Category World News

Nestle has fired CEO Laurent Freixe after just one year in the job following an investigation into an undisclosed “romantic relationship”, ousting its second chief executive in a year and throwing the Swiss food giant into its deepest leadership chaos in decades.

Freixe’s sudden dismissal followed an investigation into an undisclosed romantic relationship with a direct subordinate that breached Nestle’s code of business conduct, Nestle said late on Monday.

Freixe was replaced by Nespresso chief Philipp Navratil, a rising star at the world’s largest food company as it battles slowing sales, the impact of United States tariffs and eroding investor confidence after years of underperformance.

The Frenchman’s predecessor Mark Schneider failed to cope with the challenge, and it cost him his job in August 2024. Paul Bulcke, CEO from 2008 to 2016, will step down as chairman in April and will be replaced by Pablo Isla, a former CEO of Spanish fashion retailer Inditex.

“The loss of two CEOs and a chairman in a year is of historic proportions for Nestle,” said Ingo Speich, head of corporate governance and sustainability at Deka, a top 30 Nestle investor.

“The new CEO needs to fix the business model and bring volumes back. He needs to do better M&A [mergers and acquisitions] and focus more on emerging markets.”

The upheaval underscores the struggle not only at Nestle but also other consumer goods companies to reignite sales and recover stock values as the post-pandemic cost-of-living crisis drives consumers towards cheaper alternatives. Meanwhile, US tariffs threaten to further inflate prices and alienate already price-sensitive shoppers.

Shares in the maker of Nescafe and KitKat chocolate bars were down 0.8 percent in Zurich by 1:18pm (11:18 GMT).

Speak Up

The company said concerns about a possible relationship were raised by staff via the company’s internal reporting channel, Speak Up, although an initial investigation was unsubstantiated. Freixe had initially denied the relationship to the board, a company spokesperson said.

When staff concerns persisted, Nestle said it ordered an investigation overseen by Bulcke and Lead Independent Director Isla with the support of independent outside counsel. Swiss media reported that Swiss lawyers from the Baer & Karrer law firm helped with the inquiry.

Freixe, who spent 39 years with Nestle, will receive no exit package, the company told the Reuters news agency.

In a short statement, Bulcke thanked Freixe for his years of service at Nestle but said the dismissal was a “necessary decision”.

His dismissal adds to a list of top executives forced to resign after investigations into their relationships with colleagues.

Energy giant BP’s former CEO Bernard Looney and McDonald’s CEO Steve Easterbrook were both removed for failing to disclose relationships with colleagues.

The Swiss financial news website Inside Paradeplatz reported that Freixe met the woman in 2022 before he became CEO and when he was head of Nestle’s Latin America business.

Freixe was not immediately available to comment when contacted via email. The identity of the female subordinate has not been made public.

Swiss law does not prohibit relationships between senior executives nor does it require disclosure although most large companies have internal codes of conduct that require they are disclosed.

Corporate governance expert Peter V Kunz from the University of Bern said he was not familiar with Nestle’s rules but said requirements at most public companies were broadly similar.

“In this respect, Mr Freixe’s behaviour – regardless of whether it was legal or not – seems to me to be simply stupid and incomprehensible in this day and age,” Kunz told Reuters, adding that he did not think investors had grounds for legal action against Nestle.

Opportunity for overhaul

Nestle’s shares, a bedrock of the Swiss stock exchange, have lost almost a third of their value over the past five years, underperforming their European peers.

Freixe’s appointment failed to halt the slide, and the company’s shares shed 17 percent of their value during his leadership, disappointing investors.

One top 20 Nestle investor welcomed news of the change, saying Freixe had been a disappointment and bringing in Navratil was an opportunity for a more ambitious overhaul.

The new CEO needs to slim down the company, cut costs and above all reduce the headcount, the investor, who declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter, said, adding that it is also crucial for the company to raise organic growth to boost volumes.

“The cash flow must cover the dividend,” the investor said. “That’s an absolute priority.”

In July, Nestle launched a review of its underperforming vitamins business, which could lead to the divestment of some brands after first-half sales volumes missed expectations.

Freixe’s dismissal was featured on the front page of Swiss newspapers with Neue Zuercher Zeitung noting that Nestle had lost its “legendary stability” during which CEOs stayed on for years before eventually becoming chairmen.

AJ Bell investment director Russ Mould said the company would likely face a period of uncertainty over whether Navratil will follow the same path as his predecessor.

President Donald Trump’s use of the military to thwart protests in California was deemed unlawful by a federal judge in the country.

Judge Charles Breyer, who is a member of the US District Court in Northern California, issued an injunction on Tuesday to stop the deployment, but it won’t go into effect until September 12 and no service members will be removed without notice.

Breyer claimed that Trump’s deployment to Southern California was “unprecedented.” He also questioned Trump’s justification for claiming that the protests were a “rebellion” that needed to be ended.

According to Breyer, “There were protests in Los Angeles, and some people acted violently.”

There was neither a rebellion nor a law enforcement presence in the area who could enforce the law.

The outcome of the lawsuit Newsom v. Trump, named for California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose administration filed the lawsuit in June, was announced.

Posse Comitatus Act violations

One of Trump’s most recognizable critics has come out, and Newsom has been suggested as a potential Democratic Party candidate for the 2028 presidential election.

According to him and the attorney general of California, Trump’s decision to send 700 US Marines and nearly 4, 000 National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area in June was against the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the use of the military for law enforcement purposes.

With the unprecedented and unlawful federalization of the California National Guard and the influx of military personnel into our communities, the Trump administration far overstepped its bounds, according to Bonta in a June article.

Judge Breyer largely concurred with that assertion in Tuesday’s 52-page decision, finding that Trump had actually overstepped his authority.

Breyer criticized the Trump administration, noting that “Defendants willfully violated the Posse Comitatus Act”.

The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the military from performing twelve functions, which defendants knowingly contravened their own training materials.

Breyer criticized the Trump administration’s “top-down” strategy as a “complete sidelining of state and local authorities,” adding that it was “complete sidelining of local and state authorities.”

For the first time since 1965, a president has federalized National Guard troops deployed to a state without the governor’s approval to quell unrest.

Under President Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration, there was a previous time when troops were deployed to Selma, Alabama to protect civil rights protesters from violence.

Deportation protests are a compulsion.

In response to Trump’s strong-armed approach to immigration enforcement, which resulted in workplace raids occurring all over California, protests erupted in and around Los Angeles.

Trump has pledged to carry out the “largest deportation programme” in US history, but critics worry that his treatment of immigrants is inhumane and puts them in danger.

Trump issued a memo on June 7 to acclimatize the state’s National Guard, ostensibly to protect federal property as the protests grew in Los Angeles.

He defended his actions by contrasting the protests with a rebellion.

According to the memo, “to the extent that protests or violent acts directly impede the enforcement of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the United States’ government’s authority.”

However, Newsom and Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, quickly denounced the decision and claimed that the troops had exacerbated the protests rather than stopped them.

According to a statement released at the time, “the federal government is now using the military against American citizens.” Donald Trump acts like a tyrant, not a president, according to the statement. We request that these unlawful actions be immediately stopped.

At least 300 National Guard service members are still stationed in Southern California while Trump is in charge, according to Breyer, who noted that the federalization was supposed to last for 60 days.

Additionally, according to Breyer, Trump has threatened to send federal troops to other states, including Chicago, Illinois, a metropolis in the Midwest.

He cited Trump as saying to his cabinet in August that he had the authority to “do anything I want.” The United States has its own president. I have the ability to do it if I believe our nation is in danger and that these cities are in danger.

However, Breyer claimed that the US Constitution’s separation of powers does not apply to that perspective.

Breyer explained that the title “the president is the commander in chief” only becomes effective when the military is called into service, and that Congress, not the president, has the “bulk of the federal authority over the military.”

According to Breyer, “There is little support in the US’s founding era] for an inherent constitutional authority for the President to summon the militia or use the military in general to carry out the laws.”

The judge referred to as a “conflict of interest” the Trump administration’s claim that the executive branch should decide the Posse Comitatus Act’s limitations.

Trump wants to deploy to Chicago.

Judges have been repeatedly accused of bias against the Trump administration’s immigration policy.

The injunction against the troop deployment in California is only allowed by Breyer’s ruling, which runs until noon local time (19:00 GMT) on September 12.

The Trump administration can expect to appeal after this pause. Otherwise, the injunction would prevent the soldiers from engaging in crowd control, crowd control, and other forms of law enforcement that are normally prohibited by the Posse Comitatus Act.

Trump’s ambitious claims to presidential authority are hampered by Tuesday’s ruling, but the president has vowed to send troops there on a similar mission.

He declared on social media on Tuesday morning, “Chicago is by far the worst and most dangerous city in the world.” “I’ll solve the crime issue right away, just like I did in DC,” he said. Chicago will once more be in good health soon. “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN”

Trump had already ordered the National Guard to patrol Washington, D.C. streets in August on the grounds that it was experiencing a “crime emergency.”

Due to the US government’s greater authority over the capital district, federal law, however, largely allows this deployment to occur in Washington, D.C.

However, according to critics, a deployment to Chicago would likely raise many of the same constitutional issues as Southern California did.

Trump’s military exercises to combat crime have primarily targeted Democratic-led cities so far. Trump is a Republican in his own right.

Governor Newsom applauded Tuesday’s decision as a response to the president’s overreach, which has been repeated on social media in recent weeks.

11 protesters were detained on Monday during a demonstration, and a student group in Gorontalo, Indonesia, is requesting their release. In response to the government’s ongoing indignation over the cost of living, benefits to lawmakers, and police brutality, large-scale protests have been occurring all over the country.

As his trial for orchestrating a conspiracy to stay in power draws to a close today, Jair Bolsonaro’s future rests in the balance. During the trial, the nation is anticipating unrest.

The panel of the Supreme Court, which will decide whether the populist former leader is guilty of attempting to overturn the 2022 presidential election result, which he lost to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has scheduled sessions from September 2 through September 12.

Bolsonaro, age 70, was accused of five counts of trying to orchestrate a coup d’etat. He repeatedly claims that his trial was motivated by political reasons, and he insists there is no wrongdoing and is currently under house arrest.

Donald Trump, the president of the United States, made a similar point by imposing a 50% tariff on Brazilian imports and citing Bolsonaro’s trial as a “witch hunt” against a political opponent.

What is anticipated for Tuesday?

The case involving Bolsonaro and seven of his allies is being heard by a Supreme Court five-justice panel.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who Bolsonaro and his supporters claim he orchestrated the trial against the former president, is scheduled to give a detailed summary of the case on Tuesday. Cristiano Zanin, a former attorney for President Lula, and Flavio Dino, the former justice minister of the leftist president, are also members of the judges’ panel. Two members of the panel were chosen by Bolsonaro as president.

The prosecutor general is expected to read out the charges against Bolsonaro after Moraes speaks. Following that, Bolsonaro’s and the other defendants’ attorneys are scheduled to make statements.

Bolsonaro could be found guilty on Tuesday if the justices decide to go directly to court after the closing arguments on Tuesday and a majority prevails.

Supreme Court trials are frequently delayed by suspended proceedings, sometimes for months, in practice, though. In order to “strengthen the case,” Bolsonaro’s attorneys are frequently expected to raise procedural questions, file motions, and highlight “new evidence”

What crimes is Bolsonaro accused of?

Bolsonaro is accused of five crimes, including attempted violent abolition of the democratic rule of law, and two counts of destroying state property.

A coup plot conviction alone carries a maximum sentence of 12 years.

Seven other close ally of Bolsonaro, including his running mate and former defense minister Paulo Sergio Nogueira and his running mate Walter Braga Netto, are facing charges.

The prosecution has argued that Bolsonaro’s camp attempted to compel military action and remove the new president by staging a riot on January 8, 2023 when Bolsonaro supporters demolished top government buildings a week after Lula took office.

Bolsonaro’s supporters are also accused of planning to kill Lula before swearing-in by the prosecution. According to investigators, the evidence indicates that the former president endorsed the plan.

Bolsonaro has already been prohibited from running in elections in Brazil until 2030 because of allegations of abuse of power and concerns about Brazil’s electronic voting system.

Bolsonaro acknowledged at a deposition that he participated in meetings looking for ways to change the 2022 election results despite denouncing any attempt to overthrow Brazil’s democracy.

Bolsonaro has also indicated that he intends to run for president in 2026.

Bolsonaro will attend the trial, right?

Bolsonaro is house-assisted in a high-security neighborhood in Brasilia, the capital. The former president’s attorney said it was uncertain if he would attend the sessions this week.

After discovering a document suggesting he might have sought political asylum in Argentina, his lawyers allege that he is being watched closely and is being kept under full surveillance.

Bolsonaro has been prohibited from contacting foreign officials, using social media, or approaching national embassies since July.

What would transpire if Bolsonaro were found guilty?

Lawyers for Bolsonaro are predicting a shorter prison term because Brazil’s maximum prison sentence is 40 years, which is the maximum combined sentence for the crimes Bolsonaro is accused of committing.

What makes this trial significant?

Bolsonaro’s trial, according to some Brazilian commentators, is “historic,” claiming that this is the first time high-ranking officials accused of an attempted coup are facing criminal charges.

Up until 1985, armed forces supported by conservative elites overthrew Joao Goulart, the elected president, and a military dictatorship ruled for more than 20 years. Bolsonaro has rekindled his support for Brazil’s military rule in spite of human rights violations.

The Amnesty Law was passed by the government in 1979, and as a result, Brazil never prosecuted any of the military personnel responsible for the country’s widespread rights violations.

The charges against Bolsonaro and his supporters amount to political persecution, intended to thwart his political resumption in the upcoming presidential election.

Trump: Is he a trial participant?

President Trump slapped Brazil with a 50% US tariff on August 1, citing the allegations that Bolsonaro, who Trump had allyd with, had political backing.

Trump criticized Brazil’s handling of Bolsonaro in a letter from July to Brazil’s current president Lula.

He claimed that Brazil’s covert attacks on free elections and the country’s fundamental free speech rights were contributing factors to his justification for the sky-high tariff.

The US president urged Americans to “please understand that the 50% figure is much less than what is required to achieve the Level Playing Field we require with your Country.”

He continued, “The way Brazil treated former President Bolsonaro, a Highly Respected Leader throughout the World, including by the United States, is a world disgrace.”

While Trump’s global trade war primarily targeted nations with large surpluses with the US, Brazilian imports from the US far outweigh their exports, and Washington had a $ 28.6 billion trade surplus with Brazil in 2024.

Lula, Brazil’s president, has stated that his country won’t immediately impose tariffs on the US. He instead reiterated his request for Trump to discuss trade issues with him.

Trump was facing criminal charges related to his campaign to overturn the election, which he also falsely claimed he had defeated Joe Biden in the 2020 US presidential election.

Before Biden took office, his supporters also stormed the US Capitol in an effort to stop the election results from being certified. According to some experts, the US Capitol attack on January 6, 2021, was the inspiration for Bolsonaro’s riot in Brazil in 2023.