République dominicaine: première plainte pour “homicide involontaire” après le drame de la discothèque

La famille d’une des 231 personnes décédées lors de l’effondrement du toit d’une discothèque dominicaine a déposé la première plainte mardi pour “homicide involontaire” contre les responsables de l’établissement mais aussi contre les “institutions publiques” pour “omissions dans l’accomplissement des devoirs légaux”.Le gérant du Jet Set a dit dans un communiqué dans l’après-midi être à “l’entière disposition” de la justice. “C’est la justice qu’on vous demande et qu’on espère mériter” après cette “tragédie évitable”, écrit Me Félix Humberto Portes Nunez, avocat de la veuve et des parents de Virgilio Rafael Cruz Aponte, décédé lors du drame.Considérée comme la plus grande tragédie du siècle en République dominicaine, la catastrophe dépasse, en termes de bilan humain, l’incendie en 2005 d’une prison à Higuey, dans l’est du pays, qui avait coûté la vie à 136 détenus.”Il résulte sans équivoque qu’il y a suffisamment” d’éléments pour accuser les responsables de la discothèque d'”homicide involontaire”, selon le texte de la plainte déposée au parquet dont l’AFP a obtenu une copie. Le Jet Set, “52 ans après son ouverture, connaissait des fuites, des chutes partielles de morceaux et de poussières du plafond”, est-il ajouté.- “Chaîne de négligences” -“L’affaiblissement de la structure dû à l’ancienneté, un incendie, réparations, infiltrations, charges indues sur le plafond telles que des entrepôts, des équipements lourds de climatisation”, sont également pointés dans la plainte.La famille de la victime accuse aussi les responsables d’avoir “fait preuve de négligence en ne réalisant pas une planification adéquate dans (…) la conception de la sécurité, le renforcement des structures et du plafond du bâtiment et n’ont pas respecté les réglementations et normes”.L’avocat vise aussi les autorités: “Les faits décrits ici témoignent d’une chaîne de négligences structurelles et d’omissions de sécurité, attribuables non seulement aux gestionnaires, actionnaires de la discothèque, mais aussi aux institutions publiques”.”Ces institutions, en manquant à leurs devoirs d’inspection, de surveillance et de contrôle, ont violé leurs fonctions légales et ont favorisé un environnement dangereux qui a culminé dans cette tragédie évitable”, accuse l’avocat.”L’Etat dominicain peut être poursuivi pour responsabilité civile, tant pour des actes illicites commis par ses agents que pour des omissions dans l’accomplissement de ses devoirs légaux, lorsque ces actions ou omissions causent un dommage aux particuliers”, ajoute le texte.Le toit de la discothèque s’est effondré le 8 avril à 00H44 (04H44 GMT) alors qu’entre 500 et 1.000 personnes assistaient à un concert de la star du merengue Rubby Pérez, morte lors de l’accident. Quelque 189 personnes ont été secourues.Dans l’après-midi, Antonio Espaillat, gérant du Jet Set, s’est adressé au parquet pour “manifester formellement et expressément (son) entière disposition à collaborer avec le procureur (…) dans le cadre de l’enquête”.  “Nous réaffirmons, de manière solennelle et sans réserve, notre engagement à répondre à toute demande de ce Procureur (…) pour contribuer avec transparence, respect et dignité à la clarification des faits”, selon le texte. “Tout cela, conscients de la douleur profonde qui accable les victimes, leurs familles, et la société dominicaine dans son ensemble; une douleur que nous partageons avec une véritable consternation”, conclut le texte. Lundi, le président Luis Abinader avait souligné lors de sa conférence de presse hebdomadaire: “Nous allons respecter le fait que la justice sera rendue comme elle doit l’être. Et vous ne trouverez aucune intervention du gouvernement”.Le président a indiqué qu’il n’existait pas d’obligation de supervision des travaux de construction privés dans le pays, et reconnu: “Il y a un vide dans la loi, que nous devons résoudre”.La présidence a annoncé la création d’une commission d’experts nationaux et internationaux pour déterminer les causes du désastre.

Mark Zuckerberg de retour à la barre pour défendre Meta

Mark Zuckerberg est revenu à la barre d’un tribunal de Washington mardi, au deuxième jour du procès de son entreprise Meta, la maison-mère de Facebook, accusée d’avoir acheté Instagram et WhatsApp pour étouffer des concurrents potentiels.Après avoir évoqué lundi les débuts de Facebook, le patron du géant californien, qui avait tout fait pour éviter ce procès fédéral, a assuré mardi que les deux applications n’auraient pas autant prospéré sans les investissements du groupe.”L’intégration d’Instagram s’est très bien passée, au final”, a-t-il déclaré. “Nous avons réussi à ajouter beaucoup plus de valeur au service que je n’aurais initialement pensé.”Après cette acquisition, “nous avons gagné en confiance dans notre capacité à identifier des applis à fort potentiel que nous pourrions faire croître plus rapidement en les rachetant”, a-t-il ajouté.Le procès a lieu cinq ans après la plainte déposée sous le premier gouvernement Trump. Le juge a huit semaines d’audience pour déterminer si le géant des réseaux sociaux a enfreint le droit de la concurrence et devrait être forcé de se séparer de ses deux plateformes phares.L’agence de protection des consommateurs, la FTC, estime que Meta, alors Facebook, a abusé de sa position dominante lors du rachat d’Instagram en 2012, pour un milliard de dollars, et de WhatsApp en 2014, pour 19 milliards.- “Eliminer des menaces” -Ces achats ont permis à Meta “d’éliminer des menaces immédiates”, a accusé lundi le représentant de la FTC. Ils ont à l’inverse été “des réussites” pour les consommateurs, a plaidé de son côté un avocat de Meta.Daniel Matheson, l’avocat de la FTC, a montré mardi à Mark Zuckerberg des courriels de 2012, où l’ancien directeur financier de Facebook évoque des raisons possibles d’acheter des start-up comme Instagram, y compris “neutraliser un concurrent”.Dans sa réponse à l’époque, le dirigeant avait reconnu ce facteur de décision, parmi d’autres. “Je ne sais pas ce que je pensais exactement à ce moment-là”, a-t-il éludé mardi. Il a expliqué que ses équipes avaient pesé le pour et le contre de développer une application photo pour Facebook, un projet qui était en cours. “J’ai trouvé qu’Instagram était meilleur dans ce domaine, donc je me suis dit qu’il valait mieux l’acheter”.Mark Zuckerberg a multiplié les avances à l’égard de Donald Trump depuis la seconde élection de ce dernier en novembre, dans l’espoir notamment de régler cette procédure à l’amiable.Mais la FTC, même sous présidence républicaine, semble décidée à poursuivre les différentes grandes actions antitrust lancées ces dernières années par le gouvernement américain dans le secteur des technologies.Google a été reconnu coupable d’abus de position dominante sur le marché de la recherche en ligne en août dernier, tandis qu’Apple et Amazon font également l’objet de poursuites.- “Minutes d’attention” -Le procès de Meta va se jouer en partie sur la définition du marché concerné. Pour le gouvernement américain, les services de Meta relèvent des “réseaux sociaux personnels”, qui permettent de rester en contact avec la famille et les amis. Les autres grandes plateformes telles que les très populaires TikTok et YouTube n’appartiennent pas à la même catégorie.Une perspective que la firme de Menlo Park (Silicon Valley) rejette comme périmée.Selon Mark Zuckerberg, TikTok et YouTube sont les principaux concurrents de Facebook et Instagram, “parce que la vidéo est le médium le plus prisé des gens pour partager des contenus”. “Et ils sont bien plus gros, nous avons du retard à rattraper”, a-t-il déclaré mardi.La défense de Meta va également insister sur la compétition existante entre ses applications et leurs concurrentes, qui innovent et ajoutent régulièrement des fonctionnalités pour “gagner en minutes d’attention des utilisateurs”.Instagram compte aujourd’hui 2 milliards d’utilisateurs à travers le monde. Un succès que l’entrepreneur milliardaire attribue aux investissements substantiels du groupe.Il a même assuré que si Snap avait accepté de rejoindre Facebook, “nous aurions certainement accéléré leur croissance”.”Je me souviens que j’avais dit: +Avec nous, Snapchat aurait des milliards d’utilisateurs+. Et je crois qu’ils n’y sont toujours pas arrivés, 10 ans plus tard”.La FTC va chercher à l’inverse à démontrer que le monopole de Meta sur le marché des “réseaux sociaux personnels” se traduit par un usage dégradé pour les usagers, contraints de tolérer trop de publicités et de changements abrupts.

Trump ramps up conflict against defiant Harvard

President Donald Trump escalated his war against elite US universities Tuesday with a threat to strip Harvard’s tax-exempt status if the country’s most famous educational establishment refuses to submit to wide-ranging government oversight.Harvard stands out for defying Trump, in contrast to several other universities and a string of powerful law firms that have folded under intense pressure from the White House in its crackdown on American institutions.Its president, Alan Garber, said the school would not “negotiate over its independence or its constitutional rights.”Tuesday’s threat of a major tax bill comes a day after the freezing of $2.2 billion in federal funding.The impacts are already being felt on a campus that has produced 162 Nobel prize winners and whose alumni range from Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg to eight US presidents.The university said one faculty member had just been told to halt her tuberculosis research because of “the broader funding freeze.”But the mood was defiant.”I love it. I think it’s amazing. I think more schools across the country need to. It shows that you’re not going to bow down, you’re not going to let free speech be taken,” student Darious Hanson told AFP.- Anti-Semitism -Trump posted on social media that non-profit Harvard “should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity” if it does not submit to his demands for the university to change the way it runs itself, including selection of students and authority for professors.Trump and his White House team have justified their pressure campaign on universities as a reaction to what they say is uncontrolled anti-Semitism and support for the Palestinian militant group Hamas.Trump “wants to see Harvard apologize. And Harvard should apologize,” Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told journalists.The anti-Semitism allegations are based on controversy at protests against Israel’s war in Gaza that swept across campuses last year.Columbia University in New York — an epicenter of the protests — stood down last month and agreed to oversight of its Middle Eastern department after being threatened with a loss of $400 million in federal funds.The White House has also strong-armed dozens of universities and colleges with threats to remove federal funding over their policies meant to encourage racial diversity among students and staff.The White House has cited similarly ideological goals in its unprecedented crackdown on law firms, pressuring them to volunteer hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of legal work to support issues that Trump supports.- Harvard defiant -Harvard, the oldest and wealthiest university in the United States, is now the most prominent institution to resist Trump’s ever-growing bid for control.The Trump administration is demanding that a wide range of Harvard departments come under outside supervision for potential anti-Semitism. It also seeks to require “viewpoint diversity” in student admissions and choice of professors.Garber’s insistence that Harvard cannot “allow itself to be taken over by the federal government” sets up a likely long-running, high-profile fight.Hard-line presidential advisors such as Stephen Miller depict universities as bastions of anti-conservative forces that need to be brought to heel — a message that resonates strongly with Trump’s hard-right anti-elite base.For Trump’s opponents, the Harvard refusal to bend marks a chance to draw a line in the sand against an authoritarian takeover.”Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions — rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom,” former president Barack Obama wrote on X. “Let’s hope other institutions follow suit.”Dozens of universities and other stakeholders are separately battling the Trump administration in court over broad research funding cuts that have led to staff layoffs and created deep uncertainty among US academics.

Boeing faces fresh crisis with US-China trade war

US aviation giant Boeing, fresh off a crippling labor dispute and quality control crisis, has now found itself drawn into the escalating trade conflict between Washington and Beijing.The largest US exporter, Boeing has been caught in the crossfire after President Donald Trump imposed new tariffs of up to 145 percent on many Chinese products, sparking retaliatory 125 percent levies from Beijing.The duties more than double the cost of aircraft and spare parts manufactured in the United States.On Tuesday, Trump accused China of reneging on a “big Boeing deal,” following a Bloomberg news report that Beijing ordered airlines not to take further deliveries of the company’s jets.The report also said that Beijing requested Chinese carriers to pause purchases of aircraft-related equipment and parts from US firms.Boeing has declined to comment on the matter.Last week, Bloomberg reported that China’s Juneyao Airlines was delaying delivery of a Boeing widebody aircraft as the growing trade conflict drives up costs of big-ticket products.- ‘Not surprised’-Boeing’s website shows its order book at the end of March contained 130 aircraft due to Chinese customers, including airlines and leasing companies.But as some buyers prefer to remain anonymous, the true figure could be higher.Bank of America (BofA) analysts note that Boeing is scheduled to deliver 29 aircraft this year to identified Chinese companies, but added that a large portion of unidentified customers who bought aircraft are actually Chinese.”China represents about 20 percent of the market for large civil jets over the next 20 years,” BofA Securities said in a note.It added that the US administration cannot ignore Boeing when it considers trade balances.”Boeing is the US’s largest exporter, as such, we are not surprised by China’s move; however, we do see this as unsustainable,” BofA Securities said.Boeing’s main competitor Airbus cannot be China’s only supplier of large commercial jets given its capacity constraints, it said.The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) is also “highly dependent on US suppliers,” the analysts said.If China stopped buying aircraft components from the United States, COMAC’s C919 program — a competitor to Boeing’s 737 or Airbus’s A320 — would be halted, they said.A delivery blockage would affect the United States’ trade balance further as well.Boeing’s production slowed significantly after quality issues that emerged with an in-flight incident in January 2024, and two factories were subsequently paralysed by a strike in the fall.According to US official data, commercial aircraft exports reached $4.2 billion in August last year but dropped to $2.6 billion in September. They slipped further in October and November.In December, when Boeing deliveries gradually resumed, the amount rose to $3.1 billion.- Airline customers -Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg previously stressed that the company supports 1.8 million jobs in the United States.A delivery freeze would have direct consequences for the group, which traditionally receives 60 percent of the price upon delivery.With its difficulties of 2024, Boeing is already dipping heavily into cash flow that has been depleted by the Covid-19 pandemic and other issues.Besides concerns surrounding Beijing, Boeing will likely be squeezed by higher duties too.Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline by passenger numbers, said on Tuesday his company might postpone delivery of 25 Boeing jets expected from August if they cost more customs duties.Ryanair, a major Boeing customer, notably placed an order in May 2023 for 300 737 MAX 10s, including 150 firm orders, for a list price estimated at over $40 billion.Ed Bastian, CEO of Delta Air Lines, said last week that he does not intend to pay customs duties on the Airbus aircraft he expects this year.

Boeing faces fresh crisis with US-China trade war

US aviation giant Boeing, fresh off a crippling labor dispute and quality control crisis, has now found itself drawn into the escalating trade conflict between Washington and Beijing.The largest US exporter, Boeing has been caught in the crossfire after President Donald Trump imposed new tariffs of up to 145 percent on many Chinese products, sparking retaliatory 125 percent levies from Beijing.The duties more than double the cost of aircraft and spare parts manufactured in the United States.On Tuesday, Trump accused China of reneging on a “big Boeing deal,” following a Bloomberg news report that Beijing ordered airlines not to take further deliveries of the company’s jets.The report also said that Beijing requested Chinese carriers to pause purchases of aircraft-related equipment and parts from US firms.Boeing has declined to comment on the matter.Last week, Bloomberg reported that China’s Juneyao Airlines was delaying delivery of a Boeing widebody aircraft as the growing trade conflict drives up costs of big-ticket products.- ‘Not surprised’-Boeing’s website shows its order book at the end of March contained 130 aircraft due to Chinese customers, including airlines and leasing companies.But as some buyers prefer to remain anonymous, the true figure could be higher.Bank of America (BofA) analysts note that Boeing is scheduled to deliver 29 aircraft this year to identified Chinese companies, but added that a large portion of unidentified customers who bought aircraft are actually Chinese.”China represents about 20 percent of the market for large civil jets over the next 20 years,” BofA Securities said in a note.It added that the US administration cannot ignore Boeing when it considers trade balances.”Boeing is the US’s largest exporter, as such, we are not surprised by China’s move; however, we do see this as unsustainable,” BofA Securities said.Boeing’s main competitor Airbus cannot be China’s only supplier of large commercial jets given its capacity constraints, it said.The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) is also “highly dependent on US suppliers,” the analysts said.If China stopped buying aircraft components from the United States, COMAC’s C919 program — a competitor to Boeing’s 737 or Airbus’s A320 — would be halted, they said.A delivery blockage would affect the United States’ trade balance further as well.Boeing’s production slowed significantly after quality issues that emerged with an in-flight incident in January 2024, and two factories were subsequently paralysed by a strike in the fall.According to US official data, commercial aircraft exports reached $4.2 billion in August last year but dropped to $2.6 billion in September. They slipped further in October and November.In December, when Boeing deliveries gradually resumed, the amount rose to $3.1 billion.- Airline customers -Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg previously stressed that the company supports 1.8 million jobs in the United States.A delivery freeze would have direct consequences for the group, which traditionally receives 60 percent of the price upon delivery.With its difficulties of 2024, Boeing is already dipping heavily into cash flow that has been depleted by the Covid-19 pandemic and other issues.Besides concerns surrounding Beijing, Boeing will likely be squeezed by higher duties too.Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline by passenger numbers, said on Tuesday his company might postpone delivery of 25 Boeing jets expected from August if they cost more customs duties.Ryanair, a major Boeing customer, notably placed an order in May 2023 for 300 737 MAX 10s, including 150 firm orders, for a list price estimated at over $40 billion.Ed Bastian, CEO of Delta Air Lines, said last week that he does not intend to pay customs duties on the Airbus aircraft he expects this year.

Nvidia expects $5.5 bn hit as US targets chips sent to China

Nvidia on Tuesday notified regulators that it expects a $5.5 billion hit this quarter due to a new US licensing requirement on the primary chip it can legally sell in China.US officials last week told Nvidia it must obtain licenses to export its H20 chips to China because of concerns they may be used in supercomputers there, the Silicon Valley company said in a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing.Shares of Nvidia, which have seen high volatility since US President Donald Trump made a major tariffs announcement on April 2, were down more than six percent in after-market trades.The new licensing rule applies to Nvidia GPUs (graphics processing units) with bandwidth similar to that of the H20.The United States had already restricted exports to China of Nvidia’s most sophisticated GPUs, tailored for powering top-end artificial intelligence models.Nvidia was told the licensing requirement on H20 chips would last indefinitely, it said in the filing.Nvidia’s current fiscal quarter ends on April 27.”First quarter results are expected to include up to approximately $5.5 billion of charges associated with H20 products for inventory, purchase commitments, and related reserves,” Nvidia said in the filing.Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has said publicly that the AI chip powerhouse will balance legal compliance and technological advances under Trump, and that nothing will stop the global advancement of artificial intelligence.”We’ll continue to do that and we’ll be able to do that just fine,” the Taiwan-born entrepreneur told reporters late last year.Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden restricted Nvidia from selling some of its top AI chips to China, which the United States sees as a strategic competitor in technology.Global markets have been on a roller coaster since Trump’s April 2 announcement, declining sharply before partially recovering with his 90-day pause on the steepest tariff rates last week.Trump warned Sunday that no country would be getting “off the hook” on tariffs despite a 90-day reprieve on some levies, while also downplaying exemptions for Chinese technology.Most nations will now face a baseline 10 percent tariff for the near-three-month period — except China, which launched a tit-for-tat escalation.China has sought to present itself as a stable alternative to an erratic Washington, courting countries spooked by the global economic storm.

Nvidia expects $5.5 bn hit as US targets chips sent to China

Nvidia on Tuesday notified regulators that it expects a $5.5 billion hit this quarter due to a new US licensing requirement on the primary chip it can legally sell in China.US officials last week told Nvidia it must obtain licenses to export its H20 chips to China because of concerns they may be used in supercomputers there, the Silicon Valley company said in a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing.Shares of Nvidia, which have seen high volatility since US President Donald Trump made a major tariffs announcement on April 2, were down more than six percent in after-market trades.The new licensing rule applies to Nvidia GPUs (graphics processing units) with bandwidth similar to that of the H20.The United States had already restricted exports to China of Nvidia’s most sophisticated GPUs, tailored for powering top-end artificial intelligence models.Nvidia was told the licensing requirement on H20 chips would last indefinitely, it said in the filing.Nvidia’s current fiscal quarter ends on April 27.”First quarter results are expected to include up to approximately $5.5 billion of charges associated with H20 products for inventory, purchase commitments, and related reserves,” Nvidia said in the filing.Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has said publicly that the AI chip powerhouse will balance legal compliance and technological advances under Trump, and that nothing will stop the global advancement of artificial intelligence.”We’ll continue to do that and we’ll be able to do that just fine,” the Taiwan-born entrepreneur told reporters late last year.Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden restricted Nvidia from selling some of its top AI chips to China, which the United States sees as a strategic competitor in technology.Global markets have been on a roller coaster since Trump’s April 2 announcement, declining sharply before partially recovering with his 90-day pause on the steepest tariff rates last week.Trump warned Sunday that no country would be getting “off the hook” on tariffs despite a 90-day reprieve on some levies, while also downplaying exemptions for Chinese technology.Most nations will now face a baseline 10 percent tariff for the near-three-month period — except China, which launched a tit-for-tat escalation.China has sought to present itself as a stable alternative to an erratic Washington, courting countries spooked by the global economic storm.

Trump showdown with courts in spotlight at migrant hearing

US President Donald Trump’s showdown with the judicial system came into the spotlight Tuesday as a judge grilled his administration over its failure to return a migrant wrongly deported to El Salvador.The Trump administration previously admitted that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was living in the eastern state of Maryland and married to a US citizen, was deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador due to an “administrative error.”A judge has ordered Trump to “facilitate” his return, an order upheld by the Supreme Court, but his government has yet to request El Salvador return Abrego Garcia.Trump has alleged that Abrego Garcia is “an MS-13 Gang Member and Foreign Terrorist from El Salvador,” while Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed that he was “engaged in human trafficking.”But Abrego Garcia’s family has continued to proclaim his innocence, and Judge Paula Xinis — before whom the Tuesday hearing was held — has said she had seen no evidence Abrego Garcia was a gang member.During the high-stakes hearing — widely seen as a test of the judiciary’s ability to tame Trump’s White House — Xinis slammed the administration for sharing “nothing” on its plans for Abrego Garcia’s return. “There’s so much daylight between what you’re actually saying and where this case is,” Xinis said, adding she would set in motion a process to discover if officials acted against court orders.If so, it would mark a tipping point for the Trump administration, which has for months flirted with open defiance of the judiciary following court setbacks to its right-wing agenda. Dozens of protestors carrying signs reading “Defend democracy” and “Bring Abrego Garcia home” gathered outside the courthouse in Maryland on Tuesday.They were joined by Abreago Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, who urged Trump and his ally, Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, to “stop playing political games with my husband.”Hoping to heap political pressure on Trump, Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen said he will travel to El Salvador on Wednesday to check on Abrego Garcia’s condition and discuss his return.”He shouldn’t have to spend another second away from his family,” Van Hollen, a Democrat, said on X.- ‘Alive and secure’ -Trump and his administration have repeatedly clashed with the courts since he returned to office in January, criticizing rulings that curb the president’s policies and power and attacking judges who issued them.”No District Court Judge, or any Judge, can assume the duties of the President of the United States. Only Crime and Chaos would result,” Trump said on Truth Social last month.Government attorneys last week rejected Xinis’s order to provide an update on Abrego Garcia’s status by Friday, saying that “foreign affairs cannot operate on judicial timelines.”The Trump administration has since partially complied with the judge’s directives, providing a statement from a State Department official saying that Abrego Garcia is “alive and secure” in the Salvadoran prison.The Department of Homeland Security said in a court filing Tuesday that it would take Abrego Garcia into custody and deport him again if he returned to the United States.But El Salvador’s Bukele on Monday, sitting next to Trump at the White House, rejected calls to repatriate Abrego Garcia, saying: “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States.”The case represents the only time the administration has acknowledged wrongly deporting anyone, though the Justice Department subsequently fired the lawyer who made that concession, saying he had failed to vigorously defend the government position.