The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has initiated an ex officio investigation against Özgür Özel, the chairman of the Republican People’s Party (CHP), due to allegations of “insulting the President” and “insulting a public official due to his duty.” This action comes in response to comments made by Özel during a party rally held in Ümraniye, where he criticized the treatment of judiciary members involved in high-profile investigations. The situation has attracted significant attention amid rising tensions between political factions in Turkey, prompting reactions from both Özel and government officials, notably the Minister of Justice.

The Investigation Against Özgür Özel

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced the initiation of an investigation against Özgür Özel for alleged offenses related to insulting the President and public officials. The charges stem from remarks made by Özel during a rally in Ümraniye, where he targeted President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and judiciary members. According to the Prosecutor’s statement, Özel’s words were seen as inflammatory, contributing to the charged political climate. The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office emphasized its commitment to conducting a thorough investigation into the allegations, asserting that it would be approached with “determination and meticulousness.”

Özel’s Defense: A Social Media Response

In light of the investigation, Özgür Özel took to social media to express his outrage and defend himself against the accusations. In his post, he articulated concerns regarding the appropriateness of the conduct of Akın Gürlek, the Istanbul Chief Prosecutor, who he claimed had previously acted unlawfully while affiliated with a public company abroad. He argued that instead of investigating him, the government should hold accountable those who, according to him, are misusing their power. Özel’s critique touched on broader themes of justice and governance, characterizing the Prosecutor’s actions as politically motivated rather than in line with legal principles. He concluded his post with a call for peace and unity among Turkish citizens, expressing that the public is weary of the ongoing polarization.

Government Response: Justice Minister’s Remarks

Justice Minister Yılmaz Tunç responded to Özel’s comments, reiterating the government’s stance on the allegations against the CHP leader. Tunç stated that Özel’s remarks were not only politically immoral but also disrespectful to the traditions of the state and the values of the nation. He underscored the seriousness of the remarks targeting both the President and the judiciary, stating that such “hate speech” could not be tolerated. Emphasizing the importance of upholding the law, Tunç declared that all officials, regardless of their status, are subject to the same legal standards. His comments underscored the increasing tensions and divisions within Turkish politics as accusations and counter-accusations fly amidst a charged electoral landscape.

Public Reaction and Political Ramifications

The investigation of Özgür Özel has elicited varied reactions from the public and political commentators. Supporters of Özel argue that the investigation is a blatant attempt to suppress dissent and stifle opposition voices in Turkey. Many view it as indicative of broader governmental efforts to control political discourse and diminish the influence of opposition parties. Conversely, pro-government commentators argue that Özel’s comments crossed a line and demonstrated a troubling disrespect for the country’s political institutions. This incident may exacerbate existing tensions between the ruling party and opposition groups, with each side viewing the situation through their respective political lenses. As Turkey gears up for upcoming elections, these events will likely play a significant role in shaping voter perceptions and campaign strategies.

The Political Context: Current Tensions in Turkey

The implications of the ongoing investigation extend beyond the immediate situation involving Özgür Özel. The political climate in Turkey is deeply polarized, with heightened tensions between the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and opposition factions. This episode illustrates the precarious balance of power and the contentious atmosphere within Turkish politics. Özel’s criticisms reflect a broader sentiment among many citizens who seek to challenge the status quo and advocate for accountability within government institutions. As political tensions mount, the potential for dialogue between opposing factions seems increasingly distant. The upcoming electoral cycles will serve as a crucial test of these dynamics, potentially impacting the trajectory of governance in Turkey for years to come.

Summary

The ex officio investigation against Özgür Özel serves as a critical flashpoint in the already tumultuous landscape of Turkish politics. As tensions between the ruling and opposition parties continue to escalate, the implications of this inquiry are likely to ripple through the upcoming election cycle. With Özel mounting a robust defense against the allegations, the unfolding situation will be closely monitored, potentially impacting both public sentiment and political alliances in the months ahead.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What are the charges against Özgür Özel?

Özgür Özel is facing charges of insulting the President and a public official due to his duties, stemming from comments made during a party rally.

Question: How has Özgür Özel responded to the investigation?

Özel has taken to social media to criticize the investigation, alleging that it is politically motivated and calling for accountability among those misusing their power.

Question: What implications does this investigation have for Turkish politics?

The investigation underscores divisions between political factions in Turkey, potentially affecting voter perceptions and strategies ahead of upcoming elections.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

In Virginia’s competitive governor’s race, a new ad campaign is stirring controversy by linking Democratic candidate Abigail Spanberger to issues surrounding transgender policies and public safety. The advertisement, produced by the American Principles Project, draws attention to the case of a convicted sex offender while garnering comparisons to the infamous Willie Horton ad from 1988. With record early voting underway, surpassing prior elections, the Republican campaign aims to frame Spanberger as dangerous to the safety of children in a bid to sway voters ahead of the upcoming election.

Ad Campaign Overview and Context

The American Principles Project has launched a seven-figure advertising campaign targeting Abigail Spanberger, with the intention of associating her with issues related to public safety and transgender policy. The ad portrays Spanberger as someone whose policies could facilitate dangerous situations for children, implicating her in the case of a known sex offender, Richard Cox. The significance of the ad is amplified by its strategic timing, coinciding with early voting in Virginia, which has already seen significant turnout. During the first week of early voting, over 146,000 people had cast their ballots — more than twice the turnout from the preceding election cycle. This uptick reflects heightened engagement from voters, particularly regarding cultural and safety issues.

Specific Allegations Against Spanberger

The advertisement highlights Richard Cox, a convicted Tier III sex offender, who has multiple charges related to indecent exposure in facilities designated for females. The campaign claims that Spanberger’s stance on transgender policies—specifically her rejection of Governor Glenn Youngkin’s guidelines for transgender students—contributes to an unsafe environment for young girls. By asserting that Spanberger’s decisions prioritize ‘radical ideology over the safety of children’, the advertisement intensifies the narrative that she is reckless regarding public safety.

“The case of sexual deviant Richard Cox preying upon young girls in Virginia is enraging to any decent person – but not to Abigail Spanberger,”

stated Terry Schilling, the founder of the American Principles Project. He further critiques Spanberger for her lack of condemnation surrounding Cox’s actions.

Comparative Strategies in Political Advertising

The ad’s strategy bears a striking resemblance to the notorious Willie Horton campaign ad from 1988, which successfully utilized crime concerns to instill fear and sway voter opinion against the Democratic candidate. This tactic reflects a history in U.S. politics where fear of crime is leveraged to mobilize voters, particularly in key battleground states. The American Principles Project has previously executed similar campaigns in other regions, arguing that certain policies may confuse children about gender identity. By linking Spanberger to high-profile criminal cases, they aim to solidify a narrative of danger that resonates with parental concerns. As polling suggests increased sensitivity among parents towards safety issues, especially following Glenn Youngkin’s election success in 2021, this advertisement seeks to exploit that channel effectively.

Spanberger’s Response and Campaign Goals

The Spanberger campaign has adopted a different communication strategy, focusing on economic issues and her legislative record. A spokesperson defended Spanberger, stating that safety is her utmost priority as a parent with three daughters in Virginia public schools and a former federal law enforcement officer.

“Convicted sex offender Richard Cox is a predator who should be in jail — and that’s exactly where he is,”

they emphasized. Spanberger’s team is aiming to steer the conversation toward policy achievements and economic stability, hoping to counteract the negative portrayal created by the ad campaign.

Current Polling and Voter Sentiment

As the race intensifies, polling data indicates a competitive landscape. A recent survey from the Washington Post Schar School revealed Spanberger at 55%, leading Winsome Earle-Sears, the Republican nominee, who stands at 43%. Notably, Virginia Republicans are reportedly making a strong showing in early voting. The strategic timeliness of ads like the one from the American Principles Project aims to sway voters in these critical weeks leading up to the election. With early voting set to conclude on November 1, the outcome of these advertisements will be crucial in affecting voter sentiment and behavior.

Summary

The ad campaign against Abigail Spanberger taps into broader fears relating to crime and child safety, mirroring past political strategies that have influenced voter preferences. As early voting sets records in Virginia, the implications of these ads could play a significant role in shaping the outcome of the election. With both candidates galvanizing their bases, the next few weeks will be pivotal in determining which of their narratives resonates more effectively with the electorate.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What is the primary focus of the American Principles Project’s ad campaign?

The primary focus of the American Principles Project’s ad campaign is to link Abigail Spanberger to issues surrounding public safety and transgender policies, particularly in relation to the case of a convicted sex offender.

Question: How does the advertisement relate to past political campaigns?

The advertisement draws comparisons to the 1988 Willie Horton ad, which successfully utilized crime fears to influence public opinion against the Democratic candidate during that election cycle.

Question: What are Spanberger’s key arguments against the claims made in the advertisement?

Spanberger’s campaign emphasizes her commitment to safety for children and her legislative record, presenting her background as a former federal law enforcement officer as evidence of her dedication to the issue.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

An investigation has been initiated by Istanbul prosecutors into the all-female music group Manifest following their age-restricted concert that took place on September 6 in the Şişli district of Istanbul. The İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has asserted that the group may have engaged in “obscene behavior” and “exhibitionism” during the performance at Küçükçiftlik Park, which was their first concert designated for audience members aged 18 and above. This investigation highlights tensions surrounding artistic expression and public decency in Turkey.

Background of the Investigation

The investigation centers on an all-female music group, Manifest, which held a concert in Istanbul that has become a focal point of controversy. Officials from the İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office announced the investigation shortly after the performance. The concert in question took place on September 6 in Küçükçiftlik Park, located in the vibrant Şişli district, an area known for its cultural and artistic displays. The performance was labeled as a +18 event, indicating that it was intended for adult audiences only, which raises questions about public reception and artistic liberties.

This inquiry into the group has spurred debate about artistic expression versus societal norms. The concept of obscenity, particularly in a modern context where the definitions are often blurred, has come to represent deeper societal divides regarding individual freedoms and public morality. This scrutiny is not isolated; instead, it mirrors broader issues in Turkey where artistic expression and freedom of speech are frequently challenged.

Legal Framework Regarding Obscenity

Turkey’s legal statutes outline specific codes concerning obscenity and public decency, with Article 226 of the penal code explicitly prohibiting the distribution of “obscene” content through any media channels. However, the law lacks a precise definition of what constitutes “obscene behavior,” leaving it subject to interpretation. This ambiguity has created a legal environment where artists may find themselves vulnerable to prosecution based on subjective evaluations of their work.

In addition to Article 226, Article 225 of the same penal code addresses public exhibitionism, which includes acts perceived as nudity or sexual conduct in public spaces. Such legal definitions are increasingly contentious as they fail to encompass the complexities of modern artistic expression, instead enforcing traditional conceptions of morality in a rapidly changing cultural landscape.

The lack of clarity surrounding these legal frameworks means that artists can easily be cast as offenders, with prosecutors able to assert claims of “violating public decency” based on broad interpretations of their actions. This environment instills fear among artists regarding the risks associated with lifting societal constraints during performances.

Concert Details and Audience Response

The September 6 concert marked a significant milestone for Manifest as it was their inaugural +18 performance since their formation earlier this year. The event drew a sold-out audience of approximately 12,000 attendees, eager to experience the band’s music and stage presence. The high turnout underscores the group’s growing popularity and the anticipation surrounding their performances.

Despite the legal scrutiny, the fans seemed undeterred, celebrating the show that showcased the group’s distinctive style and musicality. Social media buzz around the event highlighted that attendees found the performance to be engaging and a necessary expression of women’s empowerment through music. The enthusiastic crowd challenged the negative portrayals by authorities, underscoring a generational clash over definitions of decency and artistic expression.

Public and Institutional Reactions

The investigation into Manifest has ignited a wave of criticism from various organizations and individuals. The We Will Stop Femicide Platform expressed solidarity with the group, arguing that the attempts to police women’s expressions are fundamentally attacks on their rights. This statement aligns with broader movements advocating for women’s autonomy and condemning societal controls placed on personal decisions, including artistic choices.

Additionally, the Musicians and Performing Artists Union (Müzik-Sen) voiced their disapproval of the investigation, labeling it as a “reactionary stance.” By framing the inquiry as an attack on artistic expression, they call attention to the broader implications for artists in Turkey and the risks of censorship that they face. Opposition deputy Murat Emir of the Republican People’s Party criticized the actions of authorities, declaring that they promote a distorted sense of morality, one that does not resonate with contemporary societal values.

On the other hand, the investigation received support from some government factions. Oktay Saral, an advisor to the President, publicly condemned the band, describing them in derogatory terms as “immoral,” and called for legal actions to prevent further exhibitions he denounced as indecent. This dichotomy in public perception illustrates the polarized attitudes towards feminism, artistic expression, and government authority in Turkey.

Profile of the Group Manifest

Manifest is an emerging all-female music group composed of six talented members: Mina Solak, Esin Bahat, Zeynep Sude Oktay, Lidya Pınar, Sueda Uluca, and Emine Hilal Yelekçi. The group gained significant attention after winning the Big5 Türkiye talent competition, which led to their rapid rise in the Turkish music scene. Since their public debut in February, they have released their first album, Manifestival, on June 13, and subsequently, they have performed at numerous prestigious venues and festivals throughout Turkey.

Manifest has effectively utilized digital platforms to establish a strong fan base, accumulating nearly two million followers across social media channels like Instagram, TikTok, X, and YouTube. Their presence on Spotify showcases their popularity, with over 4.2 million monthly listeners tuning into their energetic and empowering music. Their journey signifies an emerging cultural wave within Turkey that seeks to redefine boundaries concerning women’s roles and representation in the arts.

Summary

The investigation into Manifest represents a critical moment in the ongoing struggle for artistic expression and women’s rights in Turkey. As legal definitions of obscenity remain murky, questions arise about the boundaries of artistic freedom in a society that is increasingly polarized over issues of morality and empowerment. The group’s rising popularity and the backlash against their censorship highlight a cultural shift towards greater acceptance of diverse expressions in an ever-evolving landscape.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: Who are the members of the group Manifest?

The group consists of six talented members: Mina Solak, Esin Bahat, Zeynep Sude Oktay, Lidya Pınar, Sueda Uluca, and Emine Hilal Yelekçi.

Question: What is the significance of the concert on September 6?

The concert was Manifest’s first +18 event, indicating it was intended for adult audiences only and attracting significant media and public attention due to the ensuing investigation.

Question: How has the public responded to the investigation?

The investigation has elicited a mix of criticism and support, reflecting broader societal debates on women’s rights, morality, and artistic freedom in Turkey, with several organizations vocally opposing the move.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

The demand for peace among Kurdish communities in Turkey has once again emerged as a focal point in national discourse, especially in light of recent developments. Following a historic call from Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a significant event is slated for July 11, where PKK members are expected to symbolically lay down their arms in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq. Observers believe that this moment signifies not only a symbolic gesture but may also mark the start of a new phase towards a sustainable peace process. Analysts like Tuncer Bakırhan, co-chair of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Equality and Democracy (DEM) Party, are emphasizing that genuine peace extends beyond merely halting violence, advocating instead for the establishment of a societal framework based on dignity and equality.

The Call for Peace

In a recent video address, Abdullah Öcalan made a compelling appeal to the PKK, urging an end to armed conflict. His remarks have resonated widely, with many seeing this as a potential turning point in Turkey’s lengthy struggle over Kurdish rights and identity. The symbolic laying down of arms by PKK members on July 11 in Iraq’s Kurdish region aligns with his call, which is interpreted by supporters as a major step toward an honorable peace. The announcement represents more than words; it embodies decades of activism and advocacy from the Kurdish community aimed at acquiring greater autonomy and recognition within Turkey.

Critics of the ongoing violence argue that real peace necessitates a commitment from both sides to engage in meaningful dialogue rather than merely appeasing each other through gestures. Tuncer Bakırhan echoed this sentiment, remarking that the road toward peace includes commitments to justice and equality for all, stressing that these foundations must be established if a lasting resolution is to be achieved.

The Role of Parliament in Peace Initiatives

Amid these developments, discussions are surfacing regarding the establishment of a parliamentary committee focusing on social peace. Tuncer Bakırhan emphasized the urgency of this initiative, asserting that building a framework for “social peace” is not simply a desire but a necessity for Turkey’s future. He pointed out that the committee should prioritize principles such as equal representation and tangible outcomes that focus on establishing justice and truth within the context of Kurdish rights.

The envisioned committee aims not just to manage existing conflicts but to fundamentally address the “Kurdish question” through democratic means. Bakırhan clarified that he expects universal rights to be legally guaranteed and encourages a platform that fosters democratic dialogue. This framework is seen as essential to ensuring that the rights of all participants—including women, workers, and vulnerable groups—are actively protected and represented.

Steps Towards Disarmament

As discussions surrounding disarmament proceed, observers note a strong correlation to deeper structural reforms within Turkey. Achieving genuine disarmament, according to Tuncer Bakırhan, requires a robust set of legal frameworks. It is essential that Turkey adopts a democratic constitution that guarantees the rights of various identities, provides clarity regarding local governance, and protects political participation.

Observations from various meetings indicate that a series of legal safeguards are necessary to ensure that disarmament is met with a genuine democratization of Turkish society. Key conditions include revising the Anti-Terror Law to eliminate arbitrary restrictions on freedoms and ensuring a political solution is established to not only lay down arms but also to enable ongoing political engagement. By ensuring that the foundational laws reflect the principles of justice and democracy, proponents believe that a more peaceful society can be built.

International Reactions and Expectations

The DEM Party’s leadership has been actively engaging with international representatives, seeking support for Turkey’s evolving peace process. Meetings have led to clear messages from the international community indicating that a democratic resolution of the Kurdish question is pivotal to achieving lasting peace not just within Turkey, but throughout the entire Middle East.

Observers indicate that international backing could play a critical role in prompting the Turkish government to take effective steps toward peace and stability. Emphasizing that the issues surrounding Öcalan should be viewed through a broader lens, the DEM Party underscores that genuine dialogue and negotiation channels must be accessible to facilitate progress. The establishment of these links is not only vital for domestic peace efforts but is viewed as crucial in stabilizing the broader region.

The Significance of the New Phase

The recent shift in discourse surrounding Kurdish rights represents a significant new phase in negotiations and peace initiatives. Following a productive meeting between President Erdoğan and the DEM Party’s delegation, it became clear that both sides have intentions of moving forward with tangible steps. This new phase is characterized by a combination of disarmament and parliamentary action intended to address the Kurdish question comprehensively.

The dual focus on halting violence and creating mechanisms for direct dialogue highlights an evolving landscape where social, political, and economic dimensions are equally prioritized. Tuncer Bakırhan suggested that through mutual responsibility, all stakeholders could play an active role in fostering an environment conducive to long-term peace. This collaborative approach will not only serve to bridge divides but also pave the way for constructive engagement among diverse groups within Turkey.

Summary

As the Kurdish demand for peace comes to the forefront of public discussion, the recent call from Abdullah Öcalan for disarmament represents a critical step towards resolving longstanding grievances within Turkish society. The suggested formation of a parliamentary committee seeks to create sustainable pathways for dialogue and societal recovery, while international perspectives emphasize the need for a democratic resolution to the Kurdish issue. This evolving situation may hold implications not just for Turkey, but for the broader Middle Eastern landscape as well, ultimately pointing toward a more inclusive and peaceful future.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What is the significance of Abdullah Öcalan’s recent call for peace?

Öcalan’s call signifies a potential shift towards reconciliation and dialogue in Turkey’s long-standing Kurdish issue, encouraging disarmament as a first step towards a broader peace process.

Question: How does the DEM Party plan to support Kurdish rights moving forward?

The DEM Party aims to ensure that the rights of the Kurdish people are integrated into Turkey’s legal framework, promoting local governance and greater political representation as essential to achieving equality.

Question: Why is international support important for the peace process in Turkey?

International support is crucial for encouraging the Turkish government to adopt necessary reforms and create an environment conducive to peace. It underscores the global implications of Turkey’s approach to resolving the Kurdish issue.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

An investigation has been launched in Turkey following the publication of a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad in a humor magazine. This act has sparked significant backlash among religious and social groups, prompting legal action from the authorities. Justice Minister Yilmaz Tunç emphasized that disrespecting religious beliefs would not be tolerated, while various organizations condemned the magazine for offending millions of Muslims.

Official Responses to the Controversy

In a serious move against what has been deemed an offensive portrayal, Justice Minister Yilmaz Tunç made a public announcement via social media declaring that legal actions would follow against the magazine that published the cartoon. The minister stated, “Disrespect for our beliefs is never acceptable,” underlining the cultural sensitivities surrounding religious figures in Turkey. His comments reflect a widespread sentiment among many Turkish citizens who hold their faith in high regard. Furthermore, he emphasized that humor should never cross the line into disrespect, as caricaturing holy figures not only taints religious values but also threatens social harmony. The publication’s actions are being scrutinized under Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code, which addresses public insults to religious beliefs.

Public Reaction and Protests

Following the publication, intense reactions emerged on social media platforms. One notable reaction came from the Great Eastern Raiders Youth Organization, which is reportedly linked to other religious extremist groups. They organized protests targeting Leman Magazine, calling for actions against its staff. Many protestors expressed their outrage by gathering around the magazine’s office and demonstrating in various public spaces across Istanbul. This public outcry exemplifies the deep-seated feelings surrounding depictions of the Prophet within Turkish society, showing how cultural demands often blend with political actions. The protests have highlighted a broader conflict over how freedom of expression intersects with religious and cultural values.

Legal Proceedings Initiated

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has launched an official inquiry regarding the cartoon’s publication. The inquiry delves into whether the content violates Turkish law and represents an offense against religious sentiments. As a result of this investigation, a decision has been made to detain four individuals connected to the magazine. Legal procedures have also been put in place to seize the issue that contains the cartoon, alongside efforts to restrict access to relevant social media accounts. This swift legal action indicates the Turkish government’s commitment to safeguarding religious sentiments and demonstrates the serious consequences involved in disseminating materials perceived as offensive. The developments reflect an ongoing struggle within the nation regarding artistic expression versus religious convictions.

Statements from Religious Leaders

In light of the incident, various religious leaders have spoken out against the publication, reinforcing the idea that the sanctity of religious figures must be protected. Fahrettin Altun, the President of the Presidency Communication, condemned the caricature as an immoral act, stating that such publications should not be allowed to flourish in a society that promotes ethical values. His emphasis on exercising “common sense” calls for a balanced approach to handling such sensitive topics while advocating for freedom of press. Other prominent religious figures echoed similar sentiments, noting that acts perceived as blasphemous not only hurt individual beliefs but can also incite larger communal unrest.

Implications for Freedom of Expression

The incident raises significant questions regarding the boundaries of freedom of expression in Turkey. While many argue that satire and humor are vital components of a democratic society, others believe there are limits when it comes to religious sensitivities. This delicate balance presents ongoing challenges for governments, courts, and media institutions alike. Critics argue that laws protecting religious sentiments may inadvertently stifle artistic freedom and censor creative expression. The debate surrounding this incident may also have wider implications for the relationship between secular governance and a predominantly Muslim populace, as authorities navigate public sentiment against the backdrop of international norms surrounding free speech.

Summary

In summary, the controversy surrounding the cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad has ignited strong reactions across Turkey, resulting in legal investigations and public protests. The official responses from various government officials and religious leaders underscore the importance of religious sensibilities in shaping discourse and policy within the nation. As the debate continues, it reinforces the need to navigate the complexities of freedom of expression in a society marked by deep-rooted cultural values and beliefs.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What actions were taken against the magazine that published the cartoon?

Legal proceedings were initiated by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, which led to the detention of four individuals associated with the magazine and the seizure of the issue containing the cartoon.

Question: How did government officials react to the cartoon?

Officials, including Justice Minister Yilmaz Tunç, condemned the cartoon as disrespectful, asserting that it harmed religious values and social peace.

Question: What has been the public response to the publication?

The public response has included widespread protests, with organizations calling for actions against the magazine and mobilizing community sentiment against perceived blasphemy.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.