repeats 'Bahamas bank account' rumours

Putin and Le Pen in Moscow

French prosecutors have opened an investigation after Marine Le Pen repeated rumours that Emmanuel Macron had a hidden offshore bank account in the Bahamas during Wednesday night's live TV debate. Macron said her suggestion was "defamation".

Macron's team had earlier announced that the candidate had lodged an official complaint over "the spreading of false information" to try to influence the result of an election.

The complaint was filed the morning after a memorable live TV debate between the two presidential election candidates.

During one particularly heated exchange in a debate marked by insults and invective the pair argued about the legal issues they faced.

After Macron said it wasn’t him that was under investigation by police, referring to the fake jobs allegations facing Le Pen, the far right candidate replied: “I hope we don’t discover you have an offshore account in the Bahamas.”

Macron warned her that her suggestion was "defamation".

Judicial sources told AFP prosecutors in Paris had opened a probe following the complaint from Macron, which comes three days before Sunday's presidential run-off vote.

A source close to the case told AFP, the complaint targets "information that circulated Wednesday night on the internet" (probably from Russian sources)  alleging tax evasion in the Bahamas.

Read more: Macron launches legal suit after Le Pen repeats 'Bahamas bank account' rumours - The Local

Far-right candidate Marine Le Pen(supported by both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin) and centrist Emmanuel Macron clashed over their vision of France's future, the euro and ways of fighting terrorism in an ill-tempered televised debate on Wednesday before Sunday's run-off vote for the presidency.

The two went into the debate with opinion polls showing Macron, 39, with a strong lead of 20 percentage points over the National Front's Le Pen, 48, in what is widely seen as France's most important election in decades.

For Le Pen, the two-and-a-half hour debate, watched by millions, was a last major chance to persuade voters of the merits of her program which includes cracking down on illegal immigration, ditching the euro single currency and holding a referendum on EU membership.

However, 63 percent of viewers found Macron more convincing than Le Pen in the debate, according to a snap opinion poll by Elabe for BFMTV, reinforcing his status as favorite to win the Elysee on Sunday.

In angry exchanges, Le Pen played up Macron's background as a former investment banker and economy minister, painting him as heir to the outgoing unpopular Socialist government and as the "candidate of globalisation gone wild."

He savaged her flagship policy of abandoning the euro, calling it a fatal plan that would unleash a currency war, and he accused her of failing to offer solutions to France's economic problems such as chronic unemployment.

Read more: Macron, Le Pen clash on euro, terrorism, in French pre-election TV showdown | Reuters

Germany and Russia: Chancellor Merkel faces President Putin in tense Sochi press conference

Merkel and Putin: an intelligent exchange of viewpoints

Chancellor Angela Merkel said she was not worried about the possibility of Russian meddling with the upcoming election in Germany.

"I am not the kind of a person that is easily scared," she told reporters at a joint press conference with Vladimir Putin in Sochi on Tuesday.

Berlin would take "decisive action" if fake news were distributed, Merkel added, citing the examples of thefictional rape of a Russian girl or claims against German troops in Latvia.  Merkel expressed confidence that Germans "will be able to campaign amongst themselves, without interference."

In turn, Russia's Putin dismissed the allegations about political meddling in the West as "rumors."

"We never interfere in the political life and the political processes of other countries and we don't want anybody interfering in our political life," he said.

Merkel traveled to Sochi on Tuesday for her first visit in two years, as part of her tour ahead of the upcoming G20 summit in Hamburg. Relations between Berlin and Moscow deteriorated following the Crimea crisis which started in 2014, and Germany and Russia are at odds over conflicts in Syria and Ukraine.

Merkel also urged Putin to "use his influence" to protect gays in the Muslim-dominated Russian republic of Chechnya. Recently, Russian activists reported that state authorities were rounding up gays and torturing them, and several were allegedly killed in the crackdown.

Additionally, the German leader stressed the right of anti-government forces to hold rallies against the Kremlin, after scores of protesters were arrested.

Putin responded by praising the Russian security forces, saying they were "more reserved and liberal" than many of their European colleagues who used "tear gas and batons" to disperse protest.

"Thankfully, we had no need for this so far," he said.

Note EU-Digest: Regardless of the differences there are in  the relationship between many of the EU countries and Russia, there is a mutual respect and civility for each others viewpoints . 

Comparing the Trump Administrations high level meetings, Press conferences, interviews and Presidential Public appearances  these past three months in light of this recent Merkel -Putin Sochhi  Press meeting, one can certainly call it a "night and day difference".

It has been reported that the US  President during his first 100 days in office made 213 false statements.

 Watching and listening to these two Heads of State intelligent composed and articulately answered responses to difficult questions, at least can give us all some hope again that  there still is a chance to solve political problems regardless of Donald Trump. 

Read more: Chancellor Merkel faces President Putin in tense Sochi press conference | News | DW.COM | 02.05.2017

France: Remember how Hillary lost ? - Beware Macron - Le Pen could win by doing a Trump on you

Macron beware: "It ain't over till (or until) the fat lady sings"

Politico reports: "Marine Le Pen needs a perfect political storm to help her win the French presidency on Sunday.

She aims to provoke it by kicking up rage at her centrist rival, discouraging leftists from voting and winning over millions of disappointed conservatives by convincing them that her plans for the European Union are less worrying than they might think.

Le Pen knows that victory remains a long shot. Six days before the final vote, polls show her trailing rival Macron by 15 to 20 percentage points, a wider gap than the one separating Donald Trump from Hillary Clinton at this stage in the U.S. race. Le Pen needs to win over millions of new votes to win, a tough sell for a lifetime outsider. Most of the French don’t see it happening: just 15 percent see Le Pen as “la présidente,” according to an Ifop poll last week.

Whatever the odds, Le Pen will fight hard until the last minute. But she is also hoping for a nod from fate. One major chance for Le Pen to change the race’s dynamic is a live debate Wednesday when she plans to “expose” her rival as a banker working against France.

Le Pen campaigned ahead of the election’s first round on the idea that she was offering voters a binary choice between “economic patriotism” over unbridled globalization.

The problem was that the message was lost on many of her core voters. Le Pen bled support for the first three months of the year. Her first-round score of around 21 percent came in several percentage points below what polls were predicting for her last January.

The analysis by her party’s own experts reportedly showed that the choice between globalization and economic patriotism — free trade and open borders versus Le Pen’s plans for withdrawal from trade agreements and more border restrictions — presented a too-abstract choice and one significantly misinterpreted by the party’s core supporters, made up of working class voters, party officials told POLITICO. Some missed the precise meaning of globalization and misunderstood “economic patriotism” as meaning that Le Pen meant rolling back checks and balances in the French Republic.

Enter a much simpler message: Le Pen is the candidate who will protect the French.

Devised by Le Pen’s strategic campaign committee and chief polling analyst Damien Philippot (the brother of influential party VP Florian Philippot), it’s an ultra-simple idea that can appeal to both right- and left-wing voters.

“We needed something that got to everyone,” said Bertrand Dutheil de la Rochère, a senior campaign aide. “She has to talk to the Left and the Right at the same time. But she can’t ask left-wingers to switch off the TV while she talks to the Right, so we came up with protection.”

“It’s the same message as before  — but simpler. And it speaks to everyone because first and foremost the French want to be protected by the state against competition, against terrorism, against mass immigration.”

Addressing supporters in Villepinte near Paris Sunday, Le Pen vowed to be the “president who protects” French citizens, “notably women,” but also the environment, national borders and “the solidarity that exists between all French people.” The message, tailored for mass appeal, is a departure from earlier speeches that emphasized a clash with Brussels and targeted Macron — whom she called “the candidate of finance.”

Here is a guide to Le Pen’s strategy for the final days.

1) Le Pen campaigned ahead of the election’s first round on the idea that she was offering voters a binary choice between “economic patriotism” over unbridled globalization.

The problem was that the message was lost on many of her core voters. Le Pen bled support for the first three months of the year. Her first-round score of around 21 percent came in several percentage points below what polls were predicting for her last January.

The analysis by her party’s own experts reportedly showed that the choice between globalization and economic patriotism — free trade and open borders versus Le Pen’s plans for withdrawal from trade agreements and more border restrictions — presented a too-abstract choice and one significantly misinterpreted by the party’s core supporters, made up of working class voters, party officials told POLITICO. Some missed the precise meaning of globalization and misunderstood “economic patriotism” as meaning that Le Pen meant rolling back checks and balances in the French Republic.

Enter a much simpler message: Le Pen is the candidate who will protect the French.

Devised by Le Pen’s strategic campaign committee and chief polling analyst Damien Philippot (the brother of influential party VP Florian Philippot), it’s an ultra-simple idea that can appeal to both right- and left-wing voters.

“We needed something that got to everyone,” said Bertrand Dutheil de la Rochère, a senior campaign aide. “She has to talk to the Left and the Right at the same time. But she can’t ask left-wingers to switch off the TV while she talks to the Right, so we came up with protection.”

“It’s the same message as before  — but simpler. And it speaks to everyone because first and foremost the French want to be protected by the state against competition, against terrorism, against mass immigration.”

Addressing supporters in Villepinte near Paris Sunday, Le Pen vowed to be the “president who protects” French citizens, “notably women,” but also the environment, national borders and “the solidarity that exists between all French people.” The message, tailored for mass appeal, is a departure from earlier speeches that emphasized a clash with Brussels and targeted Macron — whom she called “the candidate of finance.”

2) The protection message is similar to the argument that former President Nicolas Sarkozy made during his failed 2012 bid for re-election — and that may not be a coincidence.

Sarkozy remains popular among conservatives, particularly in the south where Le Pen has room to grow. She knows that many conservatives who backed François Fillon in the first round miss Sarkozy. So Le Pen is giving them Sarkozy with a side of nationalism by co-opting his message. She is also emphasizing campaign proposals that “Sarko” fans will remember: arming municipal cops and changing engagement rules so police can shoot first at perceived threats.

The Sarkozy-signalling is part of a broader plan to sweep up undecided conservatives. Le Pen is set to inherit about 30 percent of votes for Fillon versus 41 percent going to Macron. Thirty percent of Fillon voters remain undecided."

EU-Digest

International Justice: The US has long supported international justice, now it should be subjected to it'

They call him the “dictator hunter”. Reed Brody has been following the bloody trail of infamous political leaders for over 30 years, his latest trophy is Chad’s former president, Hissène Habré. And his next? George W Bush and Henry Kissinger are on his list.

Brody worked with the non-governmental organisation Human Rights Watch (HRW) between 1998 and 2016. He was personally involved in the investigation and preparation of criminal cases against at least four US-backed dictators during the Reagan administration: Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Hissène Habré in Chad, Jean-Claude Duvalier in Haiti, and Ríos Montt in Guatemala.

He has dedicated his life to laying siege to the great political criminals. When in 2012 the panel of judges of the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone considered former Liberian President Charles Taylor responsible for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed between 1991 and 2002 during the conflict in Sierra Leone, which cost the lives of 120,000 people, the HRW’s lawyer issued a warning to the world’s most powerful: “With this verdict, Taylor became the first former head of state convicted by an international tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity, after the Nuremberg trial. The same legal logic could be applied to Vladimir Putin or Henry Kissinger.”

Charles Taylor was convicted of having encouraged and provided weapons and logistical support to the Sierra Leonean rebels, a criminal complicity that brings to Brody’s memory Kissinger’s role in the atrocities committed during the Indonesian invasion of East Timor: “East Timor weighs heavy on Kissinger’s conscience.”

Documents made public in 2001 revealed that on December 6, 1975, the day before the invasion of East Timor, US President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger gave the green light to the military operation during a meeting in Jakarta with Indonesian dictator General Suharto.

The occupation lasted until 2002 and cost the lives of about 200,000 East Timorese. The US provided the Indonesian military with 90 percent of the weapons used, and Kissinger ensured supplies continued being delivered despite the restrictions imposed by the US Congress, when the invasion had already led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths.

“Unfortunately, the powerful and those they protect continue to escape an international judicial architecture still under development.”

The fight against the impunity of the powerful.

Born in 1953 in New York, the son of a Hungarian Jew who escaped from the German forced labour camps and a militant pacifist mother, Reed Brody soon felt the call to align with the weak.

In the 1970s he campaigned against the war in Vietnam. While most of his colleagues at Columbia Law School integrated into Wall Street’s financial institutions, he insisted on being the “advocate of the persecuted.”

In 1984, he left the position of Assistant Attorney General of the State of New York and headed for Nicaragua, where he collected testimonies of the atrocities committed by the Contras, the guerillas armed by Washington which fought the Sandinistas of Daniel Ortega, then in power.

Based on the testimonies of the victims obtained with the help of Catholic missionaries, he produced a detailed report. Published in 1985 by the New York Times, the document led the US Congress to convene an inquiry and cancel for some time the financing of Nicaragua’s Contras.

Between 1987 and 1992, Brody worked in Geneva with the International Commission of Jurists and the UN Commission on Human Rights. He was sent by the United Nations to El Salvador in 1994 and to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1995 and 1997.

In 1998, he had already joined the HRW, and participated in the Rome Conference that validated the Statutes of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the first permanent court of its kind after Nuremberg.

In October of the same year, Augusto Pinochet was detained in London. After being recognised as a party to the litigation and HRW’s Brody sent his reports to the British judges. And when in November Britain’s House of Lords withdrew immunity from the former Chilean dictator, the American lawyer’s fight against the impunity of the powerful reached a new milestone.
The Pinochet precedent

It was after being contacted by Souleymane Guengueng, a political prisoner of the Hissène Habré regime, that Brody began a 17-year pursuit of Habré, accused of 40,000 murders and systematic torture during his eight years as Chad’s president in the 1980s.

Judged in 2015 in Senegal, where he had been living in exile since 1990, the former dictator was sentenced a year later to life imprisonment for crimes against humanity which included torture, rape and sexual slavery.

It was the first process of universal jurisdiction carried out on the African continent, the first in which a head of state was tried in a court of another country.

“Under the Rome Statute, victims are actors of international justice rather than its passive subjects,” says Reed Brody.

It was like this in the Habré case: the testimony of the survivors was decisive for the Senegalese court backed by the African Union to condemn the dictator. The prosecution of Jean-Claude Duvalier for crimes against humanity was possible thanks to the perseverance of survivors such as Boby Duval, who recorded 180 deaths in Fort Dimanche jail cell and journalist Michèle Montas. Likewise, in Ríos Montt’s trial, the prosecution strategy was based on the testimonies of indigenous communities and human rights activists, who identified the survivors.
US resistance

The United States bolsters the existence of a justice system that is applied to other countries in the world and has been a leading contributor to the architecture of an international accountability system. With one exception, Brody points out: “This system should not be applied to the United States. They like the Hague tribunal for Yugoslavia, for Rwanda, Sierra Leone or Cambodia, but not for a court that has unlimited jurisdiction.”

According to the human rights activist, this conviction is shared by most policy makers in Washington. Democrats and Republicans do not appreciate the idea that Washington might find itself constrained in its military strategies by an international law enforced by an international judicial body. “The traditional view of the protection of American interests is that American interests are better protected if the United States is the strongest country and not subject to a system of international rules and regulations.”

US society is not even aware that these things have happened: “When recently, in an interview with Fox News, they asked Donald Trump about Russia, he replied that our country is not so innocent. If we were honest, it was a statement with a sense of reality,” says Brody, adding that “no country that exercises the kind of power the United States exercises, whether the United States, Russia or China, will have an entirely ethical international policy.”

When it became clear in 2011 that the Obama administration did not intend to take any legal action against former President George W. Bush following the US Senate report on the use of torture techniques by the CIA after the 9/11, Reed Brody called on foreign governments to file lawsuits for war crimes against Bush, former Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and ex-CIA director George Tenet for ordering the practice of torture and other crimes.

“Under international law, any government has jurisdiction to try cases of torture and war crimes,” says Brody.

An EU-Digest Special Report of EUronews