California moves presidential primary for bigger say in candidate choice

FILE PHOTO - A poll worker places a mail-in ballot into a voting box as voters drop off their ballot in the U.S. presidential primary election in San Diego, California, United States, June 7, 2016. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo

By Sharon Bernstein

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters) – California will move its presidential primary from June to March under a bill signed on Wednesday by Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, a change aimed at giving the liberal-leaning state more influence in choosing candidates from either national party.

The most populous U.S. state, which voted heavily for Democrat Hillary Clinton in November’s presidential election, has traditionally held its primary so late that Democratic and Republican voters in other states had essentially already chosen their parties’ candidates.

“The Golden State will no longer be relegated to last place in the presidential nominating process,” said Secretary of State Alex Padilla, a Democrat who backed the change, in a statement. “Candidates will not be able to ignore the largest, most diverse state in the nation as they seek our country’s highest office.”

The bill was passed mostly along party lines in the majority-Democrat legislature.

The new date will leave the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary in place as the first and second contests of the presidential election cycle, during which voters in each state choose the candidate they would like their party to nominate for president.

Because California’s primary has been in June while others were held earlier, candidates have largely ignored the state, spending less on outreach than elsewhere, making fewer visits, and failing to prioritize California voters’ concerns in their campaigns, supporters said.

In 2016, California Democrats chose Clinton and Republicans opted for Donald Trump, the populist businessman who ultimately won the presidency.

Backers in the legislature said the early primary would lead to less divisive choices by members of both major parties in the 2020 election cycle, and establish California as a leading voice in the choice of candidates.

Progressive Democrats also believe that moving the primary up could result in their party’s selection of more liberal candidates.

“California is the beating heart of the national resistance to Trump, and California Democrats are defining the progressive agenda for America,” state Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman said in a press release. “When it comes to deciding the Democratic nominee, our voices need to be heard early in the process.”

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Richard Chang)

Kenyan police disperse protests against election commission

A supporter of the opposition National Super Alliance (NASA) coalition runs after riot policemen dispersed protesters during a demonstration calling for the removal of Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) officials in Nairobi, Kenya September 26, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya

By George Obulutsa and Humphrey Malalo

NAIROBI (Reuters) – Kenyan police used tear gas and batons on Tuesday to disperse protesters who say election officials should be sacked before the re-run of a presidential vote because they favor President Uhuru Kenyatta.

Several volleys of tear gas were fired near the election commission headquarters in central Nairobi, a Reuters witness said. When protestors regrouped, officers fired more tear gas and beat some with batons. By mid-afternoon calm had returned.

Raila Odinga, who lost his presidential bid on Aug. 8, will get another chance after the Supreme Court annulled the election citing irregularities and ordered a fresh vote within 60 days.

However, Odinga has accused the election commission, known as the IEBC, of being a puppet of Kenyatta’s ruling Jubilee party and said he will not participate in the Oct. 26 re-run if election officials are not sacked and prosecuted.

The court did not find any individual responsible but said institutional failings had led to irregularities and illegalities in the transmission of election results.

The election commission has asked the opposition to call off protests until the IEBC has explained the various measures being taken to “enhance the credibility and integrity” of the vote.

“IEBC cannot begin the process of an honest election as long as those responsible for the irregularities and illegalities are still lurking in its corridors,” Odinga told reporters.

“IEBC has refused to dismiss or suspend them. That is why we are today beginning these peaceful campaigns to force them out by public pressure so the process of a fair election can at last begin,” he added.

Last week Kenya’s chief prosecutor ordered investigations into 11 election board officials including its chief executive, Ezra Chiloba, as well as a lawyer and campaigner who worked for Odinga.

Speaking as protestors gathered outside his office, Chiloba said he would not resign. “I have (a) responsibility before me and I have to discharge that responsibility,” he told Kenya’s KTN television network.

Some Kenyatta supporters also took to the streets in Nairobi but there were no clashes between the two sides.

In the port city of Mombasa, a crowd gathered at local election office, chanting: “No reforms no elections. Chiloba must go!”

The Kenyan government in a statement accused “mobs of hooligans” of taking advantage of the protests to destroy property and said “a number of criminals” had been arrested and would be taken to court.

CHARGE OF SUBVERSION

Underscoring the rising tensions, a newly elected opposition lawmaker was charged with subversion at a court hearing in Nairobi on Tuesday.

Paul Ongili Owino was arrested after a video clip of him speaking while campaigning for Odinga emerged on social media in which he called Kenyatta a son of a dog.

The prosecution said those words were “calculated to excite disaffection against the presidency”.

Ahead of Tuesday’s demonstrations by the opposition National Super Alliance coalition, Kenyatta had said violence would not be tolerated.

“People are free to demonstrate but they must ensure that they do not destroy other people’s property,” he said.

“Let them not think that they will break into other people’s shops and interfere with the daily routine of other Kenyans. That, we shall not allow,” he said.

In the western city of Kisumu, an Odinga stronghold where some 3,000 protestors gathered, one protestor, vegetable market vendor Hellen Aketch said: “I will support anything that assures me of the validity and the safety of my vote in the upcoming elections.”

“I have closed (my) business today and I am ready to do it again so long as some sanity is realized among those who hold public office.”

(Additional reporting by Joseph Akwiri in Mombasa, Kenya; Writing by David Lewis and George Obulutsa; Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg)

Kenyan police fire teargas at Supreme Court protesters

Kenyan police fire teargas at Supreme Court protesters

NAIROBI (Reuters) – Kenyan police fired teargas on Tuesday at supporters of President Uhuru Kenyatta who were protesting outside the Supreme Court against the invalidation of his Aug. 8 re-election, Reuters witnesses said.

The Supreme Court nullified the presidential election on Sept. 1 and ordered the electoral body to hold a repeat vote within 60 days. The court, which issued a majority judgment, said there were irregularities in tallying results of the poll.

David Maraga, the chief justice and president of the Supreme Court, said threats against judicial staff had risen since the ruling.

“Since the Supreme Court delivered judgment … these threats have become more aggressive,” Maraga told a news conference at the Supreme Court, as hundreds of protesters wearing the bright red of Kenyatta’s Jubilee party gathered outside.

He cited the demonstrations outside the court as an example of the rising threats, and threatening messages sent on social media to individual judges and their staff.

“Senior political leaders have also threatened the Judiciary, promising ‘to cut it down to size’ and ‘teach us a lesson’,” Maraga said, vowing that the judiciary would not be intimidated by anyone.

They protesters waved placards and shouted slogans against the judiciary and Maraga himself.

“I have attended this protest to air my grievances after the Supreme Court annulled my candidate’s victory,” one of the protesters told Reuters.

There was a commotion after the teargas was fired, before the protesters regrouped and continued with their protest outside the court building.

The Supreme Court, which gave a summary of its findings when it invalidated Kenyatta’s election victory, said it would read its detailed ruling on Wednesday at 0700 GMT.

(Reporting by Humphrey Malalo and George Obulutsa; Writing by Duncan Miriri; Editing by Catherine Evans)

FBI chief sees no evidence of White House interference in Russia probe

FILE PHOTO: Christopher Wray testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on his nomination to be the next FBI director on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., July 12, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

By Sarah N. Lynch

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – FBI Director Christopher Wray said on Thursday he has “not detected any whiff of interference” by the White House into the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Speaking publicly for the first time since being confirmed as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Wray also expressed confidence in Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating whether President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia during the election.

“I can say very confidently that I have not detected any whiff of interference with that investigation,” Wray said during a panel discussion at the Intelligence and National Security Summit in Washington.

Wray was installed as FBI director after his predecessor, James Comey, was fired by Trump in May. In an interview with NBC after Comey’s removal, Trump admitted he was thinking about “this Russia thing” when he decided to fire the then-FBI chief.

Comey later told Congress he believed Trump had tried to get him to drop an FBI probe into former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, as part of the broader Russia investigation – testimony that has raised questions about whether Trump was potentially trying to obstruct justice.

The White House has repeatedly denied the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the election.

Trump’s advisers and allies also have questioned Mueller’s independence and credibility, with some pointing out that he has hired attorneys who have given political donations to Democrats.

But Wray said he has “enormous respect” for Mueller, who is also a former FBI director. He stressed that Mueller is running the probe but said the FBI is assisting by dedicating agents and providing other support to the investigation.

Wray also reiterated his confidence in a January report compiled by U.S. intelligence agencies which concluded that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election and tried to tilt it in Trump’s favor – a finding Trump has often questioned.

Prior to his confirmation as FBI director, Wray had only read a non-classified version of the report.

“I have no reason to doubt the conclusions that the hard- working people who put that together came to,” Wray said.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Paul Simao)

Kenya’s Odinga rejects vote re-run date without ‘guarantees’, Kenyatta rebuffs demand

Kenyan opposition leader Raila Odinga, of the National Super Alliance (NASA) coalition, speaks during a church service inside the St. Stephen's cathedral in Nairobi, Kenya September 3, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya

By John Ndiso

NAIROBI (Reuters) – Kenyan opposition leader Raila Odinga said on Tuesday his coalition would not participate in the re-run of a presidential election proposed for Oct. 17 unless it is given “legal and constitutional” guarantees.

Incumbent President Uhuru Kenyatta responded by saying there was nowhere in law that required the electoral body to consult Odinga.

The opposition also said it is planning to file dozens of challenges to results from races lower down the ticket, including legislative and local seats.

Odinga’s conditions for participating in the repeat presidential election include the removal of six officials at the election board. He wants criminal investigations to be opened against them.

“You cannot do a mistake twice and expect to get different results,” Odinga told reporters. “A number of the officials of the commission should be sent home, some of them should be investigated for the heinous crimes they committed.”

Kenya’s Supreme Court ordered on Friday that the Aug. 8 vote be re-run within 60 days, saying Kenyatta’s victory by 1.4 million votes was undermined by irregularities in the process. Kenyatta was not accused of any wrongdoing.

The ruling, the first time in Africa that a court had overturned the re-election of a sitting president, was hailed by Odinga supporters as “historic”.

Analysts have said it is likely to lead to some short-term volatility in East Africa’s biggest economy, but could build confidence in institutions longer-term.

On Monday, the election board said it would hold new elections on Oct. 17.

But Odinga said he wanted elections held on Oct. 24 or 31 instead.

“There will be no elections on the seventeenth of October until the conditions that we have spelt out in the statement are met,” he said.

Kenyatta rebuffed Odinga’s demands to the commission on the setting of the election date.

“There is no legal requirement that Raila be consulted. I was neither consulted. Kenya doesn’t belong to one man,” he said in a statement sent by his office.

Odinga has lost the last three presidential elections. Each time, he has said the vote was rigged against him.

The opposition also plans to lodge 62 court cases contesting governorship, lawmaker, and local seats, spokeswoman Kathleen Openda told Reuters.

At least 33 court cases were filed contesting election results before the presidential election was annulled, said Andrew Limo, spokesman for the election board. Others had been filed since but he did not have the updated figure.

Limo said the numbers had not yet reached the same level as during the 2013 elections, when the board received challenges to 189 results.

(Writing by David Lewis and Katharine Houreld; Editing by George Obulutsa)

Kenyan president, election overturned by court, attacks judiciary

Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta flanked by his Deputy William Ruto addresses the nation at State House in Nairobi, Kenya September 1, 2017. Presidential Press Service/Handout via REUTERS

By Maggie Fick

NAIROBI (Reuters) – Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta said on Saturday the country has “a problem” with its judiciary that must be fixed.

He was speaking a day after the Supreme Court annulled his election win last month and ordered a new poll within 60 days.

“We shall revisit this thing. We clearly have a problem,” he said, referring to the judiciary.

“Who even elected you? Were you? We have a problem and we must fix it,” he said, speaking on live television at the State House in Nairobi after he met with governors and other elected officials from his Jubilee party.

Kenyatta, however, also repeated his message from Friday that he would respect the court’s ruling.

The decision to annul the election was an unprecedented move in Africa where governments often hold sway over judges — and the first time on the continent that a court ruled against the electoral victory of an incumbent.

The president’s latest comments mark the second time since Friday’s ruling that he has spoken critically about the judiciary in public. On Friday during an impromptu rally in Nairobi, he accused the court of ignoring the will of the people and dismissed the chief justice’s colleagues as “wakora”, or crooks.

The president’s public appearances since the ruling suggest he intends to campaign rigorously ahead of the re-run of the Aug.8 poll.

He said via Twitter on Saturday: “For now let us meet at the ballot.”

Attention now turns back to the election board. The court ruled that it had “failed, neglected or refused to conduct the presidential election in a manner consistent with the dictates of the constitution”.

Raila Odinga, the veteran opposition leader whose coalition brought the petition against the election board to the Supreme Court, said on Friday that some officials from the commission should face criminal prosecution.

The chairman of the election board said there would be personnel changes, but it was not clear if that would be enough for the opposition. Sweeping out the whole board would complicate efforts to hold a new poll within two months.

Last month’s election — which included the presidential poll in addition to races at other levels of government — was one of the most expensive ever held in Africa. Ahead of the vote Kenya’s treasury said preparation and execution of polling would cost the equivalent of around $480 million.

 

VEILED THREATS

Analysts saw the president’s latest comments on the judiciary as a worrisome development.

“It’s extremely unfortunate that Kenyatta seems to be issuing veiled threats at the judiciary,” said Murithi Mutiga, a Nairobi-based senior Africa analyst at the International Crisis Group.

“This was a tremendous moment for Kenyan democracy, where the court upheld the rule of law. Politicians should be careful not to incite the public against the judiciary.”

On Friday, Chief Justice David Maraga said the Supreme Court’s verdict was backed by four of the six judges and declared Kenyatta’s victory “invalid, null and void”.

Details of the ruling will be released within 21 days.

Prior to last month’s election Maraga spoke out to emphasize the judiciary’s independence.

In a statement he read out on behalf of the Judicial Service Commission less than a week before the election, he listed instances in which politicians — from the ruling party and the opposition — had tried to intervene with the judiciary’s work.

“The emerging culture of public lynching of judges and judicial officers by the political class is a vile affront to the rule of law and must be fiercely resisted,” the statement read. “We wish to state that … the judiciary will not cower to these intimidating tactics.”

Kenya’s judiciary went through sweeping changes in a bid to restore confidence in the legal system after the bloodshed following the 2007 election.

 

(Reporting by Maggie Fick; Additional reporting by George Obulutsa; Editing by Jeremy Gaunt)

 

Trump Jr. to testify in Senate, Manafort lawyer subpoenaed: CNN

FILE PHOTO: Donald Trump Jr. speaks at the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio U.S. July 19, 2016. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni/File photo

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., has agreed to testify privately to the Senate Judiciary Committee as it looks into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, CNN reported on Tuesday, weeks after he was invited to testify in public at a hearing in July.

Spokesmen and spokeswomen for the committee’s leaders did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the report.

CNN also reported that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had issued subpoenas to Melissa Laurenza, an attorney with the Akin Gump law firm, who formerly represented Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, and to Jason Maloni, a Manafort spokesman.

CNN said Maloni and a spokesman for Mueller declined comment and that Laurenza referred questions to a spokesman who did not immediately comment.

Russia has loomed large over the first six months of the Trump presidency. U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia worked to tilt last year’s presidential election in Trump’s favor. Mueller, who was appointed special counsel in May, is leading the investigation, which also examines potential collusion by the Trump campaign with Russia.

Several congressional committees are also looking into the matter.

Moscow denies any meddling. Trump denies any collusion by his campaign, while regularly denouncing the investigations as political witch hunts.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; editing by Grant McCool)

U.S. state election officials still in the dark on Russian hacking

FILE PHOTO: Voters cast their votes during the U.S. presidential election in Elyria, Ohio, U.S. November 8, 2016. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk/File Photo

By Dustin Volz

ANAHEIM, Calif. (Reuters) – The federal government has not notified U.S. state election officials if their voting systems were targeted by suspected Russian hackers during the 2016 presidential campaign, and the information will likely never be made public, a top state election chief told Reuters.

“You’re absolutely never going to learn it, because we don’t even know it,” Judd Choate, state election director for Colorado and president of the National Association of State Election Directors, said in an interview on Thursday during the group’s summer conference.

Nearly 10 months after Republican Donald Trump’s upset presidential victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton, Choate said he had not spoken to a single state election director who had been told by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security if their state was among those attacked.

The lack of information-sharing on the election breaches reflects the difficulty state and federal officials have had in working together to protect U.S. voting from cyber threats. All U.S. elections are run by state and local governments, which have varying degrees of technical competence.

DHS told Congress in June that 21 states were targeted during the 2016 presidential race, and that while a small number were breached, there was no evidence any votes were manipulated.

Other reports have said 39 states were targeted. Choate said he had heard both numbers mentioned.

Several lawmakers, including Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, have expressed frustration at DHS’ refusal to identify which states had been targeted. Arizona and Illinois confirmed last year that hackers had targeted their voter registration systems.

In a statement, the DHS did not refute that states had not been notified if they were targeted, adding the agency informed the owners or operators of systems potentially victimized “who may not necessarily” be state election officials.

DHS was working with senior state election officials “to determine how best to share this information while protecting the integrity of investigations and the confidentiality of system owners,” the agency said.

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that the Kremlin orchestrated an operation that included hacking and online propaganda intended to tilt the November election in Trump’s favor.

Several congressional committees are investigating and Special Counsel Robert Mueller is leading a separate probe into the Russia matter, including whether Moscow colluded with the Trump campaign. Russia has denied election meddling and Trump has denied any collusion.

‘LEARN FROM THE MISSTEPS’

The four-day conference of election directors was originally supposed to be about issues like voter registration, but took a sharp turn following the election hacking.

“After the 2000 election, we all had to be lawyers,” Choate said. “And now after the 2016 election, we all have to be cyber security experts.”

DHS representatives at the event fended off questions about whether the federal government would be prepared to mobilize sufficient support for the states in the event of a catastrophic cyber attack near or during the 2018 elections.

“We want to make sure we learn from the missteps that may have happened in 2016 and we want to make sure we continue building on the things we did that were right,” Robert Gatlin, a DHS cyber official, said during a panel discussion.

Gatlin said the agency was working with U.S. intelligence agencies to “downgrade” more classified information so it could be shared with the states. Information about cyber attacks is typically guarded by a high classification because it may involve nation-state involvement or contain sensitive sources and methods, he said.

Legislation recently approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee would require the director of national intelligence to sponsor top-secret security clearance for eligible election officials in each state, something the National Association of Secretaries of State has advocated.

The bill would also require DHS to submit a report to Congress detailing cyber attacks and attempted cyber attacks by foreign governments on U.S. election infrastructure during the 2016 election.

Choate said communication about cyber threats had improved with federal agencies since the election and the decision by the outgoing Obama administration in January to elevate voting systems to a “critical infrastructure designation.”

Prior to the election, some state officials worried that closer oversight of election systems represented a dangerous federal intrusion into local affairs.

(Reporting by Dustin Volz; Editing by Jonathan Weber and Peter Cooney)

Germany’s Schulz says he would demand U.S. withdraw nuclear arms

FILE PHOTO: Election campaign posters for the upcoming general elections of the Christian Democratic Union party (CDU) with a headshot of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Germany's Social Democratic Party (SPD) candidate for chancellor, Martin Schulz, are pictured in Berlin, Germany August 21, 2017. REUTERS/Fabrizio Bensch

BERLIN (Reuters) – The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats (SPD) pledged to have U.S. nuclear weapons withdrawn from German territory if, against the odds, he defeats Angela Merkel to become chancellor next month.

Addressing a campaign rally in Trier late on Tuesday, SPD leader Martin Schulz also said he, unlike Merkel, would resist demands by U.S. President Donald Trump for NATO members to increase their defense spending.

“Trump wants nuclear armament. We are against this,” Schulz said, apparently trying to differentiate his party from Merkel’s more hawkish Christian Democratic Union (CDU). “As chancellor, I will commit Germany to having the nuclear weapons stationed here withdrawn from our country,” he said.

About 20 U.S. nuclear warheads are thought to be stationed at a military base in Buechel, in western Germany, according to unofficial estimates. The U.S. embassy in Berlin said it does not comment on nuclear weapons in Germany.

Taking advantage of Trump’s extreme unpopularity in Germany, Schulz also said he would use the money Merkel had earmarked for increased military spending for other purposes.

“What to do with our money is the central question of this election,” he said, referring to a 30 billion-euro tax surplus. “Trump demands that 2 percent of GDP, 30 billion euros, should go to military spending, and Merkel agreed to that without asking German citizens.”

Germany and other NATO members had already pledged to raise their defense spending to 2 percent of gross domestic product before Trump was elected. While most of them have increased spending on their militaries, only a few have reached the 2 percent goal, and Germany is not one of them.

Most recent polls show Schulz’s party polling at around 24 percent, some 14 percentage points behind Merkel. Most expect a booming economy and low unemployment will carry her into a fourth term in Sept. 24 elections.

However, with Germans historically wary of using military force since World War Two, Schulz’s message may resonate among the SPD’s core voters.

After 12 years in office, Merkel has become increasingly confident on the global stage. She has pushed for Germany to become more militarily self-reliant, partly in response to Trump’s hinting that he might abandon NATO allies if they do not spend more on defense.

Earlier this year, Merkel said the times when Germany could rely on others to defend it were “to some extent in the past” .

(Reporting By Thomas Escritt)

Erdogan tells Turks in Germany to vote against Merkel

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan greets the audience during a ceremony to mark the 16th anniversary of his ruling AK Party's foundation in Ankara, Turkey, August 14, 2017. REUTERS/Umit Bektas

By Bulent Usta

ISTANBUL (Reuters) – Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan on Friday said German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats were enemies of Turkey and called on Turks in Germany to vote against major parties in next month’s elections.

The comments are some of Erdogan’s harshest yet against Merkel and her Christian Democrats, illustrating the widening divide between the NATO allies and major trade partners.

Ties between Ankara and Berlin have been strained in the aftermath of last year’s failed coup as Turkish authorities have sacked or suspended 150,000 people and detained more than 50,000 people, including German nationals.

Germany has voiced concern that Erdogan is using the coup as a pretext to quash dissent. Erdogan, an authoritarian leader whose roots are in political Islam, has accused Germany of anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim sentiment.

“I am calling on all my countrymen in Germany: the Christian Democrats, SDP, the Green Party are all enemies of Turkey. Support those political parties who are not enemies of Turkey,” he said in comments after Friday prayers in Istanbul.

“I call on them not to vote for those parties who have been engaged in such aggressive, disrespectful attitudes against Turkey, and I invite them to teach a lesson to those political parties at the ballot box,” he said.

Germany has a large Turkish diaspora and it contains a broad range of opinion on Turkish politics.

Germans go to the polls on Sept. 24 for elections where Merkel is running for a fourth term. Her conservatives enjoy a comfortable lead over the Social Democrats (SPD), their current coalition partner and major rival.

As a result, Erdogan’s comments are unlikely to sway the election’s outcome.

Western governments, particularly Germany, have expressed apprehension at Erdogan’s tightening grip on power. In April, Turks narrowly backed a referendum to change the constitution and grant Erdogan sweeping executive powers.

In the run-up to the referendum, German authorities prevented Turkish politicians from speaking to rallies of Turkish citizens in Germany, infuriating Ankara.

Turkey also blocked Berlin lawmakers from visiting their troops stationed in southern Turkey. The troops were later relocated to Jordan.

Merkel has also said there would be no expansion of a customs union or deepening in EU-Turkish ties, comments which infuriated Turkey.

Erdogan on Friday said Merkel’s remarks on the customs union showed Germany had become a country that violates the European Union’s acquis, or body of law.

(Additional reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu and Ece Toksabay; Writing by David Dolan; Editing by Dominic Evans and Matthew Mpoke Bigg)