Sudan's paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has agreed to a proposal from the US for a humanitarian ceasefire, the group said on Thursday.

Sudan's military-led government has not yet responded.

The RSF issued the statement after seizing the city of el-Fasher in the western Darfur region.

Their 18-month siege blocked humanitarian aid despite repeated UN appeals, causing starvation among residents unable to flee. A UN-backed global hunger monitor has confirmed famine conditions in the city.

The RSF has been facing international backlash over reports of mass killings by its foot soldiers, which it has denied. But it has admitted "violations" were committed by individuals and arrested some.

Civil war broke out between Sudan's army and the RSF in April 2023. Both parties have agreed to various ceasefire proposals during the war, though none have stuck.

In September, the US along with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt proposed a three-month humanitarian truce, followed by a permanent ceasefire and a transition to civilian rule.

The RSF's statement said it has agreed to enter the truce proposed by the four countries "in order to address the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of the war" and to allow the "urgent delivery" of aid.

The group also said it looks forward to discussions on ending hostilities "in a manner that addresses the root causes of the conflicts" and "creates the appropriate environment for a just, comprehensive, and lasting peace".

On Tuesday, before the RSF's statement, Sudan's Defence Minister Hassan Kabroun thanked US President Donald Trump's administration for its "efforts and proposals to achieve peace," in a speech broadcast on national television.

But he added that preparations for the Sudanese people's battle against the RSF were ongoing. "Our preparations for war are a legitimate national right," he said.

Sudan's Charge d'Affaires in Nairobi, Mohamed Osman Akasha, told the BBC on Wednesday that the military-led government would agree to stop the fighting only if the RSF was dismantled, surrendered its weapons, and its leader was held accountable.

"I have no information about a proposal for truce. The only thing that I know is the government of Sudan, the people of Sudan are very determined to defeat this militia," he said.

The RSF's truce announcement comes after an aid organisation warned that a network of community kitchens in Sudan was on the verge of collapse.

The locally run kitchens have operated in areas that are difficult for international humanitarian groups to access, but are facing closure due to neglect, shortages and volunteer exhaustion.

A report from Islamic Relief quoted one volunteer as saying most of these kitchens - which are crucial lifelines for millions caught up in the civil war - will close within six months.

The conflict has created what the UN has called the world's largest humanitarian crisis, with estimates that more than 24 million people are facing acute food shortages in Sudan.

More than 60,000 people have fled el-Fasher, which was captured by the RSF at the weekend, the UN refugee agency said.

There were reports of systematic killings as the group's fighters took control of the city.

Survivors who escaped the siege told the BBC they had encountered "unimaginable" suffering and witnessed fighters torturing men trying to flee.

"We saw people murdered in front of us. We saw people being beaten. It was really terrible," Ezzeldin Hassan Musa said.

Last week, RSF leader Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo announced an investigation into what he called "violations" committed by his soldiers in el-Fasher.

The group has since released footage which it says shows the arrest of a fighter accused of carrying out executions.

The UN's Human Rights Council said it would hold an urgent session on the situation in el-Fasher on 14 November.

Four senior figures in the Greek coastguard, including its current commander, are to face criminal prosecution for negligent manslaughter in connection with a 2023 migrant boat disaster in which up to 650 people are thought to have drowned.

The fishing boat Adriana went down off the Greek coast near Pylos. Survivors told the BBC that the vessel capsized after coastguards made a botched attempt to tow it.

Greek authorities have always denied any wrongdoing over the shipwreck.

Now a prosecutor at the naval appeal court in Piraeus has recommended that the current head of the Hellenic coastguard, Vice Adm Tryfon Kontizas, and three other senior officers should go on trial.

Among the charges cited by the court of appeal are manslaughter by negligence in international waters but within Greece's rescue zone, exposure by negligence with a legal obligation to rescue people that resulted in death and repeated exposure by omission of other people to danger.

The Adriana had left Libya for Italy in June 2023 and was monitored by a Greek patrol vessel for some 15 hours off Pylos before it went down. Some of the 104 survivors later revealed that a coastguard vessel had caused the boat to sink by towing the boat away too fast when the boat was unbalanced.

Although only 82 bodies were recovered, hundreds more people are believed to have died.

Prosecutors at the maritime court in Piraeus decided earlier this year that 17 members of the Greek coastguard should face charges, including the captain of the coastguard ship, the-then head of the coastguard Vice Adm Giorgos Alexandrakis and the supervisor of the national search and rescue centre.

However, they cleared Tryfon Kontizas and three other senior officers of blame. Vice Adm Kontizas had been appointed coastguard chief a few weeks before the court's decision.

That decision not to prosecute the four officers was then challenged by lawyers for survivors and relatives of the victims.

Greece has always maintained it fully respects human rights and has rescued more than 250,000 people at sea in the past decade.

Three weeks after the spectacular jewel theft at the Louvre, the museum has been heavily criticised for neglecting security.

The Court of Auditors report, drawn up before the heist, found that for years managers had preferred to invest in new artworks and exhibitions rather than basic upkeep and protection.

"Let no-one be mistaken: the theft of the crown jewels is a resounding wake-up call," said the court's president, Pierre Moscovici.

In broad daylight on Sunday 19 October, thieves broke into the Louvre's first-floor Apollo Gallery. Using a angle-grinder to open display cases, the gang made off with €88m (£78m) of jewels that once belonged to 19th-Century queens and empresses.

Basing its findings on the years 2018 to 2024, the report says the Louvre "favoured operations that were visible and attractive at the expense of maintenance and renovation of technical installations, notably in the fields of safety and security".

In the period studied, it found the museum spent €105.4m on buying new artworks and €63.5m on exhibition spaces.

But at the same time it spent only €26.7m on maintenance works and €59.5m on restoration of the palace building.

The findings chime with other criticisms, such as from Culture Minister Rachida Dati who said managers had "grossly underestimated" the dangers of intrusion into the museum.

One of France's leading art experts, Didier Rykner, has also accused the museum of preferring to spend its "abundant" resources on eye-catching initiatives rather than basic protection of what it already has.

One possible casualty is the Louvre's ambitious New Renaissance project which was launched with fanfare earlier this year by President Emmanuel Macron and the museum's director, Laurence des Cars.

The plan includes a new entrance at the eastern end of the Louvre, and the excavation of new exhibition spaces including a separate gallery for the Mona Lisa.

But the Court of Auditors found that the project had been "undertaken without proper studies - either of technical and architectural feasibility (or)… financial evaluations".

The projected cost had already soared to €1.15bn, it said, compared with the €700m announced in January.

In its response, the Louvre said it accepted most of the court's recommendations, but it believed the court did not fully understand all that it had done – notably in security.

"When it comes to the biggest and most visited museum on the world , the only balanced judgment is one that looks at the long term," it said.

Meanwhile it has been revealed that one of the suspected thieves, named as Abdoulaye N, 39, was for many years considered a local hero in the Aubervilliers neighbourhood of northern Paris, renowned for his often illegal feats of motorcycling.

Going by the nickname Doudou Cross Bitume, he regularly posted videos of himself performing skills on a motocross bike – such as wheelies at Paris landmarks like the Trocadero.

More recently his videos showed him conducting body-building gymnastics.

Abdoulaye N was previously a guard at the Center Pompidou in Paris, an arts centre containing Europe's largest museum of modern art.

He had a number of convictions for traffic and other offences, but nothing linked to organised crime.

According to French media, his profile – and that of the other main suspect Ayed G – suggests they might have been petty criminals possibly in the pay of a wealthy third party.

Two other people are in custody.

They are a man suspected of being one of the two who waited with getaway motorbikes on the street outside the Louvre; and his wife, who faces a possible charge of conspiracy.

The fourth man at the scene is still being sought – as are the jewels.

According to Le Parisien newspaper, quoting investigators, Abdoulaye N and Ayed G made some surprising statements under interrogation.

Abdoulaye N apparently did not realise he was breaking into the Louvre, he just thought the museum was in the area around the famous glass pyramid, while Ayed G assumed it would be empty because it was a Sunday.

In fact it was open and had plenty of visitors.

Boeing will avoid a criminal charge in the US linked to two deadly 737 Max crashes, after a court granted a request from the US government to dismiss the criminal case.

In his ruling, Judge Reed O'Connor said he "disagreed" that dropping the charge was in the public interest but said his concerns did not give him sufficient reason to deny the proposal.

The decision marks a major win for Boeing, after the government last year accused it of violating a settlement related to the crashes, raising the threat of prosecution.

The dismissal had been opposed by some of the families of those killed in the accidents, who had sought to hold Boeing accountable at trial.

Lawyer Paul Cassell, who represents some of the families, said he intended to appeal against the ruling.

"We believe that the courts don't have to stand silently by while an injustice is perpetrated," he said in a statement.

In his decision on Thursday, Mr O'Connor said the government's concerns about taking the charge to trial were "unserious" and he did not believe the new deal reached between the government and Boeing would "secure the necessary accountability to ensure the safety of the flying public".

But he said the government was presumed to be acting in "good faith" and he did not have the authority to override the request.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) defended its agreement, noting that it had met "extensively" with the crash victims' families, which had expressed "a broad set of views regarding the resolution".

"Rather than allow for protracted litigation, this agreement provides finality for the victims and requires Boeing to act now," a spokesperson said in a statement. "We are confident that this resolution is the most just outcome."

Boeing said it was committed to the agreement struck with the DOJ.

"We are also committed to continuing the significant efforts we have made as a company to strengthen our safety, quality, and compliance programs," the company said in a statement.

The decision marks the latest twist in a long-running legal battle stemming from two major 737 Max accidents in late 2018 off Indonesia and in Ethiopia in early 2019, which killed 346 people.

The US subsequently charged Boeing with one count of criminal fraud conspiracy, accusing Boeing of deliberately concealing from regulators key information about its flight control software, which was implicated in the crashes.

The firm admitted to the allegations but avoided prosecution with a 2021 deal in which it paid $2.5bn in fines and compensation and pledged to improve safety standards and compliance programmes.

The case was reopened last year, after an incident in which an unused door fell off a 737 Max early in flight. The DOJ accused Boeing of having breached the terms of the original settlement.

In 2024, under the Biden administration, the DOJ proposed a new deal in which Boeing would plead guilty to the fraud charge, pay a further fine of $243m and agree to a court-appointed monitor overseeing its operations for a set period.

But Mr O'Connor rejected that deal last December, in part due to concerns over how the monitor would be selected.

A new settlement put forward by prosecutors this year dropped the criminal charge, a black mark for Boeing that could have complicated its dealings with the government as a contractor.

It still required the company to hire an "independent compliance consultant" and make $1.1bn financial commitments, including another $243m in penalties as well as additional compensation to family members of those killed in the crashes.

In explaining their decision to dismiss the charge, prosecutors said Boeing had made "meaningful progress" this year in its anti-fraud and conspiracy programmes.

Canada's top court has refused to hear an appeal to stop the controversial cull of hundreds of ostriches at a farm in British Columbia, leaving the farmers with few legal options to prevent it.

The cull was ordered by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) late last year after two birds tested positive with the avian flu, following an outbreak that killed dozens of the animals.

Universal Ostrich Farms has fought the order since, and the case has attracted international attention including from senior White House officials who have criticised it as an example of government overreach.

The Supreme Court of Canada's decision means the cull can now legally go ahead.

It is unclear, however, if the farmers will try to pursue other avenues to save the birds, such as asking the federal government to reconsider the order.

In a statement following the Supreme Court dismissal on Thursday, the CFIA said it will be "moving forward" with the cull, but did not provide a timeline on when.

It added that it "expects the ostrich farm owners and supporters" to respect the legal decision.

Katie Pasitney, whose family owns the farm, reacted tearfully in a video posted on Facebook. "Shame on you Canada," she said.

"Please pray for a miracle in the next hour for our family, for these animals outside," she added.

The farmers have argued that the ostriches should be spared and used instead for scientific research, noting those that remain had survived the avian flu outbreak that killed 69 of the flock.

The CFIA, on the other hand, has said that the birds should be killed because their exposure to the flu poses a risk to wildlife and humans. They also dispute the claim that the surviving birds have developed immunity to the virus.

Lower courts have sided with the CFIA's order to cull the birds.

The ostriches remain on the farm but have been under the custody of the food inspection agency since late September. More than 60 protesters had gathered at the farm early on Thursday morning as the Supreme Court released its decision.