[JURIST] Australia's Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security [official website] has recommended the appointment of an independent reviewer [ABC Australia report] to oversee the nation's counter-terrorism laws [official backgrounder]. In a report [PDF text] Monday reviewing the country's security and anti-terror legislation, the committee recommended the creation of a position similar to the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security [official website]. The reviewer's main responsibility would entail monitoring the success of Australia's counter-terrorism efforts and reporting annually to parliament. The panel also urged police departments to review media policies so that statements aren't made that could jeopardize a defendant's right to a fair trial.Attorney-General Philip Ruddock [official profile] is considering the recommendations.

Last month, Ruddock rejected the idea of a civil rights bill [JURIST report] posed by the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) [official website] based on concerns that such a bill would unduly limit the government's ability to effectively deal with terrorism and other security threats. Since 2001, more than 30 pieces of counter-terrorism legislation [JURIST news archive] have been passed but little has been done to measure the success or practicality of these laws. AAP has more.

[JURIST] An court in India [JURIST news archive] on Monday rendered the final verdicts in connection to the 1993 Mumbai bombings [BBC backgrounder] that killed more than 250 people and injured more than 700. The six convictions handed down by Judge P.D. Kode Monday bring the total in the case to 100 - a figure that public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam described as unprecedented. Twenty-three defendants were acquitted; 37 other suspects, including alleged mastermind Dawood Ibrahim [BBC profile], remain at large.

The trial, which began in 1995, included testimony from 686 witnesses. The first verdicts [JURIST report] were announced this September. The court will now begin hearing arguments on sentencing, which is expected to take place in the new year. The sentences will range from five years to life in prison. AP has more. The Times of India has local coverage.

[JURIST] A court in Santiago granted former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet [JURIST news archive] bail from house arrest Monday as he remained hospitalized following a severe heart attack a day earlier. One of Pinochet's doctors, describing his condition today as "life-threatening" but stable, said he was awake and communicative after an emergency angioplasty was performed [JURIST news archive] to clear the artery blockage that led to the heart attack. If Pinochet continues to recuperate, the doctor said, he will stay in the hospital for a week or more.

Last week, a judge ordered that Pinochet be placed under house arrest [JURIST report] in connection with the executions of two of former President Salvador Allende's bodyguards during the so-called Caravan of Death [BBC backgrounder] that followed the coup in which Pinochet seized power. Pinochet, 91, publicly assumed full political responsibility [JURIST report] last month for the actions of his military regime, which ruled from 1973 to 1990. Although he enjoys general immunity from prosecution under the 1980 Chilean Constitution [text], Pinochet has slowly been stripped of this immunity [BBC report] in light of charges brought against him. Pinochet's previous health problems, including mild dementia, strokes and arthritis, have made his fitness to stand trial questionable [JURIST report]. AFP has more. AP has additional coverage. The Santiago Times has local coverage.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] heard two hours of oral arguments [transcript, PDF] Monday in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 [Duke Law case backgrounder; merit briefs], 05-908, and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education [Duke Law case backgrounder; merit briefs], 05-915. Both cases present the question of whether the court's 2003 decisions in affirmative action cases involving the University of Michigan, Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger [text], allow public school districts to assign students to schools based partly on race, so that the racial makeup of each school roughly mirrors that of the district. In the Seattle case, parents sought an injunction against the school district, arguing that the consideration of race violated the equal protection guarantee of the 14th Amendment [text]. The district court upheld the policy. A panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, applying the strict scrutiny standard of the Michigan cases and finding that the policy was not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest. Following an en banc review, however, the full Ninth Circuit reversed the panel [opinion, PDF] and sided with the school district. Likewise, in the Missouri case, the district court refused to issue an injunction against the school district and upheld the policy under strict scrutiny. The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed [opinion, PDF].

During Monday's arguments, school district attorneys likened the policies to the admissions process upheld in Grutter, emphasizing that race is only one factor in assigning students, and they distinguished the policies from the admissions system struck down in Gratz, pointing out that their decisions merely redistribute students rather than denying them admission to an institution. Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy [OYEZ profiles] appeared to express skepticism at some of the districts' arguments. Kennedy, who joined the majority in Gratz but dissented in Grutter, said assigning some students to schools based not upon their choice but on race is "like saying everybody can have a meal but only [some] people ... can get the dessert." AP has more.

[JURIST] Judge Mohammed Oreibi al-Khalifa, who is overseeing the genocide trial of Saddam Hussein [JURIST news archives], on Monday agreed to a prosecution request to conclude the witness phase of the trial, and adjourned until Wednesday with just one prosecution witness left to testify. The prosecution has presented more that 70 witnesses, including several US forensic experts [JURIST report] describing mass graves believed to be the result of the 1987-88 "Anfal" campaigns [HRW backgrounder] against ethnic Kurds in Northern Iraq. Prosecutors will now begin presenting documents that allegedly link Hussein to the genocide.

In a separate trial, Hussein was convicted and sentenced to death for crimes against humanity [judgment; JURIST report] committed in the town of Dujail. Hussein's defense team formally appealed [JURIST report] that judgment Sunday. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] A US Navy [official website] sailor pleaded guilty Monday at a court-martial [press release, DOC] hearing in Norfolk, Virginia, to espionage, desertion, failing to properly safeguard and store classified information, copying classified information, communicating classified information to a person not entitled to receive it, and stealing and destroying a government computer. Petty Officer 3rd Class Ariel Weinmann [case backgrounder; Wikipedia profile], accused of passing classified information to an undisclosed foreign government on three different occasions, now faces a life sentence without parole. Prosecutors said Weinmann deserted the Navy in July 2005 and traveled to Austria, where he transmitted classified information that he had stored on a stolen government computer.

Although Weinmann pleaded guilty to espionage [Navy Times report] in relation to the Austria charge, he pleaded not guilty to two additional charges of espionage. Prosecutors also alleged that Weinmann tried to give information to a representative of a foreign government in Bahrain in March 2005, and again in Mexico City in March 2006, shortly before his arrest at the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport. AP has more.

[JURIST] Defense lawyers for alleged terrorist Jose Padilla [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] have indicated they will use a recent video, taken of Padilla as he was escorted by soldiers from solitary confinement to a dentist's appointment, as evidence that charges against Padilla should be dismissed due to "outrageous government conduct." The video, obtained by the New York Times, shows Padilla wearing noise-blocking earplugs and opaque goggles while walking to a root canal procedure. Lawyers first petitioned the South Carolina federal court hearing his case to dismiss [JURIST report] the case in October, alleging that he was abused, threatened, administered either PCP or LSD as a truth serum, and subjected to sleep deprivation and stress positions, allegations denied by the government [JURIST report]. The latest defense motion, filed last Friday motions and supported by the video and numerous affidavits and other documents, argue that Padilla is so damaged by the interrogation tactics that he is no longer fit to stand trial.

Padilla, a US citizen initially suspected of planning to set off a "dirty bomb" in the United States and classified as an "enemy combatant" [JURIST news archive] subject to indefinite detention, was finally charged [JURIST report] last year on unrelated terrorism charges. He was transferred to civilian custody [JURIST report] in January of this year and has pleaded not guilty [JURIST report] to the charges. His trial is scheduled to begin [JURIST report] January 22. The New York Times has more.

[JURIST] Wire services are reporting that US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton [official website; JURIST news archive] has resigned, effective at the end of his recess appointment. President Bush named Bolton to the position [JURIST report] on an interim basis last year through a recess appointment [CRS backgrounder, PDF] that will expire when the new congressional session begins in January. A September vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on whether to confirm Bolton's nomination as the permanent US ambassador to the UN was delayed [JURIST report] in what the Bush administration called a "political" block [JURIST report] due to old grievances, not his performance as ambassador.

Bolton's nomination to the position in 2005 was stalled on the Senate floor after the Foreign Relations Committee declined to endorse the nomination [JURIST reports]. Senate Democrats at the time said Bolton "lacked credibility" [JURIST report] due to accusations that he took advantage of intelligence analysts through his role as the head US diplomat for arms control and Bolton's inaccurate statements [JURIST report] on a confirmation process questionnaire.

10:35 AM ET - In a statement Monday, Bush praised Bolton for "articulately advocat[ing] the positions and values of the United States and advanc[ing] the expansion of democracy and liberty." Bush also said:

Ambassador Bolton led the successful negotiations that resulted in unanimous Security Council resolutions regarding North Korea's military and nuclear activities. He built consensus among our allies on the need for Iran to suspend the enrichment and reprocessing of uranium. His efforts to promote the cause of peace in Darfur resulted in a peacekeeping commitment by the United Nations. He made the case for United Nations reform because he cares about the institution, and wants it to become more credible and effective.

I am deeply disappointed that a handful of United States Senators prevented Ambassador Bolton from receiving the up or down vote he deserved in the Senate. They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time. This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country, and discourages men and women of talent from serving their Nation.

[JURIST] US Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) [official website] has said she plans to introduce legislation in the Senate that would prevent the US military from using cluster bombs in civilian areas by cutting off federal funding for such weapons until the Defense Department "articulate[s] a new policy that will minimize civilian death and suffering from these weapons." In an op-ed published in Monday's Washington Times, Feinstein wrote:

Cluster bombs are intended for attacking large-scale enemy troop formations. They come apart in the air before making contact, dispersing between 200 and 400 small bomblets that can saturate a radius of 250 yards. The changing nature of warfare, though, has meant cluster bombs have been used against enemies in or near highly populated areas. So, all too often, cluster bombs critically injure or kill innocent victims instead of their intended military targets. The danger is this: These weapons are unreliable and cannot be used with precision. Up to 40 percent of the bomblets from cluster bombs fail to detonate immediately. This leaves a trail of unexploded munitions in war-torn areas...And 40 or 50 years after used, these munitions remain extremely volatile...The simple truth is that the remnants of cluster bombs become de facto land mines. They kill, maim, and wound civilians every day, even long after conflict has ended. In fact, 98 percent of cluster bomb victims are civilians. I believe use of these weapons in or near civilian areas runs counter to our values and counter to the international laws of war.

[JURIST] Lawmakers in Kyrgyzstan have called for the text of Kyrgyzstan's new constitution, adopted [JURIST report] in November, to made publicly available after an unexplained three-week delay. Kyrgyz laws are usually published soon after they are passed. The new constitution generally reallocates power away from the president towards the parliament by limiting presidential power to dissolve the parliament, giving the legislature the right to form the government, and enlarging the parliament from 75 to 90 seats. Kyrgyzstan President Kurmanbek Bakiyev [BBC profile], who came to power [JURIST report] during the so-called Tulip Revolution [Wikipedia backgrounder] of 2005, signed the bill after protesters demanded either governmental reform or Bakiyev's resignation.

The protests ceased once Kyrgyz opposition party members and pro-government supporters compromised [JURIST report] on several constitutional provisions. RFE/RL has more.

[JURIST] A Nepali government minister indicated Sunday that the interim constitution, drafted in August [JURIST report], will be signed into law within a few days. The interim draft encompassing 173 articles is designed to replace the current constitution [text] until a new representative body is elected and drafts a permanent constitution. The draft must be approved by each of Nepal's eight major political parties before the House of Representatives will vote to promulgate it, replacing the current body with an interim parliament.

It is unclear whether the interim government will retain elements of the previous monarchial system after King Gyanendra [official profile] took over direct rule of the country in early 2005 and held it for over a year until mass pro-democracy demonstrations [JURIST news archive] forced him to return power to a civilian government. Xinhua has more.

[JURIST] A confidential report on the use of wiretap evidence being prepared for UK government ministers by officials in the Home Office [official website] has as one of its two basic options setting up a special group of judges who would oversee wiretap-related cases against terror suspects, according to a report published in the Scotsman Monday. The UK has long disfavored the use of wiretapped phone conversations as evidence, and court rules ban their admission, but the threat of terrorism has caused some within the Home Office to advocate its use to reduce the need for extrajudicial control orders and other measures. Critics say allowing wiretap conversations as evidence would burden UK administrative offices by prompting a deluge of defense requests for wiretap transcripts. Lurking behind these concerns is the in-some-quarters-unsavory prospect of creating a class of investigative anti-terrorism judges along continental lines.

In the United States, federal wiretaps against suspected foreign intelligence agents must generally be approved by judges of the special Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [backgrounder], the proceedings and records of which are kept secret for security reasons. Much of the recent controversy about President Bush's warrantless surveillance program [JURIST news archive] against suspected terrorists revolves around its domestic operation outside the protections of FISC procedure. The Scotsman has more.

[JURIST] A Philippines trial court Monday convicted one US Marine and acquitted three other Marines [US embassy press release] on charges of raping a 23-year-old Filipino woman at a Navy base in Manila last year. The verdict is subject to an automatic appeal. Lance Corporal Daniel Smith will serve a 40 year sentence in a Filipino prison and will pay around $2,000 in compensation to the victim. The Marines were charged within the framework of the US-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) [text], which requires US personnel to "respect the laws of the Republic of the Philippines," and provides the Philippines with "jurisdiction over United States personnel with respect to offenses committed within the Philippines and punishable under the law of the Philippines." The US retains the power to enforce the US Military Code as appropriate and to punish all acts that are punishable under US but not Philippine law.

This case was the first tried under the VFA since it was ratified by both countries in 1999. The VFA was motivated in part by the large number of reported rape incidents in the 1980s involving US soldiers stationed in the Philippines, which resulted in zero convictions. Reuters has more.