wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. the xfinity 10g network. made for streaming. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

announcer: funding for presentation of this program is provided by... woman: a successful business owner sells his company and restores his father's historic jazz club with his son. a raymond james financial advisor get to know you, your passions, and the way you bring people together. life well planned. brook: these are people who are trying to change the world. start-ups have this energy that energizes me. i'm thriving by helping others every day. people who know, know bdo. man: cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor. diverse destinations. and immersive experiences. a world of leisure... and british style. all with cunard's "white-star"ervice.

announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. announcer: and now, bc news" >'. this is "the context." >'. >> this is done as election interference, everybody knows it. i am here instead of being able to be in pennsylvania, georgia, lots of other places campaigning. >> prosecutors want to lay on the big picture for jurors. they said this was a criminal conspiracy, election fraud, pure and simple, and then there was a cover up here. >> essentially a case over falsification of business records.

but falsification of business records for a very momentous purpose. ♪ christian: here in the u.k., the prime minister says the first asylum flights to rwanda will leave in 10 to 12 weeks come what may. first, he has to secure the legislation. we are in the final stages of that tonight. we will take you to westminster. donald trump is in court in new york. the first ever criminal trial of a former u.s. president. we will get reaction to the case set out today by the prosecution. hugh edwards says he is leaving the bbc on medical advice, nine months after he was suspended. and the latest on the you and, the investigation into the palestinian aid agency which was accuseby israel of having links to hamas.

very good evening. it will be july before a plane takes migrants to rwanda. prime minister rishi sunak set out his timetable this morning, admitting it will take longer than he would like. the rwanda bill which is likely to become law tonight designed to curb any legal challenge to that process but it appears, not giving up without a fight. these are the live pictures of the lord, settling in for another round of this parliamentary ping-pong. there were two amendments that the commons stripped out this afternoon, want to protect afghan veterans who served with british forces. the government insists those already exist. protections in place to ensure that ramonda is a safe country. here is the prime minister. >> it is clear that a minority of people will do absolutely anything and anything to disrupt this policy. you only have to look at what is going on in parliament the last

few weeks and months with the labour party at every turn blocking progress on this bill. you saw that last week, you will see it again today. christian: so how many people might be affected by this? it's important to remember that under the illegal migration act which became legal last year, all people arriving in the u.k. under regular routes must be removed. home secretary is under legal duty to remove them to a third country. but there is not a third country to send them to, not yet. those arriving since july have been sitting in limbo. the backlog is nearly 52,000 people with more small boats arriving. legally the earliest anyone could be put onto a flight is 12 days after this bill is given royal assent. according to rishi sunak, it will not happen that quickly because they are expecting some legal challenges. >> the first flight would leave in 10 to 12 weeks. of course later than what we

wanted, we have always claimed that processing will take time. christian: so what sort of legal challenge that is still open? the government has advisedome asylum-seekers could lodge an appeal against removal, appealing their personal circumstances mix them a special case. the bill creates a high bar for that kind of appeal. the home office is setting up to deal with that process. it is thought such cases will be done with in a couple of months. courts have been given extra resources to cope. asylum-seekers refusing a right to appeal would still see an order from the european court of human rights. the new law shuts off most routes by which legal challenges can be brought including being a victim of trafficking or modern slavery. once again, the prime minister did not leave out leaving the european court of human rights if things don't go according to plan. let's go to our political correspondent watching events for us tonight. i know you have a guest with you

tonight, peter. bring us up to speed on where we are. >> parliamentary ping-pong continues, debating two fresh amendments, tweaked amendments to the ones that were rejected of couple of hours ago by the house of commons. perhaps a sign of movement this evening, the government spokesperson, lord sharp suggesting the afghan resettlement scheme might be reviewed so that some people who have already arrived to the u.k., and their claim under that scheme rejected, regardless of how they arrived, could potentially stay in the u.k. that amendment put forward by former labor defense secretary dez brown. he is saying he may not push that amendment to a vote. the vote is do to get underway in the lords in the next few minutes or so. there was a small conservative rebellion in the house of commons. one of the tories that voted for the amendments was the former

cabinet minister, sir robert buckland. why did you vote against this evening? >> i have said in previous iterations of this ping-pong needs to be a specific carveout to deal with those very brave people who served not just our country but the interests of freedom in afghanistan, many of whom are waiting for their position to be sorted out. they are in pakistan, not in a position of safety. i don't think anybody wants to see them being caught up in this particular scheme which is designed for a different purpose. therefore i am encouged to hear those noises from the lord. let's see what happens. now is a moment for there to be an adjustment so that we can get on with this business and get this bill through. i want to sail this bill become law today. i want to see it get done as well. >> have you been frustrated the government has not given more ground on this? >> i have done lots bills

myself, i know the natural inclination is for government to stand their ground, not seek to compromise. but we are at the end of this process, now the small print of a bill, not the broad principles of whether it is right or wrong. i supported the bill at second reading, principal vote. we are now at the end stage we are getting the details right. that is a moment where the government can, without copper mines think it's been suppose, make the adjustments that will allow the bill to become law. it is within the government's interest to have that happen as soon as possible. >> for those who served alongside british forces, if they are already in the country, cases reviewed. but future ones they not necessarily be the case. is thaenough for you? >> we need clarity here. i understand the government's point of view, they don't want too vague of a category but we all know that when we see them.

people that are clearly in danger, their cases have not yet been resolved. i think it's in everyone's interest to clarify that position so that we don't end up committing what i would regard as an injustice to brave people who have served our country. let's not take that risk, let's tidy the bill up, eliminate that as a possibility. >> the prime minister says 10 to 12 weeks to get flights off the ground assuming it is done. how do you feel about flights to rwanda? >> it's a policy that i have supported. it's a challenge facing the entire western world. other countries have been looking, trying to do similar approaches with third countries, working with them in order to deal with this challging issue. i want to see it happen. and i want to see it done in a lawful and sensible way, which is why i supported the other amendment tonight, to make sure we get the law in lockstep with reality, that is rwanda being a safe country once it has done

everything it said it would do in that treaty signed last year. >> we will wait to see what happens in those what we are expecting in the house of lords, whether that amendment on the afghan issue is actually put to a vote. there is another one to deal with whether an independent monitoring commission should be able to say to the government that rwanda is safe or not before flights can take off. it seems there is a fair amount of support for that particular change put forth by the house of lords. we are hoping it will not be too late of a night. somebody sent you will not need your sleeping bag. we will have to see. christian: thank you for that. let's go on a busy night to westminster, our correspondent chris mason is standing by, perhaps dreading that late-night finish. the prime minister talked about the need for a regular rhythm of multiple flights which implies he doesn't think one flight will move the dial.

risk: you know what i say to pete, these are what these lights are all about, a bit of midnight oil being burned. we may be in that territory in the next couple hours. it's interesting that you talk about that line of arguments from the prime minister, something whispered privately by people to me in the last few weeks. what is going on here, they want to create a set of images that continue to appear on tv screens and social media feeds, all the rest of it, all the way through the summer and the countdown to the german election expected probably in autumn, that gives a rolling impression that this policy is up and running. and they then hope that that translates into the key thing that all of this is about -- and there has been a lot of noise about this policy in the u.k. for the last couple years. doesn't actually act as a deterrent?

thissn't about a piece of legislation in the house of commons or house of lords, even how many people they can get on a sequence of planes to the rwanda capital. it is, does it put people off getting on a small boat, attempting those perilous crossings across the channel to the u.k. whether it can make that truth stick before the election is an intriguing one. frankly they are running out of time. but they want to create the impression of a kind of unstoppable momentum. although we should put unstoppable in italics. the labor policies is the first thing they will do is stop this if they win the election, if it is up and running. christian: if it is the centerpiece of their campaign, if we need a flurry of flights to prove that it can be a deterrent, does that suggest that the election is not coming until the second half of the year? chris: good question.

when we do these election extrapolations, you can make probable hypotheses in a million different directions. on the one hand, you might think if you are the prime minister, have the election sufficiently far into the year, autumn or late autumn, you can prove you have a sequence of flights going. maybe you can make that leap, saying it is acting as a deterrent. or you have an election earlier and say, we are just getting up and running. opponents will stop it. when you speak to people privately within government, including those who are hugely keen to see this rwanda policy succeed, they will acknowledge that while they want it to succeed because the u.k. has to find a solution from putting people off of those small boat crossings, they acknowledge it will not be the difference between winning and losing a general election. they think it is worth taking on

for its own sake. others make the argument that within government, they expect in the next five or 10 years, countries like the u.k. will sign up to policies like the one the u.k. is signing up to with rwanda because there will be a necessity, the argument goes, from richer countries, european and elsewhere, to have these innovative solutions to unwanted migration. that helps to stem the volume of those seeking to move. whether policy proves that or not, we will wait to see. christian: italy one of those countries looking at that policy. you did talk about the european court of human rights. we did set out where that challenge may come. is he still serious about pulling the u.k. out of the echr if it comes to that? chris: interesting to hear, slightly evasive answer to that question. on the one hand, he thought the

infrastructure the government is assembling will be sufficient to make this policy work. on the other hand, constantly labeling european court of human rights a foreign court, plenty of critics in the house of lords tonight arguing it is an international court which the u.k. has become a signatory. not ruling out that as a conservative party, you could withdraw as a distinctive marker of difference from the labour party going into the election. there are a good number of individuals who do think logical conclusion of all of this, not just this policy but a number of others, is likely to be withdrawal from the echr, or at least the beginnings of a discussion of rewriting the convention that critics believe belongs in a different era, was not designed for the challenge of the mid-2020's.

christian: have a coffee. it could be a late one. thank you for your contributions. around the world and across the u.k., this is bbc news. for our u.k. viewers, let's take a quick look at the stories making headlines today. hugh edwards has resigned from the bbc, says he is leaving on the medical advice of his doctors. there were reports that he paid a young person for sexually explicit images. the u.k. parliamentary researcher and another man have been charged with spying for china after allegedly providing information which could be useful to an enemy. the researcher seen here and christopher baron were charged on the official secrets act. china says the allegations are malicious slander. the train drivers union has announced a new wave of strikes.

16 companies will take part in one day rolling walkouts between the seventh and the ninth of may. there will also be in overtime ban between the sixth and 11th of may. the union once improved pay and conditions. you are watching bbc news. we are all too familiar with the site of donald trump making his way into a courtroom, but this was an historic day in manhattan, the first time a former predent has faced a criminal trial. mr. trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of -- the prosecution said the former president has "orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the election." mr. trump said it was a bookkeeping issue, a minor thing, which the justice department had cooked up to keep him off of the campaign trail. >> what is going on here should

never be happening. it's a very sad day in america, i can tell you that. thank you very much. christian: with me is john edward jones iii, former president of dickinson college in pennsylvania. the opening statements are something like an overture. they set out a roadmap for what is coming in the trial. what did you make of the two sides, the way they laid out their arguments? john: exactly as i thought it would be, a roadmap. from the prosecution's standpoint, what we know is the linchpin of their case is probably michael cohen. and they admit he is not the best witness in the world but it seems they have other witnesses who will corroborate his testimony. from the defense's perspective, what they did was trivialize the case, basically say this is a case that should not have been brought. what we don't know about some of the other witnesses testimony,

some folks who work for the former president, what they might say, and the prosecution is playing it close to the vest in terms of testimony. christian: the prosecution has to prove several layers of his intent. can you help us with the law as it pertains to the 2016 campaign? was it illegal in and of itself to pay stormy daniels? john: it was not, and that is what is important. you can pay hush money. but they booked it as payments to michael cohen for legal services. so there is a fraud there but that would normally be a misdemeanor, which is a middle level offense. however, when you do it to aide another crime, and that is election interference, it rises to the level of felony, the most serious offense that they can be charged with. they must prove not just that the documents were fraudulent, that is the checks that were paid, booked as lal fees, but

they must prove also a case that was not charged, election interference, in other words, that he did it to influence the results of the 2016 election. christian: the former president says it is a bookkeeping case. john: i suspect what the prosecution has, if the jury believes them, are witnesses who will say that they heard or they have documentary evidence that proves that the former president said, for example, you have to pay this money, it is close to the election. if you don't pay this money, she is going to out me, will have a hily damaging effect, i could lose the election over it. they have not tied that up because they are on their first witness but you may hear that. christian: they put david packer up on the stand first, from the parent company that owns the national enquirer. he was instrumental to this catch and kill program at the prosecution alleges was in play.

why him first, who how good of a witness is he? john: we will find out. he is really an unindicted co-conspirator. what they want to show is that there was a pattern here. in other words, this is not the first time the former president paid somebody off. they were in league with the national enquirer, that entity was pay off her folks not to go public for trump. it is to show that there is no mistake, there is a common scheme, this is what his proclivity was to do this. christian: with your knowledge of the court system, former justice, tomorrow, the whole thing comes to a grinding halt. the judge wants to have a look at these claims from the prosecution that donald trump has breached gag order. how strong are those claims lookinat some of the things he has posted on true social? john: he is a nightmare for a

presiding judge, i can tell you. i wouldn't necessarily want to tangle with some of these issues. in this particular case, what the former president did, he basically republished things that other people said. it is a little cute and he things he can get away with it. i think what you will see tomorrow is a hearing on the gag order, but i don't think judge merchan wants to get sidetracked on this. my guess is he will admonish the former president, say, i don't care if you are between something, you cannot do that. he is on thin ice if he does it again. christian: thank you for coming onto the program. an independent review of the united nations agency for palestinian refugees says israel has yet to provide evidence for its claim that u.n. workers were members of terrorist organizations but the report found it needed to improve transparency, neutrality, and

vetting of staff members. the review was ordered after an allegation that staff have participated in the october 7 attacks and that many others were members of hamas. report says the israeli government has yet to provide supporting evidence but a significant number of unrwa employees are members of terrorist organizations. nonetheless, there is a list of recommendation but the committee believed unrwa was indispensable to palestinians economic development. the review was headed by the former french foreign minister. >> overall, the findings of the review are a rise of very significant positions to comply with the position of neutrality. actually a more developed system than other u.n. organizations or agencies. there is room for improvement,

some issues related to neutrality persist. christian: let's speak with andrew gilmore, the former assistant secretary for human rights, executive director of the berkman foundation. help me understand why israel would make an allegation in the not provide any evidence to support it. >> they do that quite regularly the way. they make allegations. a number of western governments ran down the rabbit hole after these allegations and provided funding to an organization providing communitarian assistance. 100 12 straight days of bombardment at the time. desperate starvation at the time, complete destruction. that was the time western governments decided the allegation that 0.1% of the unrwa staff working in gaza were

connected to the hamas attk, 0.1%, the western government still cut off aid at that time. that is not going to be remembered. i think it's a pretty bad moment actually. christian: one of the things that unrwa said in giving evidence to these independent investigations is that the israeli government had not informed unrwa of any concerns based on the stuffing lists and sent since 2011. so why, if there were long-standing concerns within israel, why that was not being reported? >> exactly. it is part of something else. in all conflicts there is this oppression. before these allegations came out on december 29, the israeli press leaked a confidential document in an attempt to smear unrwa so that it would be

defunded and kicked out of gaza. it is part of that. since we know that governments do things like that, it is odd that western countries felt obliged to cut funding to these desperate populations. christian: how do you think governments will respond to today's report, how quickly will funding be restored? >> i think they will be embarrassed by what they did. whether they will say that they are is another matter. they will restore it. it is not a good look. christian: in terms of operations within gaza, does unrwa have any operations to speak up without that funding? >> yes, because other countries have tried to make up the shortfall. you are right, unrwa doesn't have a police force, intelligence. unrwa doesn't have the capacity, signal intelligence that can

listen to everybody, coercive interrogation. of course they have more information but it doesn't mean that the information is true. christian: very good to talk to you. thank you for your thoughts on that. we are going to take a short break. announcer: funding for presentation of this program is provided by... financial services firm, raymond james. bdo. accountants and advisors. cunard is a proud supporter of public television. announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪