[JURIST] Jury deliberations began Monday in the retrial [JURIST report] of two former Enron [JURIST news archive] executives from the fallen company's broadband department. Former CFO Kevin Howard and senior accounting director Michael Krautz [Houston Chronicle profiles] are being retried after their first trial ended in a hung jury in 2005. Both men are charged [indictment, PDF] with one count of conspiracy and falsifying records and three counts of wire fraud, while three other former broadband executives will also be retried [JURIST report] on insider trading, money laundering, and fraud charges.

Closing arguments ended Monday with prosecutors alleging that Howard and Krautz illegally created earnings for Enron by launching "Project Braveheart," a scheme to put profits on the company's books through a sale promising investors an interest in future revenue for a business line which never made a profit. Prosecutors contend that the deal was a sham because investors were told they would be bought out at a premium, but defense attorneys for the former executives have argued that the buyback never actually occurred. Meanwhile, the jury in the separate trial of former Enron executives Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling [Houston Chronicle profiles] is also still deliberating [JURIST report]. AP has more.

[JURIST] Bushra Khalil, a defense lawyer for Saddam Hussein [JURIST news archive], said Monday that she believes Judge Raouf Abdel-Rahman [BBC profile], the Kurdish judge presiding over Hussein's trial [JURIST news archive], is harsher on her than other lawyers because she is a Shiite. Khalil was thrown out of court [JURIST report] for the second time Monday after being added to Hussein's defense team [JURIST report] as the only female lawyer in late March. Khalil was previously removed from a court session [JURIST report] in April when she showed pictures depicting the alleged abuse of Iraqi detainees at the hands of US soldiers.

While many have speculated that Rahman seems harsher on Khalil because she is a woman, she asserts that it is because she is from a well-known Shiite family and is defending a man against charges that he killed and tortured Shiite villagers in Dujail. Khalil said Monday that she believes that Hussein ordered the deaths in Dujail [JURIST report] because of an assassination attempt on his life, and not as an attack on Shiites in general. AP has more.

[JURIST] Legal experts with the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) [advocacy website] have questioned the credibility of some of the Cambodian judges [AHRC statement] who have been approved to serve on a war crimes tribunal that will hear cases against former Khmer Rouge [Wikipedia backgrounder] leaders accused of genocide and crimes against humanity. Earlier this month, King Norodom Sihamoni [official profile; BBC profile] approved a list of 30 officials selected by Cambodia's Supreme Council of Magistracy to serve as judges and prosecutors [JURIST report] on the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia [KRT task force website; backgrounder], the joint Cambodia-UN tribunal. The jurists are from Cambodia, Australia, Austria, Canada, France, Japan, Poland, Sri Lanka, the Netherlands, and the US. While many of the foreign officials have impressive resumes including several degrees and years of experience, the credentials of the Cambodian jurists seem to pale in comparison, according to the Hong Kong-based rights group.

Critics have expressed concern over the reputations of Cambodian judges which indicate a tendency to decide cases based on the government's political agenda, especially since many of the judges received their law degrees in the former Soviet communist bloc where impartiality was often sacrificed in judicial decisions. Earlier this month, visiting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louis Arbour stressed the importance of greater independence for members of the Cambodian judiciary [JURIST report]. The war crimes tribunal is expected to begin trying cases early next year after the United Nations [official website] urged a timely trial calendar [JURIST report] to begin proceedings for the deaths of 1.7 million people during the communist regime's rule from 1975-1979. AP has more.

[JURIST] The Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs [organization website] is reportedly preparing a document that recommends a lawsuit against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [official website; BBC profile] for allegedly inciting genocide with anti-Israel remarks [JCPA report]. A group of Israeli diplomats, including former UN Ambassador Dore Gold [JCPA profile], say Ahmadinejad's comments violate the 1948 UN Genocide Convention [text]. Lawyers expect to send a file on Ahmadinejad to the International Court of Justice [official website], the UN's main judicial body, at The Hague.

In February, an Israeli lawyer sued Ahmadinejad in Germany [JURIST report], alleging that the Iranian president had denied the occurrence of the Holocaust. BBC News has more. Ynetnews.com has local coverage.

[JURIST] The South Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) [official website] on Monday rejected an appeal of its antitrust decision against Microsoft [corporate website; JURIST news archive]. In December, the KFTC issued a preliminary ruling [JURIST report; KFTC findings, PDF] that Microsoft had abused its dominant market position by bundling its media viewer and instant-messaging software with its Windows operating system. The KFTC fined Microsoft the equivalent of $34 million and ordered it to provide consumers a version of Windows without the bundled software.

A separate appeal [JURIST report; Microsoft press release] of the KFTC ruling is pending in the Seoul High Court. Last week, a US judge extended Microsoft's antitrust settlement with the US Justice Department [JURIST report] by two years, through November 2009. AP has more.

[JURIST] Royal Dutch Shell PLC [corporate website] will wait for a Nigerian appeals court ruling rather than pay a $1.5 billion judgment [JURIST report] to compensate ethnic communities in Nigeria for pollution from its operations. A company spokesman said paying the judgment, which was due at noon Monday, would be inappropriate because of its appeal [JURIST report; company press release].

Shell was ordered to pay damages to the ethnic Ijaw [Wikipedia backgrounder] in the Niger Delta for pollution caused by its joint venture with the Nigerian government and two other companies. The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta [BBC report], a militant group whose attacks have reduced the flow of oil from Nigeria by 20 percent this year, has demanded that Shell pay the Ijaw. AP has more.

[JURIST] A federal grand jury in Ohio on Monday indicted [PDF text; press release] seven former executives of National Century Financial Enterprises [Forbes.com backgrounder] on charges of conspiracy, fraud, and promotion of money laundering. The seven former executives of the health care financing company are accused of conspiring to defraud investors of $3 billion by lying to investors about how their funds would be used, diverting the funds and then covering the shortfall with subsidiaries' bank accounts and fake reports. The money laundering and conspiracy charges each carry a maximum 20-year prison sentence and $500,000 fine, while the fraud charges carry maximum prison terms of five years or 20 years.

National Century, which collapsed in November 2002, bought medical accounts receivable from health care providers, then financed the purchases by selling securities to large institutional investors outside of Ohio. The former executives indicted include former CEO Lance Poulsen, former vice chairman Rebecca Parrett, former COO Donald Ayers, former director of securitizations Roger Faulkenberry, former CFO Randolph Speer, former VP for client development James Dierker, and former VP of securitizations Jon Beacham. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website; JURIST news archive] filed a civil injunction action [SEC press release] against National Century in December, alleging that Poulsen, Parrett and Ayers participated in a scheme to defraud investors in securities issued by its subsidiaries. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] US oil companies did not illegally manipulate gasoline prices [press release] or restrain supply last year in the wake of Hurricane Katrina [JURIST news archive], according to a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) [official website] report [PDF text] released Monday. US antitrust authorities performed an investigation of the oil industry, and, like several past investigations, found no evidence of price manipulation by refiners or pipeline companies, either through cutting inventory or restricting capacity to superficially raise prices.

The FTC did find, however, 15 examples of price-gouging at the refining, wholesale or retail level. The FTC findings correspond with legislators' definition of price gouging, but it is likely that regional market trends ranging from pipeline outages to panic buying in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina are to blame and not any fault on the oil companies. Congress defines price gouging as "any finding that the average price of gasoline in designated disaster areas in September 2005 was higher than in August 2005 for reasons other than rising production or transportation costs, or national or international market trends." Reuters has more. AP has additional coverage.

[JURIST] The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda [official website; JURIST news archive] has denied prosecutors' request to transfer the trial of Rwandan genocide suspect Michel Bagaragaza [Trial Watch profile] to Norway because Norway does not have a specific law against genocide. In its decision [text], the UN-backed court said:

In this case, it is apparent that the Kingdom of Norway does not have jurisdiction (ratione materiae) over the crimes as charged in the confirmed Indictment. In addition, the Chamber recalls that the crimes alleged - genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide and complicity in genocide - are significantly different in term of their elements and their gravity from the crime of homicide, the basis upon which the Kingdom of Norway states that charges may be laid against the Accused under its domestic law. The Chamber notes that the crime of genocide is distinct in that it requires the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such". This specific intent is not required for the crime of homicide under Norwegian criminal law. Therefore, in the Chamber's view, the ratione materiae jurisdiction, or subject matter jurisdiction, for the acts alleged in the confirmed Indictment does not exist under Norwegian law. Consequently, Michel Bagaragaza's alleged criminal acts cannot be given their full legal qualification under Norwegian criminal law, and the request for the referral to the Kingdom of Norway falls to be dismissed.

[JURIST] UK Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith [official profile] is to meet with senior Israeli officials Thursday to discuss whether Israeli soldiers should be charged with war crimes for shooting two Britons in 2003. The families of James Miller, an award-winning cameraman, and Tom Hurndall, a peace activist, have asked Goldsmith to prosecute the Israeli soldiers under the Geneva Conventions [ICRC materials]. A British inquest jury last month found Miller's shooting unlawful [BBC report], and an Israeli soldier is already serving an 8-year manslaughter sentence for Hurndall's death [JURIST report].

During his previously scheduled visit to Israel, Goldsmith is planning to meet with his Israeli counterpart, Meni Mazuz [Israeli MFA profile], as well as Defense Minister Amir Peretz [MFA profile; BBC profile], Justice Minister Haim Ramon [MFA profile] and possibly Brigadier Gen. Avichai Mendelblit, the military advocate general. Israeli military prosecutors have refused to pursue further prosecutions without new evidence. The Times of London has more. The Evening News has additional coverage.

[JURIST] Court-martial proceedings against US Army Sgt. Santos A. Cardona began Monday on charges of maltreatment of prisoners, dereliction of duty and assault connected to Cardona's alleged use of unmuzzled dogs [JURIST report] when questioning detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison [JURIST news archive]. A second dog handler, Sgt. Michael Smith, was convicted [JURIST report] earlier this year and sentenced to six months in jail [JURIST report] for similar abuse charges. Cardona faces over 16 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

Defense lawyers are expected to call US Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller [Wikipedia profile], the former commander of military intelligence at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive], as one of their witnesses. Miller refused to testify in Smith's trial, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, but Cardona's lawyers said in April that Miller is now willing to testify [JURIST report], which would make him the highest-ranking military officer to testify in the Abu Ghraib scandal. His testimony is expected to directly conflict with that of Col. Thomas Pappas [Wikipedia profile], the former top-ranking intelligence officer at Abu Ghraib. Pappas testified at Smith's court martial that Miller told him the use of dogs in interrogations had been successful at Guantanamo Bay, but Miller maintains that he recommended dogs be used to help control prisoners, not for interrogation purposes. Lead civilian lawyer Harvey Volzer expects Miller's testimony to help prove that Cardona simply followed approved orders from above. Pappas received a letter of reprimand and was relieved of command [Washington Post report] last year for failing to gain approval from superiors for using dogs at Abu Ghraib. Reuters has more. The Washington Post has additional coverage.

[JURIST] Election officials in Montenegro [government website; CIA backgrounder] said Monday that over 55 percent of voters in Sunday's referendum [CDT materials] endorsed seceding from Serbia [JURIST news archive] and forming an independent nation. Montenegro's State Electoral Commission said that 55.4 percent of voters supported independence in a majority vote that required 55 percent to win. Some Montenegrin leaders had criticized [JURIST report] the 55 percent threshold, which was set by the European Union [official website], as undemocratic. Montenegrins began to celebrate late Sunday night when it appeared as though Montenegro was likely to win the referendum [JURIST report]. The voter participation rate in the election was 88 percent, the highest turnout since the first democratic elections [summary] in 1990. Montenegrins voted for independence despite heavy resistance from Serbian nationalists within Montenegro, who argued that Montenegro was too small to survive as an independent nation. Conversely, the pro-independence camp argued that independence would boost the economy and accelerate Montenegro's path to joining the EU with former Yugoslav republic Slovenia. AP has more. B92 has local coverage.

Former Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Miroljub Labus [BBC profile] called on the Serbian Government Monday to be the first to recognize Montenegro as an independent nation, stating that Montenegrin Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic [official website; Wikipedia profile] and Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica [official profile; Wikipedia profile] should meet immediately. According to the constitutional charter [PDF text] of Serbia-Montenegro, Serbia will retain all international rights and obligations as a result of the break, including the country's seat in the United Nations. All other issues will be left to resolution between the two nations. Although Montenegro hopes to join the EU quickly, it will now have to register for acceptance into all international organizations as a requirement for EU acceptance. However, Montenegro should not run into too many economic problems in its bid to join the EU because Serbia and Montenegro have been discussing EU acceptance independently. Serbia will not have to change its law to accommodate its newfound independence, and the Montenegrin Parliament [official website] will incorporate Sunday's referendum into a bill during a special session scheduled for Wednesday. B92 has more.

[JURIST] Chief Justice John Roberts [OYEZ profile] wants greater consensus between justices on the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] and hopes to decide issues on very narrow grounds in order to avoid unnecessary controversy. In a commencement address [recorded video] to Georgetown Law Center graduates on Sunday, Roberts said:

If it is not necessary to decide more to a case, then in my view it is necessary not to decide more to a case. Division should not be artificially suppressed, but the rule of law benefits from a broader agreement. The broader agreement among the justices, the more likely it is a decision on the narrowest possible grounds.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] on Monday ruled that police can enter a home without a warrant when they have not knocked or announced their presence if they have an objectively reasonable basis to believe that someone inside the home has been seriously injured or there is an imminent threat of injury. In Brigham County v. Stewart [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], four police officers in Brigham County, Utah, entered a home without a warrant screaming "Police!" when they observed a violent situation unfolding between household members through a window. They had tried to get the attention of the occupants before entering to no avail. Four adults arrested were all charged with misdemeanors - disorderly conduct, intoxication, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The Utah Supreme Court ruled that the evidence should be suppressed [opinion text], but the US Supreme Court reversed this decision Monday, holding that the officers had a reasonable basis for entering the home without knocking or announcing their presence. Read the Court's unanimous opinion [text], per Chief Justice Roberts, along with a concurrence [text] from Justice Stevens. AP has more.

The Court did not grant certiorari in any new cases Monday, and among the cases the Court declined to hear was a challenge to the lethal injection [JURIST news archive] method of execution used by several states. Last month, the Court heard arguments in Hill v. McDonough [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report] where Hill, a death row inmate, is seeking to challenge the constitutionality of Florida's method of lethal injection under 42 USC 1983 [text] even when all his other appeals have been exhausted. The Court is only considering the procedural issue in that case, and in denying certiorari in Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, the Court has refused to review whether the three-drug cocktail used by several states constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment because it causes unnecessary pain and suffering. SCOTUSblog has more.

[JURIST] US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [official profile; JURIST news archive] said Sunday that the US does not need to make English the "national language" and that a Senate move to add English language amendments to an immigration reform proposal [JURIST news archive] was symbolic. In an interview [recorded video] on ABC's "This Week" Sunday, Gonzales said that the Senate's amended version of the immigration bill [S 2611 text] "would not have an effect on any existing rights currently provided under federal law." Gonzales did, however, recognize that English is the "path to opportunity" in the US. The Bush administration supports recognizing English as the national language of the US, but has stopped short of declaring it as the official language. The Senate passed the English language amendments [JURIST report] last week in a somewhat confusing manner: an amendment to make English the national language passed by a 63-34 [roll call] margin and an alternative amendment declaring English as the "common and unifying language" passed by a 58-39 [roll call] margin.

US Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) [official website], also on Sunday, said that the English language amendments to the draft Senate immigration bill will not be a "deal breaker," but also stated that the Senate bill does not meet its true objective of stopping illegal immigration because it fails to secure the borders and enforce employer sanctions. AP has more. ABC News has additional coverage.

[JURIST] The US prison and jail population added prisoners [press release] from mid-2004 to mid-2005 at a rate of 2.6 percent and more than 1,000 new inmates a week, reaching a total of 2,186,230 inmates behind bars according to a Justice Department Bureau of Justice Statistics [official website] report [summary; PDF text] released Sunday. Prisons received 1.4 million of the new prisoners, while jails received almost 750,000 new prisoners. Much of the gain is due to a large rise in the jail population, where 62 percent of inmates have not been convicted yet. The Bureau Chief of Corrections Statistics Allen J. Beck believes that "judges are perhaps more reluctant to release people pretrial."

Louisiana, Georgia, Texas, Mississippi and Oklahoma added the most prisoners, while Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Vermont and New Hampshire added the least. The statistics show that 738 out of every 100,000 residents became inmates in June 2005, while only 725 out of 100,000 joined the prison population as of June 2004. The racial makeup of the prison population remained steady, but the number of women incarcerated in the US for a period of over a year is on a large upswing, growing 757 percent between 1997 and 2004 [JURIST report], according to a report [text] released Sunday by the Women’s Prison Association [advocacy website]. AP has more.

[JURIST] US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [official profile; JURIST news archive] said that the government has authority to prosecute journalists for publishing classified material under several "statutes on the book which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility." In an appearance [recorded video] on ABC's "This Week" Sunday, Gonzales said that journalists' obligations to national security is greater than the First Amendment [text] right of a free press. Although Gonzales did not specify what statutes he was referring to, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press [advocacy website] Executive Director Lucy Dalglish speculated that Gonzales was referencing the 1917 Espionage Act [PDF text], even though no one has ever used it to prosecute journalists. Gonzales stated that the government will track telephone calls of journalists as part of a criminal leak investigation, but denied that the government would randomly track their domestic-to-domestic phone calls simply to identify their confidential sources. A court order would be necessary to review the content of the phone records.

Journalists have recently been subpoenaed to testify [JURIST report] in the investigation into the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity [JURIST news archive] and have also come under scrutiny for the leak of the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program [JURIST news archive]. In a January court filing [PDF text], DOJ lawyers asserted that journalists can be prosecuted [JURIST report] for receiving or publishing classified information under the 18 USC 793 [text]. AP has more.

[JURIST] FBI agents videotaped US Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) [official website] last August accepting $100,000 in cash as a bribe from wealthy businesswoman Lori Mody for a Nigerian official, according to an FBI affidavit [PDF] made public Sunday. Mody was actually working as an FBI informant and FBI agents later found $90,000 of the cash in Jefferson's freezer. The search warrant affidavit served as the basis for an 18-hour FBI search of Jefferson's congressional office over the weekend. The document alleged that Jefferson planned to use the money to bribe a high-ranking Nigerian government official who agreed to help an American telecommunications company do business in Nigeria. Jefferson's attorney accused prosecutors of releasing the affidavit to purposely embarrass Jefferson because they have not yet charged Jefferson with any crime. In a speech last week, Jefferson defiantly claimed that he will fight any charges against him [Times-Picayune report].

Jefferson has continually maintained his innocence in the investigation for his role in helping Nigerian company Netlink Digital Television with Kentucky-based Internet venture iGate Incorporated [corporate website]. iGate owner Vernon Jackson, who faces up to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty [plea agreement, PDF; press release; Times-Picayune report] to paying more than $400,000 in bribes to a fake company controlled by Jefferson and his family in exchange for favors, has agreed to help the FBI as they investigate Jefferson's dealings with iGate. Jackson's bribes quickly led to contracts with the US Army to test iGate products, and later led to exposure to all of the federal agencies. Mody triggered the FBI investigation in March 2005 when she invested $3.5 million in iGate to acquire the rights to iGate's technology, but grew concerned when Jackson refused to comply. In addition, former Jefferson aide Brett Pfeffer plead guilty in January [Times-Picayune report] to bribery charges for his role. Reuters has more. The New Orleans Times-Picayune has local coverage.

[JURIST] Raouf Abdel-Rahman [BBC profile], the judge presiding over the Saddam Hussein trial [JURIST news archive], on Monday threw defense lawyer Bushra Khalil [JURIST report] out of the courtroom for apparently arguing with the chief judge. Khalil, the only female defense lawyer in the trial, was removed from a session [VOA report; JURIST report] in April when she objected to a video of Hussein introduced by the prosecution and responded by showing pictures of alleged abuse of Iraqi detainees by US Soldiers. Monday's argument began when Abdel-Rahman told Khalil that she would be allowed to return, but refused to allow Khalil to make a statement. Hussein objected to the removal of Khalil, declaring "I am Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq. I am above all," but Abdel-Rahman told him to be silent. Abdel-Rahman has taken a tough stance to stop frequent outbursts by Hussein and his co-defendants.

After Khalil's removal from the courtroom, defense lawyers continued presenting their case, calling Murshid Mohammed Jassim to testify on behalf of a Awad al-Bandar [Wikipedia backgrounder], the former Revolutionary Court judge who sentenced 148 Shiites to death [execution order] following a 1982 assassination attempt on Hussein's life in Dujail. Jassim, a former Revolutionary Court employee, refuted charges that the Shiites never received a fair trial and insisted that defendants were always given a chance to defend themselves, adding that the Revolutionary Court never removed a lawyer from the courtroom. AP has more.