our top story — president trump has met with president vladimir putin in helsinki and said he believes putin's claim that moscow has never meddled in american elections. there's been a scathing reaction in the united states from many republicans and democrats alike who expressed dismay that president trump cast doubt on the reliability of us intelligence agencies. hundreds of thousands of people have crammed ono the champs elysees in paris, to welcome france's world cup winning team home. and this story is trending on bbc.com. george clooney has set a new record for the highest earnings by an actor in a calendar year according to forbes magazine. he made an estimated $239 million, though much of that was due to the sale of his tequlia business. —— tequila. that's all. stay with bbc world news. now on bbc news, it's time for hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk.

i'm stephen sackur. in just a few days, pakistanis will go to the polls to elect a new government. democracy, rather than military dictatorship, is becoming a habit, or is it? accusations are flying inside the country of military meddling, intimidation of critical media voices and tacit support for friendly politicians. my guest today is one of pakistan's most influential figures, hameed haroon, boss of the dawn media group. is pakistan's democracy in danger? hameed haroon, welcome to hardtalk.

thank you. you're in london, but back home in pakistan there is a great deal of noise, energy, vibrancy to the last couple of weeks of campaigning in the pakistani elections, and yet you say that democracy in your country is threatened, it is in grave danger. why? i think, steve, the fact of the matter is that democracy without representative government or responsible government is not really democracy. and if, on the path to democracy, or on the path to mopping up a militancy, or on the path of trying to create a new social architecture in pakistan, if you're going to play around with the institution of democracy, you are going to do great damage to its possibility under a new political dispensation. you're pointing a finger

at the pakistani military. in a recent op—ed in the washington post, you wrote this, "there is an unprecedented assault by the pakistani military on the freedom of the press". now, pakistan has got a very difficult and sometimes toxic history of relations between the military and the media. are you seriously suggesting that right now, amid all the noise and vibrancy of an election campaign, there is an unprecedented assault on the free media? this has been about two years in the making. but in the last three months the intensification is major. i think that in the last three months all attempts have been made to mop up critical media, independent media. the largest focus on the attack are the three oldest media groups, the three oldest newspapers, the jang news, nawa i waqt, and dawn. which is, of course, your group.

that's right. yeah, but dawn is publishing, dawn is still able to give its independent voice of the election. this notion of yours, that something truly critical to the future of democracy is happening, seems to fly in the face of the evidence on the ground. and i am reminded of the phrase in the english language of, "never make the perfect the enemy of the good". maybe things aren't perfect in pakistan's democracy today, but if they are better than they have been in points in the past, maybe that's worth celebrating. i think that it would be wrong to say that things are better than they have been in the past. i think one could dangerously assume that things are not as bad as they might be, but on the inside i think, an independent press, if we had a quiet, acquiescent press, like many east asian countries do, like most middle eastern countries do, it might not be such a great loss.

but, despite everything else, and despite the battering pakistan's press has taken over the last few decades, i think it is a vibrant press. and we have almost an obligation to try and keep a vibrant press active not only for people in pakistan but for those in south asia and that part of the asian continent. but you also surely have an obligation not to exaggerate. so let's get to specifics. what are you saying is happening, you say the last few months has been critical, what are you saying in the last few months in your opinion is so very dangerous to freedom of expression and free press? for the first time and in this capacity i represent not only dawn but the 400 newspapers and magazines of the whole pakistan newspaper society which i am president of. it is my task as president of all pakistan newspaper society to represent the threats and dangers. i need to get to the specifics. otherwise you will stand accused at home, not least by the military, who are very angry that you have raised such an stink here, you'll be accused

of misrepresentation. so, give me the facts. what are the specifics? i think the first part of it has to do with the interruption, massive intervention, in the distribution system of newspapers, and of blocking television broadcasts in pakistan. so, dawn obviously has a distribution throughout the country. are you saying your newspaper cannot now be read by the people who want to read it across the country? in large parts of the country it can be read and in equally large parts it cannot be read. in certain cities like larkana, until 2a hours ago, they haven't seen dawn for two and a half months. blocking tv broadcasts... who is blocking it? well, if we were to believe the cpj, the committee to protectjournalists, reporters sans frontieres, and if we were to believe the international press institute, then they clearly indicate the military is blocking it.

and the reason for this assumption i think is that the state institutions are acting with impunity clearly in nawaz sharif‘s government, it wasn't nawaz sharif that was blocking it. in the prime ministership that followed subsequently of shahid khaqan abbasi, it wasn't the government. you are talking about, as the phrase goes, some sort of dark state, a deep state? i'm talking of a deep state, i'm talking of mistakes in military strategy. i don't think the military has decided it is their task to demolish democratic institutions forever. i think there's a mistaken strategy, i think is poorly conceived, it's on the eve of the elections. it is so widespread, it's not a single incident. let me quote you if i may, because you are making these charges on hardtalk, the words of major general asif ghafoor, a spokesman for the army, he says, "they have never tried to dictate or still less intimidate any media group orjournalist, and the military is determined not to be dragged into politics". of course i think that the major

general asif ghafoor, who is a bright man, would have difficulty explaining his role at the press conference where he put up pictures in front of all of the journalists, of social activists, of otherjournalists and anchors from television and declared that they were enemies of the state. it was almost an incitement to aggression and coercion against his people. some bloggers and some journalists have been threatened, some have been detained. abducted. well, you can call it abducted if you like. there was the famous case of gul bukhari who disappeared for a short while. many called that an abduction. so, are you, let us just be clear here, are you saying that elements in the armed forces, presumably under command, are going out and abducting journalists, threatening their lives? i am saying that in the eyes of the public, there is a perception, and in the eyes of the human rights

and international press organisations, and in the human rights organisations in pakistan, there is a strong perception that, because of the impunity with which these abductions take place, and the fact that there is no accounting for it, no holding anybody responsible or picking up anybody as a consequence, they go on without comment. we have appealed to international bodies, we have appealed to the pakistan government, to the supreme court, to the chief of army staff and to the caretaker prime minister. and, surely, if you were not involved, you would at least look into the matter and give some report about why these are happening on such a perpetual basis. for the last three months the freedom network, which combines incidents from eight press clubs in pakistan, shows a massive intensification... let's bring this close to home. have your own journalists in the dawn media group been intimidated and threatened? have they actually experienced this? i think there has been a level of attempted intimidation,

on social media, as a result of a joint investigation team, in which the military is included, when the personal phone numbers and mobile numbers and the addresses of people being investigated are put on social media, this becomes an incitement for people to attack... are yourjournalists living in fear? i think not only myjournalists but a large number ofjournalists through pakistan are deeply complaining about this self—censorship they have been forced to impose upon themselves. that's an interesting phrase, self—censorship. there is one particular story that has been very important in recent months, is the story of the rise of the movement of the pashtun tahaffuz movement, which has been demanding answers from the military about alleged disappearances, extrajudicial killings in parts of the country, particularly tribal areas of the country in the recent past. now, the allegation from journalists is that they have been required, not least by their own media organisations, not to report

on the rise of this movement, because the military doesn't want this movement to get publicity. is that happening in your media organisation? i think, with respect to the pashtun movement, it's terribly clear that there are — instructions work two ways, to give them and to accept them are two different things — but, yes, there is a high degree of complaint from a large number of media houses, newspapers and television channels that the government... you have not directly answered my question. you are the boss of dawn. you must know whether inside your own organisation there are journalists who are not reporting on something that they feel they ought to report on because they are being intimidated. with one qualification, that dawn has an autonomous editorial set—up and the editors take such decisions. but, yes, there is pressure. and there have been attempts by the military to clap down on those media who are reporting the pashtun movement.

i'm a journalist, so of course i am inclined to want to defend the freedom ofjournalists, but i also have to consider what is happening in pakistan today. there is a real security problem in pakistan. we just saw yet again in peshawar a suicide blast which killed a senior politician. again, very close to the run—up to the election. we have the army and the election itself saying they could be targeted saying they could be targeted and other politicians named as potential targets. the army has a duty to the people of your country to secure the country first and foremost. is it not a real possibility that the kinds of things you are saying, the inflammatory language you are using, is undermining the ability of the military to meet that duty? i think let me say first of all that i have tremendous admiration admiration for the steps taken

to curb the militancy over the years by army, but that admiration does not extend to misconceived policy of trying to browbeat the media, of trying to intimidate the media and of trying to prevent newspapers and television from getting information a cross for an election. ithink... my point is slightly different. my point is that the way you're using your language and the inflammatory ideas you are spreading undermines the army, first of all, the military‘s ability to safeguard the election without people then thinking, "oh my god, all of these troops are around the polling stations, they must be trying to fix it in some way," because you planted the seed of doubt of neutrality into people's heads. i think, to be terribly fair, the media is not quite as far from, steve, as you say. i think it is the military which has planted the seed of doubt with respect to the execution of their policies. so, when you see, and we understand from the pakistani election commission that they have called for literally hundreds of thousands of serving and retired security force personnel to be on duty at polling stations around the country, on election day, july 25th, are you saying to me that

that will feel you with fear? no, i am not saying that, it will be a good step to prevent the polling process from going wrong. but i am speaking of the atmosphere of pre—poll rigging which has taken place, where the selection of candidates, the decapitation of political party heads, the instituting of cases and investigations against politicians at different levels, i am not against the accountability process. i'm not for corruption in the political system. but i'm against the selective application. well, yes, and now you have put it out there, let's get to the nub of this in many ways, and the military would see it that way. you talked about what you see as the decapitation strategy that you say and have said for the last couple of years is being pursued in pakistani politics, particularly targeting nawaz sharif, who was the prime minister, who fell foul of a raft

of allegations about alleged properties owned in london, which he hadn't declared, forcing his resignation and he has even been convicted of a crime. now, you and your media group it seems have chosen to be deeply sympathetic to mr sharif. why have you done that? i think perhaps you mistake two different phenomena. the first one is that we have carefully put across whatever evidence is available on the corruption of politicians, including nawaz sharif and other parties, to the extent that it can be justified or it can be backed upped with material in our possession. the problem is not there. i think it is the selective method by which these politicians have been eliminated. i think a fairer playing field, a more level playing field might have been better. but you've always — if i may say so and look back at the record — it always seems you had a bit of a hotline to nawaz sharif‘s people and his interest. for example, going back to 2016, you were the media group who got hold of the leaked reports saying that nawaz sharif,

as prime minister, had demanded that the military take action, better more effective action, against terror groups inside the country. it was something that deeply embarrassed the military, they were very angry about it, they wanted to do where you got the leak from. and ever since then, there has been this sort of battle going on between you and the military, primarily over nawaz sharif. ijust wonder whether it is wise for a journalist to get into that? i think that we have to be very clearly i think that we have to be very clear and i have to state very clearly that the report in dawn leaks was never leaked to dawn. the "dawn leaks" is a title that was made up by the prosecutors of dawn. i think that... you published the leaked material. where it was leaked is perhaps a little bit immaterial. the point i'm getting to is that you pose here as the defenders ofjournalistic integrity, independence and impartiality

in pakistan and yet, to many in pakistan, not least in the military, you are not seen as entirely independent, neutral and impartial because, over the last couple of years, you're basically seen to have been increasingly giving a platform to one particular political player, nawaz sharif, who had run into an awful lot of trouble because of allegations of corruption. i was speaking particularly about the fact that there was no leak from nawaz sharif or his party. in fact, the news about which dawn printed in the so—called "dawn leaks saga" about the conversations with respect to two meetings was available at different points in pakistan and internationally. in fact, that material was procured internationally. its verification process... let's not get hung up on the technicalities of how all this panned out. the bottom line is this, and i come back to it, you, the self—proclaimed independent, impartial, neutral media group, covering pakistani politics are now seen to be supportive and sympathetic of nawaz sharif, his daughter, who are now, it has to be said, convicted criminals. i think what is more important

is there is an element of orchestration in that... where is your evidence? who is orchestrating and where is your evidence for it? i think that if you go to the social media, if you look at the trolls on social media, if you look at the attacks on dawn, you might get some idea that there is a very large presence by the ispr — or the inter services public relations — on the social media. pakistan intelligence... absolutely. ..is going after you... not going after us so much as going after anybody that they feel stands in their way. i think it is important to say that, although it is not a contest, we are hardly contenders for straight power. i think basically there is a civil military narrative which went wrong and dawn was the messenger and a large part of that is shooting the messenger. you see, you started this interview with the premise that pakistan's democracy is facing threats and dangers but, in a way, you are creating those threats and dangers, because you are now telling me that

the pakistan intelligence services are meddling in politics, to the extent that they want to "decapitate one particular important political player" and one can only infer that they therefore have other politicians they would like to see successful in the forthcoming election. is that what you believe, that they have favoured candidates? of course, not nawaz sharif who you say they want to decapitate, but others that they want to see in power? i think there is a preferred face of pakistan they'd like to see... who? the security forces and the establishment... no, no, who would they favour, in your opinion? i think that, at this point, there appears to be an attempt to favour second level string leaders and a patch up coalition which would rule, take directions from the deep state. you are not using names but i'm pretty sure that, from what you're saying, you mean imran khan and his pti party? well, there are times that imran‘s index goes up

with the security state and, at times, other people in his party are named. in every case... you are throwing out — i mean you have just said something potentially explosive in pakistani politics — that imran‘s fortunes go up and down depending on the interventions of the deep state and the intelligence services. and many political parties... where is your evidence? you're a journalist, you know that you can't say these things without having absolutely irrefutable evidence. i think that evidence today in pakistan must, to a certain extent, be looked at through inference, through the work of human rights organisations, through the works of political commentators. i'm not actually making a case against the state, i'm making a case for the state to conciliate itself with the media and try and keep the normal institutions of democracy going... but you are making a case against the state. from the very beginning, with this talk of the military trying to undermining freedom of expression and the free press, of course, you're making

a case against the state, and it comes back to the credibility of the entire democratic system, in pakistan. you, farfrom trying to build it up, appear to be trying to sow very grave seeds of doubt about that system. i am afraid, steve, as being the president of the apns. that is the overall pakistani press association. yes, i am elected to represent the rights of the media, the justified rights of the media. there is so much more i could go into which would perhaps be boring. as far as irrefutable evidence are concerned, so many of the orders given are illegal orders. for example, if you ask me to produce 20 people from different cities, hawkers, ordinary distributors, who have been stopped from distributing dawn and other newspapers... i get that point.

and you've made the point about what's happening on the ground but, before we finish — we're nearly out of time — i just want you to tell me what you think is going to happen over the next few days? we've got nawaz sharif, as we speak — nawar sharif hasn't returned but he is about to return any moment now to pakistan — unclear whether he's going to be detained, and then in a few days‘ time we've got the election itself. everything you're saying to me suggests you have a very bleak view of how this election is going to pan out. i'm perhaps more optimistic than you think but, yes, i always have a bleak view when important provisions of the constitution, like article 19 which guarantees freedom of press, and article 19a which guarantees freedom of access to information... let me put it to you bluntly, everything you've said in this conversation suggests to me that when you sit down and watch the election result come out in a few days‘ time, you will have grave doubts about its validity and its legitimacy and, in particular — we've talked about imran khan and his party only one 30 odd seats last time around, the polls suggest he could win many more this time they could — maybe not — but they could

conceivably be part of a coalition that's governing the country and you appear to be saying to the people of your country, if that is the case, then you better have very grave doubts about legitimacy of the next government. no, i think the polling process is bound to be reasonably fair. it's the pre—polling process and the information and dissemination of information leading up to the electoral process which has been more than a little unfair and i think that we need to curb that. something we need to change, some things we need to improve so that, in the new political dispensation, freedom of press is one of the characteristics that characterises pakistan. a final thought, which isn't about the unknowns of the next few days in pakistani politics. it's a bigger thought. you seem, talking of being bleak, you also seem very pessimistic about the degree to which pakistani culture and levels of tolerance and openness and sort of dialogue, the degree to which they are not being improved by access to information, the internet revolution, the fact that virtually every pakistani now has a phone which can wire them immediately to a world of information.

you're suggesting, that levels of intolerance, notjust in terms of the state but in terms of community and people in their villages is not changing. is that true? no, it is changing and it is changing for the better but i think we appear to be in a deep transitional period and it is better to respect democratic institutions during the process of exchange to ensure there is a place for it. but you say, "unless we change our climate in the country" — the cultural climate — "unless we alter our basic values, i'd venture to say that, however bad partition was, our current situation could be even worse." i think so. it is of the spirit of intolerance with which public service, with which governance, with which public policy is viewed. obviously the militants have their effect on pakistan. but pakistan is not a militant state. i think pakistan is like everybody else in the world. we would like to be free

and if i can stand up, however small, or however defectively, for that freedom, i feel i am only doing my duty and i try and put that forward as much as possible. hameed haroon, it has been a pleasure to have you on a hardtalk. thank you very much indeed. thanks you, steve. hello there. monday was a day of contrast for the weather here in the uk. we had the searing heat in the east and temperatures pushed 32 degrees celsius at gravesend in kent. but for further north and west, for many areas, it was a fresher day. we had a weather front across us. and this is how it looked in north yorkshire through the afternoon.

now, that weather front is cold, it's been pushing its thundery rain eastwards and northwards through the night and because it's called a cold weather front, you guessed it, it is introducing cooler air so we will notice a fresher feel to the weather into tuesday except for the far south and east, but there will still be some thundery rain around north—eastern areas first thing and certainly through shetland. a much more comfortable night will have passed for many of us and the coming few nights should be more comfortable because not only are we cooling the air down, we are losing the humidity. a lovely start to the day, plenty of sunshine which will clear any mist quite quickly. the cloud will tend to bubble up, fair weather cloud and will produce a few showers through the afternoon, particularly across northern england. scotland, heavy ones, slow—moving ones across the north and east with a light winds and very few showers elsewhere. but in contrast to monday, temperatures will be notably down across england and wales and it won't feel quite so intense, the heat.

still lovely and warm in the sunshine. more of that will follow as we move into wednesday, high pressure building again, so another comfortable night tuesday into wednesday and plenty of sunshine first thing, any mist clears quickly and we will see a scattering of showers, mostly in the west, possibly in scotland, one or two heavy ones as well but by and large, the exception rather than the rule. temperatures will start recover a little bit as we see more heat coming in from the sun than we lose. the temperatures are creeping up a degree on wednesday. they'll creep up another degree on thursday, high pressure with us. very few showers, but later thursday into friday, watching the approach of this low pressure, giving us a bit of headache all week, but it looks like it will bring showery rain, mostly to scotland and northern ireland, possibly northern parts of england and wales but for the bulk of england and wlaes, again, quite hot and dry, temperatures exceeding those of thursday by another degree and a little bit of brightness between the showery rain further north as well. with high pressure re—establishing itself towards the weekend,

it will push the unsettled weather away. there will be a lot of dry and fine weather. but you can see the risk of quite a bit of cloud into saturday in the north and west, particularly scotland, but at the moment, the weekend is looking very promising, particularly in central and southern areas. i'm rico hizon in singapore. the headlines — donald trump sides with vladimir putin over claims russia meddled in american elections, implying his own intelligence services got it wrong. president putin, hejust said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. mr trump says the summit marks a change in the relationship but there's been a scathing reaction in washington. i'm babita sharma in london. also in the programme — an angry mob slaughters nearly 300 crocodiles at a sanctuary in indonesia.

police say they were unable to stop it. and it's party time in paris