[JURIST] In Thursday's environmental law news, sixteen firms, including Huffy, Lockheed Martin, Mobil Oil, and Philip Morris, have agreed to pay [EPA press release] $14.9 million for polluting groundwater in California. In 1979, a contamination plume, measuring 1 mile wide by 8 miles long, was discovered under Baldwin park in Whittier, CA. Known as the San Gabriel Valley Area 2 Superfund site [EPA backgrounder], the plume consisted of mostly rocket fuel, dry cleaning chemicals and industrial solvents. A number of companies had already settled for their role in the contamination, and this settlement includes companies that had previously refused to contribute for cleanup costs. The Whittier Daily News has more.

In other environmental law news...

• The Equitas reinsurance company settled with General Motors [corporate website] over asbestos claims on Thursday. Equitas was set up to handle liability claims made against businesses that contracted with the Lloyd's of London [corporate website] insurance company. General Motors had claims against several manufacturers of car brakes that contained asbestos. The amount of the settlement has not been disclosed. Reuters has more.
  
  
• Canadian conservative MPs on Wednesday called for the federal government to get involved in a case that will decide whether a natural gas fired power plant will be allowed to construct power lines through British Columbia's Fraser Valley. While the Sumas Energy 2 [US corporate website] owned plant would be located within the United States, 800 meters from the border, without the power line approval the plant is unlikely to be built. Some Canadian residents feel that the air pollution that will be created by the plant outweighs the benefits from any electricity they might receive from it. The case goes before the Federal Court of Canada [official website] on November 7. Canadian Press has more.

[JURIST] Reacting Thursday to the publication [JURIST report] of the Volcker committee's final report [TOC] on the UN oil-for-food scandal [JURIST news archive], UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the US State Department both emphasized the need to reform program oversight mechanisms at the United Nations which they said allowed Iraqi ex-president Saddam Hussein to corrupt the UN's humanitarian Oil-for-Food Program [official website]. Annan also emphasized the need for UN member states to prosecute companies within their own territories that knowingly participate in illegal activities. State Department spokesperson Sean McCormack called the report "one more data point" [State Department transcript], suggesting that "reform of the UN secretariat and implementation of important management reforms" is necessary. The Independent Inquiry Committee [official website] led by former US central bank chief Paul Volcker [Wikipedia profile], confirmed its prior conclusion [JURIST report] that Annan himself was not guilty of influencing the bidding process that awarded a company employing his son Kojo a lucrative contract. AFP has more on the State Department response; the UN news service has more on Annan's position.

[JURIST] The Constitutional Court of Korea [official website] Thursday struck down a statute limiting the scope of medical advertising to statements on types of services offered, types of facilities, and number of employees. The content of hospital and clinic advertising may now include representations as to the capabilities and methods of the provider. The 6-3 majority decision reasoned that "direct-to-consumer advertising could empower the patient to learn more about medical options if they are based on accurate information. It could also result in a healthy competition between medical institutes that could benefit the quality of health-care services eventually." The minority opinion cautioned against the potential for providers to exaggerate and distort their capabilities in order to increase earnings. The Korean Medical Association [official website, in Korean] supports the decision, but other civic groups have expressed concerns similar to the dissent. The Korea Times has local coverage.

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice [official website] Thursday endorsed [press release] the mergers of Verizon Communications with MCI and SBC Communications with AT&T [corporate websites], requiring both Verizon and SBC to lease to competitors unused or "dark" communications lines that run to office buildings in several metropolitan areas. The DOJ Antitrust Division filed complaints in the US DC District Court alleging that holding these lines would unfairly increase prices for business customers in 8 of Verizon's franchise territories and 11 of SBC's franchise territories; the proposed divestitures, if approved by the court, would resolve the concerns [SBC case filings here; Verizon case filings here]. A spokesperson for the Department said that "the transactions will not harm competition and will likely benefit consumers, due to existing competition, emerging technologies, the changing regulatory environment." Verizon and MCI issued a joint press release welcoming the merger approval; SBC issued a release saying it will adopt the AT&T name. AP has more.

[JURIST] Kenya's debate over its draft constitution [text, PDF] has erupted into violence, with supporters and opponents clashing in the streets in what has become an increasingly intense disagreement [JURIST report] over a controversial document. Dozens were injured during rioting by machete-wielding demonstrators Wednesday evening in the town of Kakamega in Kenya's Western Province. The incident is the latest in a series of recent violent outbreaks between opposing political factions. Critics say that the document leaves too much power concentrated in the presidency and fails to establish a clear separation between state and religion. The proposed changes are the first Kenyans have attempted to make to their constitution since the country's 1963 independence from Britain. Kenyans will vote on the new charter in a referendum scheduled for November 21. AFP has more.

Previously in JURIST's Paper Chase...

• Debate over Kenya constitution draft intensifies
• Kenya constitutional referendum campaigning begins
• Draft Kenyan constitution presented despite court-ordered halt

[JURIST] In a brief order issued Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website] denied a request from Georgia to throw out a lower court injunction barring enforcement of the state's new voter identification law [JURIST news archive]. In issuing last week's order [PDF text; JURIST report], a US District Court judge reasoned that because the new law required voters to show a photo identification card, it discriminated on the basis of voters' ability to pay for the ID, thus functioning as an unconstitutional poll tax. The Atlanta Journal Constitution has more.

Previously in JURIST's Paper Chase...

• Federal lawsuit filed against Georgia voter photo ID law
• Opponents of GA voter ID law to file federal lawsuit
• ACLU, Georgia spar over voter ID card fees
• Georgia voter ID law receives DOJ approval
• Georgia governor signs voter photo ID law

[JURIST] A federal judge sitting in Baltimore Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought by a group of lawyers seeking $24 million in legal fees for their work in the Microsoft antitrust cases [JURIST news archive], saying he did not have jurisdiction. The lawsuit was brought by a group of 27 law firms that represented plaintiffs in federal court who sought a share of the $79 million in fees that a group of 11 law firms received for state court cases against software giant Microsoft [corporate website]. The federal court lawyers claim they did significant work for the state court lawyers, including funding the litigation, taking depositions and working with experts. Over the past five years, attorneys at both the state and federal level have represented end-user plaintiffs in antitrust overcharge class action lawsuits against Microsoft. AP has more.

[JURIST] Lawyers for Sami Al-Arian [advocacy website], the former Florida college professor charged by the US government with aiding and abetting Palestinian terrorists, rested their case Thursday without calling a single witness to refute the five months of prosecution testimony. Al-Arian's lawyer called the prosecution an "all-out assault on the First Amendment" and then rested his case. Al-Arian was indicted [PDF text; JURIST report] in 2003 on 50 counts, including charges of conspiracy to commit terrorism. Al-Arian, 47, taught computer science at the University of South Florida [official website], until being fired shortly after his indictment [JURIST report]. AP has more. The Tampa Bay Tribune has local coverage.

Previously in JURIST's Paper Chase...

• Federal judge says no mistrial in ex-professor terror case
• Israeli police officer testifies in ex-professor terror trial
• Trial begins for ex-professor accused of terrorism
• Former professor facing terrorism charges seeks to dismiss government evidence

[JURIST] Experts with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] expressed concern over the fairness of the trial of 15 men in Uzbekistan charged with terrorism and precipitating the violent uprising in the town of Andijan [JURIST news archive] in May 2005, according to a press release issued Thursday. According to the statement:

The Special Rapporteurs are concerned about allegations of irregularities in preparation of the trial and of defence procedures that are inadequate to ensure a fair trial. They also fear that the crime of terrorism is not defined in national law in a manner compatible with the requirements of articles 6 and 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in relation to crimes subject to capital punishment.

Moreover, as little evidence has been presented during the trial, apart from confessions; since the defendants admitted their guilt on the first day of the trial reciting the prosecutors' accusatory text and asking for the death penalty; and in light of the fact that they were not cross-examined by independent lawyers, the Special Rapporteurs express concern that the defendants' confessions may have been obtained by means of torture. The previous Special Rapporteur on torture, in his report on a visit to Uzbekistan (document E/CN.4/2003/68/Add.2) wrote that, "torture or similar ill-treatment is systematic as defined by the Committee against Torture [and that] torture and other forms of ill-treatment appear to be used indiscriminately against persons charged for activities qualified as serious crimes such as acts against State interests, as well as petty criminals and others."

[JURIST] Manfred Nowak, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture [official website], has voiced concern that countries are using diplomatic assurances to circumvent the absolute prohibition in the Convention against Torture [text] against the forcible return to countries where there is a risk of torture or ill-treatment. Nowak said that some countries are deporting aliens to countries that systematically practice torture, if the accepting government promises not torture that particular deportee, and said that this practice fails to "take up the issue of the systematic practice of torture." In August, Nowak criticized [JURIST report] British Prime Minister Tony Blair's plan to deport Islamic extremists [JURIST report], saying it is likely to result in violations of international human rights law. Britain has reached "Memorandums of Understanding" with Jordan [JURIST report] and Libya [JURIST report], specifying that foreign nationals deported to those countries will not be mistreated upon their return. Earlier this week, the UK and Jordan agreed to allow an independent rights organization to monitor the treatment of deportees [JURIST report]. UN News has more.

[JURIST] Australian Capital Territory Chief Minister Jon Stanhope [official website] on Thursday became the first state or territory leader in Australia to reject the federal government's proposed anti-terrorism legislation [PDF text] in its current form. Stanhope's opposition [JURIST report] focused on provisions dealing with preventative detention and control orders. After receiving expert opinion, Stanhope concluded that he would not implement provisions that may breach Australia's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) [text]. Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock [official website] supported the proposed legislation [transcript] and the constitutionality of allowing judges to subject people to control orders:

These matters have been tested before in relation to powers of warrants for a range of security-related purposes. The system that is used for questioning warrants involves a judicial officer in considering a request approved by me, asked for by ASIO, before a warrant is issued. Now that is a matter that we were advised was constitutional when we implemented it. It hasn't been challenged. In relation to all of the surveillance that is undertaken by police under the telecommunications interception legislation, warrants are issued by judicial officers, again using the same power of the constitution of judicial officers acting in their personal capacity and not being involved in any review that might be undertaken when decisions are challenged. ... But the point I make is that there are a range of functions that are now carried out where judges or judicial officers exercise a personal decision-making capacity which the court in Grollo's case in 1995 upheld and our advice from our constitutional experts is that these measures are of the same character.

[JURIST] Investment banks and other defendants associated with the WorldCom accounting fraud [JURIST news archive] fallout have agreed to settle with a group of over 65 institutional investors for $651 million. The investors had opted out of a broader class action lawsuit previously brought that netted $6.1 billion [JURIST report] for WorldCom stock and bond holders. The settlement will compensate institutional investors, such as pension fund groups, who purchased WorldCom stocks and bonds from 1998 to 2001. WorldCom [MCI/WorldCom website] plunged into bankruptcy in 2002 after the accounting fraud at the company was revealed. Former WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers [JURIST news archive] was sentenced to 25 years in prison [JURIST news report] for his role in defrauding investors. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] After Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination [JURIST report] to the US Supreme Court in a letter [PDF] to President Bush Thursday, Republican and Democratic Senators who had generally been lukewarm about her nomination and skeptical of her experience and credentials seemed ready to move on to a new candidate. Senate Judiciary Committee member Charles Schumer (D-NY) [official website] for instance described Miers as a "fine and capable person" who was "clearly the wrong [person for the] position." He urged the President "to choose a knowledgeable and mainstream successor in the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor." Other Senator who did not bemoan Miers' demise nonetheless expressed dismay about the nomination process that brought about her withdrawal. Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) [official website] described the events that led to her decision to pull out as a "sad episode in the history of Washington, D.C." and described the treatment she has received as "really disgraceful." Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) [official website] was more explicit, saying "The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination." AP has more.

Conservative Focus on the Family [advocacy website] founder James Dobson, who at one point seemed likely to be called to testify at Miers' confirmation hearing [JURIST report] about assurances allegedly made to him about Miers' views and likely rulings, commended [press release] President Bush for "wise decision in accepting Harriet Miers' withdrawal." He said he had been "increasingly concerned about her conservative credentials." Ralph Neas, president of the liberal People for the American Way [advocacy website], called the Miers nomination and withdrawal an "astonishing spectacle" that "demonstrates [that] the ultra-right wing dominance of Republican Party politics is total." NPR has more. US Newswire maintains a running list of press releases by groups reacting to the withdrawal of the Miers nomination.

[JURIST] There will be no announcements in the investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity until Friday, a spokesperson for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald [official website] said Thursday. The White House is waiting for news on whether a federal grand jury will issue indictments after Fitzgerald met with the panel [JURIST report] Wednesday. The investigation is said to be focusing on two key White House aides, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby [official profile], the vice president's chief of staff, and Bush's top political advisor, Karl Rove [official profile]. The two-year investigation began when the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame [JURIST news archive; Wikipedia profile] was revealed days after her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, criticized the Bush administration's pre-Iraq war intelligence. AP has more.

Previously in JURIST's Paper Chase...

• Charges expected this week in CIA leak probe
• Special prosecutor reportedly finalizing CIA leak charges
• Cheney reportedly told aide about CIA operative
• Cover-up charges reportedly being considered in CIA leak case
• Rove appears before grand jury for a fourth time
• DOJ, Plame special counsel wanted Congress to block CIA ID leak probe
• CIA leak probe could be nearing end, lawyers say
• Plame leak prosecutors interview wide range of administration officials

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of China [official website in Chinese] Thursday confirmed its plan to remove the authority from lower courts to review death sentences [JURIST report], which is expected to decrease the number of execution sentences currently given and also prevent fatal miscarriages of justice. China [JURIST news archive] has been criticized by international human rights groups for the large number of executions performed in the country, but the impact of the reforms may be difficult to ascertain since Beijing keeps secret the number of people shot or executed by lethal injection. Amnesty International [advocacy website] has reported that there were 200 executions over a two-week period in February, and information from a senior Chinese lawmaker indicates that the actual annual toll could be close to 10,000. A court press release [text in Chinese] announcing the high court's decision said, "Taking back authority for death penalty approval will undoubtedly be of great service in ensuring strict control of its use, setting a unified standard and fulfilling constitutional human rights protections." The court did not give a date for the limits to be imposed. The Financial Times has more.

[JURIST] Jose Padilla [JURIST news archive] has filed an appeal [PDF cert. petition, via How Appealing] with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to place limits on the government's ability to hold him and other terror suspects indefinitely without filing charges against them. Padilla has been in US custody for over three years on allegations that he was involved in an al Qaeda plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the US. Last year, the high court dismissed Padilla's challenge to his indefinite detention in a 5-4 decision because he brought it in the wrong court, but Padilla refiled the case [JURIST report]. Earlier this year, a federal judge in South Carolina ordered the government to either charge or release him, but the Fourth Circuit decided [opinion, PDF] that he could be detained indefinitely without charges [JURIST report], prompting Padilla's latest appeal to the high court. The Bush administration has argued that terrorist suspects should not be given constitutional protections when national security is at issue, and the new make-up of the court could bring a majority decision in favor of Bush's contentions. The Justices are not expected to decide whether they will hear Padilla's case until later this year. AP has more.

ALSO ON JURIST  Op-ed: Jose Padilla and the Milligan Problem | Topic: Enemy Combatants

[JURIST] The Constitutional Court in Malawi [government website; BBC country profile] Wednesday issued a temporary injunction delaying impeachment proceedings by parliament against Malawi President Bingu wa Mutharika [BBC profile] until the court has the opportunity to review parliamentary guidelines regarding how to remove the president. Parliament adopted the new impeachment procedures [JURIST report] last week to fill a gap in the constitution, which allowed for a president's removal but did not indicate the manner in which it should be done. Mutharika faces impeachment after charges were brought against him for misusing public funds and abusing his presidential role, and Parliament had called for him to answer the charges, but Mutharika appealed directly to the Constitutional Court which led to the court's ruling. He argued that the new impeachment procedures were unconstitutional and "not in accordance with the rules of natural justice." Parliamentary officials said they plan to appeal the court's injunction. AP has more.

[JURIST] US Representative Tom DeLay [official website; JURIST news archive] has informed US House of Representative officials that he neglected to disclose all contributions made to his legal defense fund as mandated by congressional rules. DeLay told House officials that he began an audit which uncovered an unreported amount of $20,850 contributed in 2000 and 2001 to the defense fund. Another $17,300 was listed in the defense fund's quarterly report, but was not disclosed in DeLay's 2000 annual financial disclosure report, and other donations that actually totaled $4,450 were understated as totaling $2,800. Congressional rules require the disclosure of donations in quarterly reports and mandate disclosures of donations over $250 on annual reports. DeLay said that he first realized the inconsistencies last February and called for a "full and complete" audit at that point. Meanwhile, DeLay has decided to personally attend a hearing next Tuesday on whether the judge overseeing his trial should be replaced [JURIST report]. DeLay is facing money laundering and criminal conspiracy charges for allegedly helping to funnel corporate donations to GOP candidates for the Texas Legislature in violation of Texas state law. His attorney said DeLay wants to be present at the hearing because "he wants to be involved in every facet [of the case] particularly when something is very important." AP has more.

ALSO ON JURIST  Op-ed: Tom DeLay's Challenge to Texas Grand Jury Process

[JURIST] US Representative Tom DeLay [official website; JURIST news archive] has informed US House of Representative officials that he neglected to disclose all contributions made to his legal defense fund as mandated by congressional rules. DeLay told House officials that he began an audit which uncovered an unreported amount of $20,850 contributed in 2000 and 2001 to the defense fund. Another $17,300 was listed in the defense fund's quarterly report, but was not disclosed in DeLay's 2000 annual financial disclosure report, and other donations that actually totaled $4,450 were understated as totaling $2,800. Congressional rules require the disclosure of donations in quarterly reports and mandate disclosures of donations over $250 on annual reports. DeLay said that he first realized the inconsistencies last February and called for a "full and complete" audit at that point. Meanwhile, DeLay has decided to personally attend a hearing next Tuesday on whether the judge overseeing his trial should be replaced [JURIST report]. DeLay is facing money laundering and criminal conspiracy charges for allegedly helping to funnel corporate donations to GOP candidates for the Texas Legislature in violation of Texas state law. His attorney said DeLay wants to be present at the hearing because "he wants to be involved in every facet [of the case] particularly when something is very important." AP has more.

ALSO ON JURIST  Op-ed: Tom DeLay's Challenge to Texas Grand Jury Process

[JURIST] US officials and members of the Iraqi government have mismanaged $24 million in reconstruction grants made by the US in 2004, and fraudulent activities may have occurred in some of the cases, according to a report [text, PDF] released Wednesday by the US Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction [official website]. Inspector General Stuart Bowen [official profile] said he has recommended an investigation into several cases of potential fraud related to grants given to Iraq's south-central region to help rebuilding efforts after the US invasion in 2003. The grants were meant to be used for projects including road repair, media work, and efforts to bring heightened awareness to women's rights issues, but it is not clear that the money was actually spent on those goals. Bowen's report said that individuals working for the Coalition Provisional Authority [official website] have not been able to account for $20.5 million in funds, and audits into these monies are still ongoing. The report recommends stricter controls over grants and also calls for the creation of an investigatory team to research whether other regions in Iraq had similar issues in managing grants. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] AP is reporting that US Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers [JURIST news archive] has withdrawn her nomination.

9:15 AM ET - In a letter [PDF] to President Bush Thursday, Miers withdrew her nomination [JURIST report], expressing concern that the confirmation process would present "a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country." Citing a need to protect the independence of the Executive Branch [Findlaw executive privilege backgrounder], Miers also said that efforts to obtain documents during her service in the White House [JURIST report] as legal counsel to the President contributed to her decision to withdraw. The White House on Monday refused to release any records of White House conversations [JURIST report] between Miers and President Bush. Bush Thursday reluctantly accepted Miers' withdrawal [White House statement], saying "It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House - disclosures that would undermine a president's ability to receive candid counsel. Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers - and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her." Bush said that he would fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court, created when Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement [JURIST report] in July, "in a timely manner." O'Connor's retirement will not become effective until her successor is nominated and confirmed. Miers' withdrawal follows suggestions of cronyism [WSJ op-ed] in her nomination, criticism of her ideological credentials by conservative groups [JURIST report], Senators' frustration at her limited answers to written questions [JURIST report], and rarely-expressed reservations [JURIST report] from GOP legal staff on the US Senate Judiciary Committee. AP has more.

[JURIST] Republican senators continued a long-running effort to build support for breaking up the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] into two circuits during a US Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] subcommitee hearing [witness list and prepared statements] Wednesday. A bill introduced earlier this month by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) [official websites] would split the circuit into two, with one containing California, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, and the other containing the remaining states. Proponents of the idea have argued that the circuit's caseload has grown too unwieldy for the current court structure; the circuit hears about triple the cases of the nationwide circuit court average. Many opponents, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) [official website], have called the proposal politically motivated due to the 9th Circuit's reputation as a liberal circuit. Of eight judges who testified at the hearing, three supported splitting the circuit into two. Republicans have long sought such legislation, with the House approving a measure last fall [JURIST report] that failed to make it past the Senate. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. introduced a similar bill [JURIST report] in the House last week. The Los Angeles Times has more.

[JURIST] Walt Disney [corporate website] shareholders have appealed a ruling by a Delaware court that the company's directors were not liable [JURIST report] for approving a $130 million severance package for former President Michael Ovitz [Wikipedia backgrounder]. The appeal sought to have the ruling overturned on procedural and evidentiary grounds. Ovitz served as president of the company for 14 months before leaving in 1996. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] Lawyers could be suspended for a year for repeatedly filing frivolous lawsuits under a bill introduced in the US House of Representatives [official website] as part of a Republican effort to limit such lawsuits. Supporters of the legislation say frivolous claims and lawyers that bring them are clogging US courts and driving up healthcare costs around the country. H.R. 420 [bill summary], introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith [official website], would amend Rule 11 [text] of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to require a year-long suspension if a lawyer files three frivolous claims in a jurisdiction during his career. The bill also applies upon motion to state actions where the judge determines that the action affects interstate commerce, a provision that the American Bar Association [profession website] has opposed. A similar version of the bill was approved in the House [National Law Journal report] last fall, but the Senate never voted on it. With a full fall calendar this year, the Senate appears unlikely to vote on the new bill again this year. The Judicial Conference of the United States [official website] has also opposed the legislation, arguing that mandatory punishment for frivolous claims had failed to work in an earlier version of the rule. AP has more.

5:53 PM ET - The US House approved the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2005 [PDF text] Thursday afternoon by a vote of 228-184. AP has more.

[JURIST] Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti [official website] has subpoenaed 73 employees of Memorial Medical Center [hospital website] in New Orleans, as part of its ongoing investigation [JURIST report] into deaths alleged at hospitals and nursing homes in the wake of Hurricane Katrina [JURIST news archive]. The subpoenas covered all levels of employees at the hospital, and a spokeswoman for the attorney general said they were needed to get employees to talk to investigators. At Memorial, 34 patients died after the hospital was cut off by flood waters, and some reports suggested that doctors at the hospital debated euthanizing some patients [CNN report] who were unlikely to survive the flood. Tenet Healthcare [corporate website], which owns Memorial, has said that it told employees that it was up to them whether to talk to investigators. Foti has been investigating at least 140 deaths at New Orleans hospitals and nursing homes, with two nursing home owners being charged with 34 counts of negligent homicide [JURIST report] for deaths that occurred during the flooding. AP has more.

[JURIST] More than 2,000 companies around the world paid $1.8 billion in illegal kickbacks to the regime of Saddam Hussein in abusing the now defunct UN oil-for-food program [official website; JURIST news archive], according to parts of a UN investigation obtained Thursday by the Associated Press. The Independent Inquiry Committee (IIC) [official website], led by former US Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker [official profile], is set to release its full report later Thursday. The report found that more than half of all companies participating in the program from 66 countries used illegal kickbacks and surcharges to win oil contracts from Iraq. The report is expected to be critical of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan [official profile; JURIST news archive] and the UN Security Council for failing to better monitor the program. Under the massive aid program, which ran from 1996 to 2003, Iraq was allowed to sell oil and use the proceeds to buy humanitarian goods to help citizens cope with the UN sanctions placed on the country. The report also found that Iraqi leaders, who were able to award the oil contracts, denied contracts to American, British and Japanese companies due to their government's support for the sanctions, while they favored Russia, France and China. The report, the fifth to be issued, will conclude the commission's year-long investigation. AP has more.

11:46 AM ET - The Independent Inquiry Committee has now posted online the full text of its report on The Manipulation of the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme [PDF]. A separate table detailing Actual and Projected Illicit Payments on Contracts for Humanitarian Goods-Summary by Supplier [PDF] is also available. The 190-page list notes payments by multinationals DaimlerChrysler and Volvo as well as many other large and small businesses worldwide.

ALSO ON JURIST  Text: IIC Management Report | Text: IIC 3rd Interim Report | Text: IIC 2nd Interim Report | Text: IIC Interim Report