JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE ARCHIVEDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.
Listen to Paper Chase!


Legal news from Tuesday, October 24, 2006




UK Commons rejects limitations on extraditions to US
Lisl Brunner on October 24, 2006 8:32 PM ET

[JURIST] The British Labour Party government's majority in the UK House of Commons [official website] Tuesday rejected greater restrictions on extraditions to the United States and other foreign countries which were proposed by the House of Lords [official website] as part of the Police and Justice Bill [PDF; Home Office backgrounder]. The bill follows controversy over the so-called Natwest Three [BBC profile], extradited to the US [JURIST report] in July to face charges in the Enron fraud scandal [JURIST news archives]. Under the current Extradition Treaty [PDF; Statewatch backgrounder] between the US and UK, only prima facie evidence is needed for a US extradition request to be granted. In contrast, a British request must show probable cause before a US citizen will be extradited. The House of Lords version [PDF] of the Police and Justice Bill had sought to amend the Extradition Act of 2003, the UK statute which incorporates the treaty, to require a greater showing of evidence before a British citizen can be extradited to the US.

A number of Labour MPs rebelled in supporting the Lords, but Home Office Minister Joan Ryan defended the unamended version of the bill, stating, "We have extradited people to the US, and they to us, for 100 years. We trust their system just as they trust ours." Other defenders praised the lower house move for its tough stance on crime. Opponents, however, have criticized the current policy as "lopsided" [JURIST report; Liberty UK press release] and disadvantageous for British citizens. BBC News has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Federal judge strikes down Florida exit poll law
Lisl Brunner on October 24, 2006 7:53 PM ET

[JURIST] A federal court in Florida ruled Tuesday that a 2005 state law [text] prohibiting exit polling within 100 feet of a voting place violates the free speech and freedom of the press guarantees of the First Amendment. US District Judge Paul Huck found in favor of the Associated Press and five television networks which had filed a lawsuit challenging the legislation. AP has more.

On Monday the same media companies sued [complaint, PDF] to overturn a similar directive [PDF] by Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell [official website] which prohibits "loitering" and "congregating" in areas surrounding a polling station as well as "hindering" or "delaying" a voter who exits the polls as being vague and confusing. Blackwell issued the rules on October 13, after US District Judge Michael Watson [official profile] struck down [AP report] a previous order prohibiting exit polling within 100 feet of an election station. A similar suit is pending in a court in Nevada, where a ruling is expected on October 31. AP has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


New Jersey high court shifts mental retardation burden in death penalty cases
Robert DeVries on October 24, 2006 7:10 PM ET

[JURIST] The New Jersey Supreme Court [official website] Tuesday held that mental retardation, like insanity, is a condition to be affirmatively proved by the defense in state death penalty cases. In a 5-2 ruling [text, PDF], the court overturned an August 2005 appeals court decision [PDF] that had placed the onus of disproving mental disability on prosecutors [JURIST report]. Convicted death row inmates now carry the burden of proving mental disability before the sentencing phase of their trials. If they succeed they are sentenced to life imprisonment. If they fail, a penalty-phase trial begins where mental retardation is considered as a mitigating factor when weighing the death penalty [JURIST news archive]. New Jersey joins twenty-eight other states that place the mental retardation burden on defendants.

The ruling arose from the case of Porfirio Jimenez, a day laborer who was convicted in 2001 of sexually assaulting and killing a 10 year old boy after luring him to a secluded area. His defense argued that since his IQ was below 70, a fact corroborated by the prosecution, he was mentally retarded and therefore disqualified from the death penalty. Even if a death penalty were handed down in the case, however, New Jersey has had a moratorium on the practice since 1982 and has not executed an inmate since 1963. In 2002, the US Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia [text] that executing mentally retarded individuals is unconstitutional, but left it up to the states to determine the definition of mental retardation. The most common standard is the IQ test. AP has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


EU considers special competition court for merger cases
Lisl Brunner on October 24, 2006 7:02 PM ET

[JURIST] A proposal to create a special competition court within the European Union Court of First Instance [official website] has been publicly endorsed by the Court's head justice, who called it the best "if not the only effective way of ensuring speedier and perhaps even better handling of competition cases" at a conference in London. Court President Bo Vesterdorf [official profile] cited the current backlog of cases and the fact that 243 of the 950 pending cases deal with competition issues, such as appeals of European Commission [official website] decisions regarding mergers. In its most extreme example, the Court took 19 months to annul [JURIST report] a joint venture between Sony and Bertelsmann which the Commission had approved; the companies are appealing the ruling [Reuters report] to the European Court of Justice [official website].

Responding to concerns of British industry, a UK House of Lords committee [official website] has taken up the issue of a special European competition court, forming a committee which will begin hearings on November 22 and produce a report by January. Bloomberg has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Canada judge rules terror definition in anti-terror law unconstitutional
Katerina Ossenova on October 24, 2006 4:01 PM ET

[JURIST] An Ontario Superior Court judge struck down a central provision of Canada's Anti-Terrorism Act [text; CBC backgrounder] Tuesday, saying it violates the constitutional rights of Momin Khawaja [CBC backgrounder]. Lawyers for Khawaja, the first person charged [JURIST report] under the terrorism legislation, had argued [JURIST report] that the legislation passed in the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks on the US is unconstitutionally vague and violates several provisions of the Canadian Charter on Rights and Freedoms [text]. Justice Douglas Rutherford ruled that the section of the law defining "terrorism" violates the Charter. A Canadian Justice Department spokesman told AFP, "The Superior Court annulled the definition of terrorist activity under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically the provision in the act that requires proof that a person was motivated by ideological, religious or political purpose in the activity for which they've been charged. Essentially, this ruling means there is no definition of terrorism."

Khawaja, the Canadian-born son of Pakistani immigrants, was arrested in March 2004 and is accused of knowingly participating in or contributing to the activities of a terrorist group and of knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity in Ottawa and London. His trial is scheduled to begin in January and will likely last up to three months. AFP has more. CBC News has local coverage.

This is the second judicial setback to the Canadian anti-terror legislation in less than a week; last Thursday, another Ontario Superior Court judge threw out part of a secrecy law [JURIST report] passed as part of the same package that had been invoked in 2004 to search a reporter's home for the source of a story she published on Maher Arar [JURIST news archive], the Canadian citizen who on suspicion of being linked to Al Qaeda was deported from the US to Syria in 2002 and tortured there.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Rwanda begins probe into alleged French role in Rwandan genocide
Katerina Ossenova on October 24, 2006 3:18 PM ET

[JURIST] A seven-man Rwandan government commission began an official probe Tuesday into accusations that France assisted a Hutu [Wikipedia backgrounder] massacre of Tutsis [Wikipedia backgrounder] during the 1994 genocide [HRW backgrounder; BBC backgrounder]. Rwanda's current Tutsi President Paul Kagame [official website; BBC profile] has accused France of training and arming Hutu militias who were behind the 100-day massacre that left over 800,000 Tutsis and Hutus dead. The commission, made up of legal experts, historians and a former army commander, will investigate the role of French troops in supporting the Hutu government which used its troops to commit genocide. Testimony taken from 20 witnesses could be used if Rwanda decides to take action against France. France investigated the Rwandan accusations last year [JURIST report], but has denied involvement in the massacres. Six Rwandan citizens filed a lawsuit in France [JURIST report] last year, accusing French soldiers of complicity in crimes against humanity.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) [official website; JURIST news archive], established for the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law during the Rwandan genocide, has rendered judgments or has trials underway [JURIST report] for 56 suspects, and is on schedule to complete its roster cases [press release] by the end of 2008. Reuters has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


EU-US agreement will allow sharing of information on criminal probes
Brett Murphy on October 24, 2006 2:30 PM ET

[JURIST] European Union [official website] officials said Tuesday that the EU has reached an agreement [press release] with the US to allow EU transnational organized crime-fighting body Eurojust [official website] and US prosecutors to share information about investigations on terrorism and cross-border criminal cases. The EU and and US are expected to formally sign the agreement on November 6. Human rights groups, however, have already expressed worries about privacy protections in light of other recent deals.

Earlier this month, EU and US representatives signed a separate data sharing agreement [JURIST report] allowing the EU and US to exchange air passenger data for transatlantic flights after an initial agreement was struck down on privacy grounds in May by the European Court of Justice. That interim agreement is slated to expire in July 2007, giving time for EU and US officials to form a more extensive data sharing program [JURIST report] and resolve any lingering privacy concerns. Reuters has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


UN arms sales treaty urged by Nobel Peace Prize laureates
Brett Murphy on October 24, 2006 1:31 PM ET

[JURIST] Fifteen Nobel Peace Prize laureates sent a letter [text] to United Nations [official website] member states Tuesday urging the UN General Assembly to explore an arms-trade treaty. The letter signers said they believe it "imperative for humanity that the number of deaths caused by firearms be reduced." They recommended passage of an international arms sales resolution that would create a panel to study the issue and report its finding to the UN in 2008.

The laureates, including the Dalai Lama, Iranian human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei, Anglican archbishop Desmond Tutu, and former Polish president Lech Walesa, said that an arms trade treaty should minimally provide as follows:

  • All international arms transfers should be authorized by a recognized State and carried out in accordance with national laws and procedures that reflect, at the very least, the obligations incumbent on States under international law.
  • No State should authorize international arms transfers that violate the specific obligations incumbent upon it under international law with regard to arms.
  • No State should authorize international arms transfers if they are, or may be, used to violate international law.
  • States must take account of factors such as the probable use to which arms will be put before authorizing transfers.
  • States should submit annual national reports on arms transfers to an international registry.
  • States should agree common standards for setting up specific control mechanisms.
The draft General Assembly resolution is co-sponsored by Argentina, Australia, Britain, Costa Rica, Finland, Japan and Kenya. Most UN member states, including three of the six largest arms exporters, are expected to vote in favor of the resolution. It appears likely that other large exporters, including the US, Russia and China, will oppose it. The resolution is due for a vote Wednesday in the General Assembly's First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) [official website]. AFP has more.





Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


US Education Dept. relaxing single-sex classroom regulations
Holly Manges Jones on October 24, 2006 12:11 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Department of Education [official website] announced [press release] Tuesday that it is changing its regulations in order to allow public schools more discretion in providing for the separate education of boys and girls. The changes, to be published Wednesday in the Federal Register, will affect how anti-discrimination provisions in Title IX [text] are applied by allowing same-sex classes [backgrounder], grade levels, or even entire schools. The Bush administration is seeking the changes after reviewing 5,600 public comments and studies that suggest higher achievement and less disciplinary issues in single-sex classrooms. The current rules, implemented in 1975, only allow same-sex classes in gym or sex education classes. The proposed changes would enable school boards to segregate any course if it would offer an educational benefit, such as higher attendance or increased student comfort. Any school that segregates based on sex would be required to offer a co-ed version of the course, and enrollment in a same-sex class would always be voluntary.

Critics of the plan include the American Association of University Women, the National Organization for Women (NOW), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy websites]. The ACLU opposed a plan in Louisiana to segregate two middle schools; the plan was ultimately dropped. The US Education Department changes are set for implementation Nov. 24. Most schools are likely to wait until the spring semester to begin analyzing whether such plans would work with their students. Only elementary and secondary schools would be able to segregate students by sex under the new rules. School districts would be required to evaluate their compliance with Title IX every two years. AP has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


US brings civil suit against Lay estate seeking $12.7 million in assets
Brett Murphy on October 24, 2006 11:07 AM ET

[JURIST] The US government has filed a civil lawsuit against the estate of former Enron chairman Ken Lay [defense website; Houston Chronicle profile], seeking $12.7 million. The Justice Department brought suit Monday "to recover property that constitutes proceeds of the fraud proven in the criminal case." Last week, a federal judge vacated [JURIST report; text, PDF] Lay's convictions on fraud and conspiracy charges [indictment, PDF] because Lay died suddenly [JURIST report] of a heart attack in July. Citing "abatement," Lay's lawyers requested that the conviction be vacated [JURIST report] because the former Enron executive died while his appeal was pending.

The judge's decision meant the government could not seize Lay's assets unless it filed a civil suit. The assets being sought by the government include a $2.5 million condo and $10.2 million controlled by an investment firm. Michael Ramsey, Lay's criminal trial attorney, told the Houston Chronicle that only victims of the Enron scandal should be able to sue and that the government's lawsuit "is an attack, apparently, on his widow and children."

On Monday, Jeffrey Skilling [Houston Chronicle profile], Lay's co-defendant, was sentenced to 24 years in prison. The Houston Chronicle has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Saddam testimony sought by Dutch court in chemical weapons case
Holly Manges Jones on October 24, 2006 9:40 AM ET

[JURIST] A Dutch court took steps Monday to obtain testimony from Saddam Hussein [JURIST news archive] in an appeal [JURIST report] by a Dutch businessman convicted of selling chemicals that were used in poison gas attacks in Iraq. Frans Van Anraat [BBC profile] was convicted last year of selling raw materials to Iraq that ultimately were used in the 1988 gas attack against Kurds in the town of Halabja [JURIST report] that killed 5,000 people. Iraq also used poisonous gas in Iraq's war with Iran [Wikipedia backgrounder] from 1980 to 1988. The appeals court in The Hague asked an examining judge to determine whether Saddam and several others could be questioned. The potential witnesses include a senior member of Iraq's chemical weapons program and two former ambassadors to Baghdad.

The appeals court denied Anraat's request to be released from serving his 15-year sentence [JURIST report] pending a decision on Saddam's testimony. The court also refused the defense's request for the release of Dutch intelligence documents. But the court ordered the prosecution to provide information regarding Dutch and international exporting policies during the 1980s. In 2003, Anraat admitted to selling the chemicals but claimed he did not know they would ultimately be used in Iraq to create poison gas. Saddam is currently on trial for genocide charges related to the 1988 deaths of 180,000 Kurdish villagers in the so-called "Anfal" campaign [HRW backgrounder]. He also is awaiting a verdict in the separate Dujail crimes against humanity case [JURIST report]. Reuters has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Border fence legislation sent to White House for approval
Holly Manges Jones on October 24, 2006 8:35 AM ET

[JURIST] The Secure Fence Act of 2006 [PDF text; HR 6061 summary], the second portion of a two-part plan to tackle illegal immigration [JURIST news archive] in the US, was sent to President George Bush Monday for his signature. The bill allows the US Secretary of Homeland Security [official website] to begin using $1.2 billion earmarked for the construction of a border control fence [JURIST news archive] to prevent illegal aliens from entering the US and outlines when and how the building project will get underway. Bush has already signed the first half of the legislation, which creates a $34.8 million fund for tackling immigration issues, including the money to build the 700-mile fence, which will cover areas of the border in California and Arizona. President Bush has 10 days to sign the border fence legislation in order for it to become law.

In a statement [text] Monday, US Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) [official website] and US Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) [official website] called the legislation "a key component to keeping America safe and stemming the tide of illegal immigration." US Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) [official website], chairman of the Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship subcommittee [official website], has expressed concern, however, that the government has not budgeted nearly enough to combat the immigration issue, and has lobbied for the use of technological means as well as the fence to prevent illegal immigration. WorldNetDaily has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


ICTY appeals panel rules Serb nationalist war crimes indictee can defend self at trial
Holly Manges Jones on October 24, 2006 7:47 AM ET

[JURIST] The appeals chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia [official website] has ruled that Serbian war crimes suspect Vojislav Seselj [BBC profile; ICTY case backgrounder] can act as his own lawyer in his upcoming trial. An ICTY trial chamber removed Seselj's right to self-representation [JURIST report] in August based on his "disruptive behavior," but the appeals court reversed the lower court decision [ruling, PDF; press release] late last week, determining that Seselj he had not been sufficiently warned that he could lose the right to self-representation prior to it being removed. The appeals court also made it clear that future courtroom antics that "substantially obstruct the proper and expeditious proceedings in his case" will not be tolerated and cautioned Seselj that a lawyer will be appointed if he engages in such behavior.

Seselj was indicted by the tribunal in 2003 and charged [indictment, PDF] in connection with his role in establishing rogue paramilitary units affiliated with the ultra-nationalist Serbian Radical Party [party website]. Those units are believed to have massacred and otherwise persecuted Croats and other non-Serbs in the Balkan Wars of the 1990s. Seselj has pleaded not guilty to the charges. His trial is scheduled to begin November 2 and prosecutors have indicated they anticipate their case will last about six months.

The ICTY allowed former Yugoslav President and onetime Seselj ally Slobodan Milosevic [JURIST news archive] to conduct his own defense, which led to multiple delays in a five-year trial that did not finish before Milosevic's death [JURIST report]. AP has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Lead lawyer for Thai military elected speaker of new constitutional assembly
Holly Manges Jones on October 24, 2006 7:16 AM ET

[JURIST] The lead legal consultant for the military regime that took over the Thai government [JURIST report] in a bloodless coup in September was elected Tuesday to serve as speaker of the National Legislative Assembly [member list], which is tasked with creating a new permanent constitution for Thailand [JURIST news archive]. Meechai Ruchupan, who also helped draft the country's interim constitution [JURIST report], won by a great margin over the other two candidates with 167 votes cast during a secret ballot by the 242 assembly members. Critics have been quick to charge Meechai with being a supporter of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra [JURIST news archive] because he aided Thaksin and past coup leaders in developing laws and was speaker of the Thai senate for two terms. Meechai denied the criticism, expressing optimism that the controversy would lessen after the vote.

Members of the National Legislative Assembly were hand-selected by the military regime and approved by King Bhumibol Adulyadej [profile]. Generals and other officers from Thailand's army, navy and air force have assumed 35 seats, while the remaining members are comprised of religious leaders, bankers, media representatives, and anti-Thaksin leaders. The assembly is responsible for writing the country's new permanent constitution, which will be subject to a referendum and then voted on in the general election next year. King Adulyadej has already approved a new 39-article interim constitution [JURIST report; text], which provides for a civilian government but preserves the military's say in policy, including the power to dismiss the civilian administration. Reuters has more.






Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST OP-ED

In Alabama, "Back Door" Restrictions on Abortion and Roe
DOMESTIC
LaJuana Davis
Cumberland School of Law

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

SYNDICATION

Add Paper Chase legal news to your RSS reader or personalized portal:
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Add to My AOL

E-MAIL

Subscribe to Paper Chase by e-mail. JURIST offers a free once-a-day digest [sample]. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.


R|mail e-mails individual Paper Chase posts through the day. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.

PUBLICATION

Join top US law schools, federal appeals courts, law firms and legal organizations by publishing Paper Chase legal news on your public website or intranet.

JURIST offers a news ticker and preformatted headline boxes updated in real time. Get the code.

Feedroll provides free Paper Chase news boxes with headlines or digests precisely tailored to your website's look and feel, with content updated every 15 minutes. Customize and get the code.

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org