despite several ministerial resignations and a growing challenge to her leadership. other european union leaders have said they won't renegotiate the draft brexit agreement even if it's rejected by parliament in london. judges at the international tribunal in cambodia are about to deliver a verdict on genocide charges against two leaders of the khmer rouge. nuon chea and khieu samphan are accused of carrying out a policy of targeting and eliminating two ethnic minorities. they have already been convicted of other crimes. the united states has imposed sanctions on 17 saudi officials for their alleged role in the murder of the journalist, jamal khashoggi. in saudi arabia itself, a government prosecutor is seeking the death penalty for five people charged with the killing at the saudi consulate in istanbul. you up—to—date on the headlines. now on bbc news, shaun ley speaks to senior us districtjudge mark

wolf on hardtalk. hello and welcome to hardtalk. i am shaun ley. the corrupt go to prison u nless shaun ley. the corrupt go to prison unless of course they run them. how do you stop prime ministers and presidents lining their pockets with the country's well. usjudge mark wolf is lobbying for the creation of an international anticorruption court. mark wolf knows it well, helping unearth the links between the fbi and a notorious gangster in boston. he says the country who won't hold governments to account should let the courts do the work. when his own government says it wa nts when his own government says it wants internationaljustice to die, what hope is there of holding the corrupt government to account? mark wolf, welcome to hardtalk. why

do you think we need an international anticorruption do you think we need an international anticorru ption court? we need an international anticorruption we need an international anticorru ption court because we need an international anticorruption court because grand corruption, the abuse of public office for private gain, is endemic, it flourishes in many countries throughout the world. it has devastating consequences, ten times more is lost to corruption in developing countries than they receive in foreign aid. indignation at corruption generates constituents for terrorists organisations like boko haram and the taliban which have positioned themselves as the prime opponents of corrupt governments in their capitals. it is a virtual complete correlation between the countries that are most

corrupt at the top and those that are most abusive of their citizens‘ human rights. the un hayek for human rights correctly said corruption kills. the amount lost to corruption every year could see the world‘s hungry at times over. if i can just add the problem is not a lack of laws. 183 countries have signed the un convention against corruption. they all have laws making bribery and extortion, misappropriation of national resources are legal but many do not enforce those laws against their corrupt leaders because those leaders control the police, the prosecutors and the courts. in those circumstances, given that countries are losing vast sums of money, given that there is anger in the countries themselves affected, why haven‘t we had an anticorruption affected, why haven‘t we had an anticorru ption court, what affected, why haven‘t we had an anticorruption court, what is the o bsta cle ? anticorruption court, what is the obstacle? well, i think the obstacle is that this has been treated to much as a domestic issue. but given

the consequences are just described, secretary of state john the consequences are just described, secretary of statejohn kerry the consequences are just described, secretary of state john kerry was correct couple of years ago when he said we can‘t view corruption any longer as a domestic concern. and prime minister cameron in convening... the british prime minister. prime minister cameron inconveniently london anticorruption summit in 2016 was certainly right when he said the world have looked away from this too long. good part of the problem be though that this is devilishly difficult to achieve? —— or part of the problem. one of the reasons is that the president have struggled with it. let me put to you what the late antonio caceres eh, president for the international criminal tribunal, from the former yugoslavia, said the problem for the international court is they can only operate as long as sovereign states will lead a helping hand. as soon as a state on whose territory material evidence or an accused may be found

refuses to bow to international justice, international criminal court is powerless. in other words they are completely at the mercy of they are completely at the mercy of the domestic. i would say two thing. my the domestic. i would say two thing. my partner in integrity initiatives international that was formed in meaningful measure to advocate for this court is justice richard goldstone from south africa, the first prosecutor for the international criminal tribunal in forming yugoslavia and rwanda and he believes like me this is both essential and possible. second, there has been a pollution in mechanisms, institutions, since that statement was made. emerging from the 2016 london summit is the international anticorruption the 2016 london summit is the international anticorru ption court a nation centre. based in london, which started in 2017, where the uk, the us, new zealand, singapore, germany and switzerland are collaborating. that is all fine but that still hits the same problem, doesn‘t it, they might be collaborating but if a country doesn‘t want to co—operate it dies.

there are ways to get to this. such as? grand corruption is frequently usually a crime not committed in any one country. if, say, by hypothetical example, president putin takes a bribe or anybody takes a bright they don‘t want to keep that money in their country so they will move through banks in switzerland, in london, in new york and those are crimes, money laundering crimes that can be prosecuted in any of those jurisdictions. you may not be able to get evidence in every jurisdiction easily, but you can get evidence in some and it may well be that the crime can be investigated in one place and if it‘s not prosecuted in that place, prosecuted in the international anticorru ption court. i am glad you gave me that exemplar because i want to put to you what was said from the foreign affa i rs you what was said from the foreign affairs select committee of the house of commons in britain, and they complained about the report

they complained about the report they called rather colourfully moscow‘s gold rush and corruption in the uk and they said the british government, a country involved in this anticorru ption centre government, a country involved in this anticorruption centre you are talking about, host one of its officers, the british government has allowed human rights abuses to use the city of london to launder ill gotten funds to circumvent sanctions. a lax approach to money laundering is putting money into the hands of regimes that harm the uk, if interest and allies. this is a matter of five months ago this report was issued. it is happening 110w. report was issued. it is happening now. now, when even the good guys are not enforcing the rules, what hope of getting the bad guys to do it? well, i guess i would say the following, the situation you described i think is historically been correct and must to some degree it still be correct, but you have contending forces. i have been looking at the national crime agency‘s anticorru ption strategy looking at the national crime agency‘s anticorruption strategy and actually the part of the reason i am

in london is i think that your leading in your efforts to combat this but it is definitely true it has been economically very advantageous for countries to take corrupt funds and when they have historically cracked down on somebody they have been the people out of power in say ukraine and one of the advantages of an international anticorruption of the advantages of an international anticorru ption court is that it wouldn‘t be influenced by those economic considerations and it wouldn‘t be influenced by chill geo— grid on geopolitical considerations. you have in making the case for a court talked about having to recruit an elite corps of investigators. given how compromised national systems a re given how compromised national systems are in some countries, where would you find these people? the international anticorruption co—ordination centre is a very good first step, or a next step. after

9/11, some very valuable initiatives we re 9/11, some very valuable initiatives were launched to investigate terrorists and drug financing. i think they could be expanded to be much more robust and focusing on corruption. and there are other mechanisms that exist that could be nurtured to provide that necessary peace in the process. what about the worry expressed by a number of countries and individuals as a result of the experience at the international criminal court, that this ends up basically being western justice dispensed to many developing countries, dispensed principally to africa? well, that is an understandable concern. it is a fa ct, understandable concern. it is a fact, isn‘t it? they have launched 11 investigations at the icc, all but one in georgia in eastern europe, all but one in georgia has been against an african country. well, i believe that there are others now including afghanistan, ukraine, that have expanded the focus, but with regard to africa, 33

african countries joined, more than any other continent. they are starting to leave, burundi is gone, south africa threatening to go. well, burundi has left, president zuma wanted to pull out, and he is under investigation for corruption in south africa. cyril ramaphosa won‘t do that and if he does he will have richard goldstone, judge richard goldstone... have richard goldstone, judge richard goldstone. .. precisely. objecting. the african union has an official champion, president buhari official champion, president buhari of nigeria. he gave a talk at the international criminal court and said we should have a supranational extraterritorial court to prosecute corruption and to repatriate assets. and that the icc should be an model, ca ta lyst and that the icc should be an model, catalyst for that court. we are working, colleagues and i are working, colleagues and i are working with president buhari and his advisers to advance this concept. you don't share the view of

presidentjuncker dummy that the icc was supposed to address the whole world but has ended up as a court to try to try africans? that is fair. pa rt try to try africans? that is fair. part of the problem is security council members can veto an investigation. so the chinese don‘t permit an investigation into north korea for example. hopefully with this court, with the treaty in or outside the un, that would be dealt with more effectively. and the united states, your own country, the administration is not particularly fond of the idea of the international criminal court. i will put to you what the national security advisor said back in september 2018, we will not co—operate with the icc. we will provide no assistance to the icc. we will notjoin the icc. we will let the icc die on its own. we will prosecute icc judges the icc die on its own. we will prosecute iccjudges and prosecutors in the criminal system and the same for any country or state that assist

the icc investigation of americans. i was the icc investigation of americans. iwas in the icc investigation of americans. i was in college withjohn bolton and he was only two years behind the ad that time. laughter. the united states will not support the iacc as we call it, the international anticorruption we call it, the international anticorru ption court. this we call it, the international anticorruption court. this is actually a benefit because one of the criticisms of the icc is it is a form of american imperialism and exceptionalism, we have prescribed it for the global south, and won‘t join it ourselves. i learn shortly after i published my articles advocating an international anticorruption advocating an international anticorru ption court advocating an international anticorruption court in 2014 that if this idea was going to progress it would have to come from latin america, it would have to come from africa, it would have to come from asia, and it is. so they are making the case for it. that is right. it is everywhere and we have to recognise countries we think of, which are democracies, multi—party democracies, experience corruption and corruption in public life and

elected officials. let me ask a bit about your experience of that, because you prosecute a public corruption in massachusetts early in your career before you were judge, most famously i suppose investigating james white he balta, what did you learn from doing that job? well, when i was a young lawyer i was assistant to the attorney general of the us after watergate. 1975. 1975-77 -- whitey bulger. my early introduction was to issues of how to hole high officials accountable including our president. from 1981—85 accountable including our president. from 1981-85 i accountable including our president. from 1981—85 i was chief federal prosecutor in massachusetts where corruption had been studied and found to be a way of life. and after we won 45 consecutive cases, many of them were people very close to the powerful mayor of the city of boston, i was appointed a united states district judge, boston, i was appointed a united states districtjudge, a federal trialjudge. it is in that capacity

that i did the bulger case 20 years ago, but this, and also sentenced the speaker of the house of representatives, the head of the parliament, to eight years in prison for taking bribes. my experience i think says two things. they are releva nt to think says two things. they are relevant to our discussion, shaun. one is, the us is not distinguish because it doesn‘t have corruption. we do. we are distinguished because we try to do something about it. and, second, in the united states, people who combat corruption at times are honoured as i was honoured to become one of about 750 united states district judges to become one of about 750 united states districtjudges appointed by the president. and distinguished service award from the event attorney general for exceptional su ccesses attorney general for exceptional successes in public corruption. when you compare this to other countries, look at russia, when alexey navalny exposes corruption, and then what are discovered to be trump up charges, is prosecuted for corruption. is it possible that in

some countries the public don‘t care very much, they might not understand the consequences of corruption, but they have accepted it as a way of life in their political system?m is not that people are apathetic in the us or i have found around the world. they are cynical about whether anything can be done. and you are right, for generations, this has been accepted as inevitable as a way of life. young people don‘t do that. they are protesting. they drove ya nu kovych that. they are protesting. they drove yanukovych into russia. that causes russia to invade crimea and creates grave dangers for international peace and security. but many of these young people are the most fervent supporters of the international anticorruption the most fervent supporters of the international anticorru ption court. what you as a special assistant to the attorney general, you appointed robert miller. the federal prosecutor in mind, the computer ——

recruited rob mueller to come from boston. with the seating to be highly professional, intelligent and educated. —— dedicated. he demonstrated those qualities when we worked together in the 19805 and i believe, i hope it‘s not inappropriate a judge to say, that he brought tho5e inappropriate a judge to say, that he brought those same qualities, much refined, to his present position. you were quoted as saying recently that since richard nixon‘s resignation no discernible effort by the president to abuse justice in a partisan manner have been seen in the united states. you still feel that way? i can't and when i said that way? i can't and when i said that but it was a while back. it is a big question. i actually... that but it was a while back. it is a big question. iactually... i didn‘t think my experience during the watergate era would be relevant

again. the watergate situation involved among other things the president using the department of justice uppal —— partisan purposes, punishing enemies and not prosecuting friends. president trump 5eem5 prosecuting friends. president trump seems to think the department of justice should be an instrument of... the attorney general and the department ofjustice have to masters. one is the president, he selected and he‘s entitled to set law—enforcement priorities for example but the other is officials of the department ofjustice, serva nts of of the department ofjustice, servants of the law. in the attorney general is the human face of that. he‘s the personification of it. as a result of watergate, two attorneys general went to prison because they didn‘t understand that you how to apply the law without fear or

favour. one had been president nixon‘s campaign chairman, john mitchell. so now, in my country, many institutions are under attack. one is the independent media, to some extent this criticism of the independent impartialjudicial some extent this criticism of the independent impartial judicial re— of which i am part stock in the department ofjustice. at times, there are questions raised about whether there are efforts to use it for a proper partisan purposes. not taking a position on that but this is taking a position on that but this i5a taking a position on that but this is a serious issue again when it hasn‘t been in almost 40 years. is a serious issue again when it hasn't been in almost 40 years. when you say, accused of by whom, by the president, the administration, partisan purposes. the accusation. president tom was put in charge of the justice department, president tom was put in charge of thejustice department, matthew

whitaker, who wrote in bed for cnn reset map —— bob mueller has come up toa reset map —— bob mueller has come up to a red line, dangerously close to cro55ing to a red line, dangerously close to crossing the line. calling the rod ro5en5tein, curbing the investigation. in those circumstances, given the importance of maintaining the line, the justice, d think it would be better if the acting attorney would be better doing whatjeff se55ions did. i actually think the issue is different. is the attorney general, a judge. i do think it is reasonable to expect any attorney general to come about opinions. i think the problem with attorney general whitaker i5, problem with attorney general whitaker is, he‘s never been confirmed by the united states senate for any position is the way the5e special prosecutor regulations

operate, regulation is a law so it has to be obeyed. it has two provisions that are pertinent here. one, the special counsel can only be dismissed. dereliction of duty. and, there is a procedural check. he can only be dismissed by the attorney general. the assumption i believe was the attorney general would be somebody who is confirmed by the senate and politically accountable. just to be clear, on the seventh of november when the president said i can fire everybody right now, he‘s been wrongly advised. he can‘t do that constitutionally. ask the attorney general to fight him but you couldn‘t do it himself. everybody works for the president. in the end, right. he could ask the attorney general to do it but some

of the authority that the president robert merrily has to fire anybody, he is limited. the president are expected to were having the regulation. every regulation has to be followed to revoke regulation. does that include congress? you can still do it in the administration? the administrative procedures are junk, but to forestall this, there are some in congress who are trying to enact legislation to provide the additional protection. interesting times ahead. one final point on this. the present gets elected, you said, devoting more to drug lord porcelain and leicester civil rights, that‘s legitimate politics and he can do that. he can‘t direct money at its allies. he said nixon,

the department ofjustice to prosecute enemies and protect friends. the president were to decide to cut funding for the special prosecutor, would that be legitimate? i think you may have the authority to do that but again, i think there is a kind of political accountability and a potential legislative accountability. you just put yourfinger on legislative accountability. you just put your finger on something. there isa put your finger on something. there is a difference between politics and partisanship. this president wants to spend more money on immigration enforcement and less on civil rights. he was elected. mutual principles had to apply. you can‘t have parts and standards which mean we are going to protect our friends and enemies. let me ask you

something on partisanship. we had the 6—storey scene of a nomination process for the cabin. he complained publicly that it was a calculated orchestrated thing. revenge on behalf of the clintons. out —— outside left—wing opposition groups. are you worried the kind of authority, where people, even if they didn‘t like the decision, accepted the decision because they respected the judicial impartiality of the justices, is respected the judicial impartiality of thejustices, is in danger of being eroded? i am deeply concerned about that. the polls show that starting with bush versus core, the case in 2000, but stopped the recount essentially in florida. public confidence in the federal

judiciary has been diminishing. this is critical. in a democracy and particularly american democracy, we asked people to accept deeply disappointing decisions peacefully and they have to have confidence in the impartiality of those decisions. thejudges are not the impartiality of those decisions. the judges are not partisan players but making good faith, honest effo rts but making good faith, honest efforts to interpret the law and to apply them without regard to who will win or lose. without regard to their personal sympathies concerning which party prevails. when i became a judge 33 years ago, if one of my decisions was reported, i would say in the last 15 or 20 years, judge mark woolf appointed by ronald reagan. as it was very important that someone was appointed by

democratic or republican presidents. that is evidence of the perception you have accurately identified and it‘s very forger of —— unfortunate and injurious to the judiciary. mark wolf, thank you very much have been with us on hardtalk. hello there. we started this week with some drenching downpours. we end the week on a much quieter note. albeit quite a murky one. some cloud, some mist and fog to start friday. i‘m hopeful that things will brighten up a little bit later on. but sunshine amounts will vary, depending on where you are. most of us starting off grey and murky with some mist and some hill fog. but as we go on through the day, that cloud will tend to break up. northern scotland should see some sunshine even through the morning. and then, into the afternoon, a few other places willjoin in, mostly where you get a bit of shelter from high ground to the south, so parts of north cornwall, north devon, western and northern wales, here a decent chance of seeing a little bit of sunshine.

elsewhere, the cloud should thin and break a little bit to reveal at lest some brightness. temperatures generally around 13 or 14 degrees. the north coast of northern ireland, perhaps cumbria, certainly the northern half of scotland, again, these areas likely to see some spells of sunshine with those temperatures again up to 13 or 14 degrees. but, as we go through friday night, most places will again turn quite cloudy, that cloud lowering down onto the hills. it will get quite murky, there will be some mist patches around. as a consequence, not a cold night, minimum temperatures between six to 12 degrees. so a mild start to saturday morning. quite a grey start as well. but there are some changes to come. high—pressure sitting out here across the near continent. but the winds around high pressure flow in a clockwise direction, and that is going to start to bring us more of a south—easterly flow. we‘ll start to tap into some drier air and so this cloud is going to retreat. we‘re going to peel it back from the map and we‘ll see increasing amounts of sunshine. so after that grey start, things should tend to brighten up. and by saturday afternoon, most of us should have blue skies overhead. those temperatures, ten, 11, 12 degrees, that won‘t feel too bad, although it will be quite breezy. and then, for sunday, quite a cold start, actually. could be a touch of frost around, but then a lot of sunshine to take

us through the day. still quite breezy and still not especially warm. those temperatures up to between nine to 12 degrees. but those temperatures are only going to head in one direction as we get into the start of next week, and that is downwards. we‘re going to start to import some much colder air from the near continent, and so temperatures are going to take a tumble. at the same time, we‘re going to bring in more in the way of cloud. so, largely grey skies as we go into monday and tuesday. it‘ll still be quite breezy, and temperatures for many stuck in single digits. this is the briefing. i‘m victoria fritz. our top story: eu leaders have said they won‘t renegotiate the draft brexit agreement even if it‘s rejected by mps in britain. i‘m david eades at westminster, where teresa may is adamant she will stick to the task.

but will her own party members opt for a direct challenge to her leadership? the number of people reported missing in the california wildfires leaps to over 600. 63 are known to have died. two former leaders of the khmer rouge in cambodia are convicted of genocide for the mass murder of ethnic minorities. taking a pounding. sterling suffers its biggest sell—off in more than two years, as political turmoil puts the uk‘s brexit deal in doubt i‘ll be speaking to a top trade lawyer about that draft