[JURIST] Former Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Ahmed Errachidi has been detained by Moroccan police after his transfer from US custody last week. Formal charges have not yet been filed against Errachidi, but a source from the Moroccan Ministry of Justice [official website, in Arabic] source confirmed Monday that he is under criminal investigation.

Errachidi's family expressed concern over his detention, saying that he suffers from a bipolar mental disorder. Errachidi lived in Britain for 17 years working as a chef before he was arrested in Pakistan in 2001 after taking a business trip there; he was held at Guantanamo for more than five years. Errachidi was transferred [JURIST report] last week without being charged by US military authorities. An Afghan prisoner was released at the same time. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] British Army Corporal David Payne, convicted of abusing Iraqi detainees in 2003, was sent to jail for one year on Monday. Payne, who was one of seven British soldiers who faced court-martial [MOD press release] for charges of detainee abuse, had pleaded guilty to charges of inhumane treatment [JURIST report] in September. The court-martial of the seven was the first prosecution of British military personnel under the International Criminal Court Act 2001 (ICCA) [text] and Payne was the first British soldier to admit to committing a war crime in Iraq.

The charges stemmed from a 2003 raid on a hotel in Basra in which British troops detained several Iraqi civilians, including hotel receptionist Baha Musa [Herald report], who died while in custody. The soldiers allegedly took the Iraqis to a detention facility where they were held for 36 hours and subjected to physical abuse, causing Musa's death, according to prosecutors. Charges against the other soldiers were eventually dropped [JURIST report]. BBC News has more.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] granted certiorari Monday in Medellin v. Texas [cert. petition, PDF; case materials], 06-984, where the Court will consider whether the Bush administration has the authority to direct a state court to comply with a ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Jose Ernesto Medellin [ASIL backgrounder], a Mexican national sentenced to death in Texas for raping and murdering two teenage girls, is appealing a ruling [text; JURIST report] from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that President Bush "exceeded his constitutional authority by intruding into the independent powers of the judiciary" with an "unprecedented" directive ordering state court rehearings [JURIST report] for 51 Mexican nationals convicted in US courts. The president's February 2005 memorandum [text] instructed the Texas courts to follow a March 2004 ICJ decision [materials] that held that Medellin and the other Mexican nationals tried in US courts had been denied their right to contact the Mexican consulate for legal assistance under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations [PDF text] and that the US was obligated to grant review and reconsideration of their convictions and sentences.

The case has reached the Supreme Court before, but was dismissed [JURIST report] after Bush issued his order. AP has more. Read the Court's full Order List [PDF text].

[JURIST] Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine [official website] issued an executive order [text; press release] Monday closing the loophole [JURIST report] that allowed Virginia Tech gunman Seung-Hui Cho to purchase a firearm despite having been ordered [text] to receive psychiatric treatment by a Virginia court in 2005. The executive order amends Virginia law so that any person who has received involuntary outpatient or inpatient mental health care will be prohibited from purchasing a firearm by having their name and record placed in a database. Previously, only those receiving inpatient mental health care were to be listed in the database, which allowed Seung-Hui Cho to bypass the screening process. A federal law [18 USC 922 (g)(4) text] prohibits persons "who have been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution" from possessing or receiving "any firearm or ammunition."

Legislation to improve enforcement [HR 297 backgrounder] of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) [FBI backgrounder] has been introduced in the House of Representatives the past three terms, but has never become law. AP has more.

[JURIST] Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko [official website; BBC profile] dismissed Ukrainian Constitutional Court [official website] Judge Valeriy Pshenichny from office for an "oath violation," according to the presidential press service Monday. No details were released on the exact nature of the "violation." On April 25, Pshenichny said that Yushchenko had requested a transcript of the court proceedings mulling the legality of Yushchenko's April 2 decree [text] dissolving the Ukrainian parliament, something he was not authorized to request. On April 26, Yushchenko signed a second decree [JURIST report] to move the parliamentary election to June 24. A majority of legislators objected to the decree, filing an appeal with the 18-judge Constitutional Court. The court has not yet ruled on the issue. RIA has more.

Yushchenko has insisted [JURIST report] that his dissolution decree was proper under the Ukrainian constitution. Earlier this month, Yushchenko added that officials who refuse to comply with his decree could face criminal prosecution [press release; JURIST report]. Yushchenko and current Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who launched the legal challenge to the decree, were fierce rivals in the 2004 presidential election [JURIST report], the results of which were invalidated by the country's Supreme Court [JURIST report] following fraud allegations. Yushchenko was sworn in as Ukraine's president [JURIST report] in January 2005 on the wings of the populist Orange Revolution [BBC timeline] after winning a re-vote. Yushchenko reluctantly accepted Yanukovych as prime minister last June and the two have since clashed over parliamentary attempts to expand the cabinet's power [JURIST reports] at the expense of the presidency.

[JURIST] Kurdish legislators in the Iraq National Assembly [official website, in Arabic] will vote against a draft law [JURIST report; JURIST news archive] to regulate the country's oil because some provisions of the bill violate a February agreement with Kurdish lawmakers, a Kurdish official said Monday. In February, the Kurds agreed to support the draft bill [JURIST report] after lengthy negotiations [JURIST report], but the bill was since amended to give almost 93% of Iraq's proven oil reserves to the state-owned Iraq National Oil Company.

Negotiations over the legislation have been a source of tension [JURIST report] in Iraq for months as Kurds are adamant about retaining control of Iraq's oil resources [Global Policy backgrounder] in the northern regions. Other government leaders pressed to give the central Iraqi government control over oil revenues and approval rights for any contracts with other countries or international companies to pump oil, since oil revenues are the main source of income to Iraq [JURIST news archive]. Many see the passing of the law as crucial to developing the country as independent from American influence and the Bush administration has been a key proponent of the law. Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani had predicted [JURIST report] the National Assembly would pass the law this month. AP has more.

[JURIST] Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser [official profile] said Monday that the treatment and trial of Australian detainee David Hicks at Guantanamo Bay demonstrate that the US and Australian governments are "prepared to throw every legal principle out the window and establish a process that we would expect of tyrannical regimes." In an op-ed published on JURIST, Fraser decried the military commission procedures Hicks faced, saying they would not pass muster if applied to US citizens in America or Australian citizens in their home country:

Their rules of procedure are utterly inconsistent with the rules of procedure in the normal justice system of America or of Australia. The loose use of hearsay evidence and evidence obtained under harshly intrusive questioning is allowed. It is left to the President to define how far that intrusive questioning may go.

This is the system established to try David Hicks and other people from Guantanamo Bay. In my view it was a system designed to achieve a guilty verdict on the basis of evidence that would be totally unacceptable if applied to American citizens or to an Australian citizen within Australia.

The main story is a willingness of two allegedly democratic governments prepared to throw every legal principle out the window and establish a process that we would expect of tyrannical regimes. That our own democracies should be prepared to so abandon the rule of law for an expedient and as I believe, evil purpose should greatly disturb all of us. But how many are concerned? Too many are not concerned because they believe that such a derogation of justice can only apply to people who are different, in some indefinable way.

Only the other day I was speaking with somebody who quite plainly believed that Hicks deserved anything that was meted out to him because he was what he was, the rule of law did not need to apply. For somebody who has done terrible things, why does he deserve justice? That denies the whole basis of our system, the necessity of a civilised society which cannot exist unless there is an open, predictable justice system that applies equally to every person.

David Hicks at the best was clearly a very foolish young man. He was terribly misguided and may well have done some terrible things. I do not know. But if our government says he has had his day in court, he made a plea bargain, therefore he deserved what he got, it only emphasises its lack of commitment to the rule of law for all people.

If the government believes it to be expedient, we now know that it is prepared to push the rule of law aside. That is a larger issue than the tragedy of David Hicks.

ALSO ON JURIST  Topic: David Hicks | Op-ed: The US, Australia and David Hicks: Abandoning the Rule of Law

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] Monday declined to hear a lawsuit brought by two Guantanamo Bay detainees challenging the legality of their military commissions. In Hamdan v. Gates and Khadr v. Bush [petition for certiorari, PDF] , 06-1169, Yemeni Salim Ahmed Hamdan and Canadian Omar Khadr [TrialWatch profiles] sought to challenge the constitutionality of Congress' decision to deny habeas challenges by suspected terrorists under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 [PDF text]. In early April, the Court declined to hear [JURIST report] another case brought by other Guantanamo detainees on whether those prisoners could challenge their detention in US federal court.

Last year the Supreme Court ruled that President Bush's military commission system violated US and international law in a previous lawsuit filed by Hamdan, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [PDF opinion]. Subsequently, the Bush administration proposed the current law restructuring the military commissions, but lawyers for Hamdan and Khadr contend that the new system is substantially similar to the old one. AP has more.

[JURIST] Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu [BBC profile] was convicted Monday of violating the terms of his 2004 release from prison [JURIST report] by granting interviews to foreign news media. Vanunu completed an 18-year prison sentence in 2004 for leaking Israel's atomic weapons secrets [Israel MOJ statement] to the Sunday Times newspaper. Following his release, Vanunu was subject to strict restrictions, including a ban on travel outside Israeli territory and limited contact with foreigners. He was indicted [JURIST report] in 2005 for violating the terms of his release.

Vanunu's sentencing hearing will be held May 18. He faces additional jail time and further restrictions on his travel. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] A judge sitting at London's Old Bailey criminal court sentenced five British men of Pakistani descent to life imprisonment Monday at the end of a year-long terrorism trial - the largest UK terrorism trial [JURIST report] since al Qaeda's September 11 attacks on the United States - that culminated in the longest deliberation by a jury [BBC report] in the recorded history of British criminal law. The jury hearing the Crown's case against seven men originally accused of conspiring to detonate fertilizer bombs in a British shopping center, a nightclub, a gas network, and other potential mass-casualty targets in 2003 and 2004 weighed their verdicts [BBC breakdown] for 27 days after having heard from 105 prosecution witnesses over 13 months. Convicted were Omar Khyam, 24: Anthony Garcia, 24 (also known as Rahman Adam); Salahuddin Amin, 31; Jawad Akbar, 23; and Waheed Mahood, 34. Nabeel Hussain, 20 and Shujah Mahmood, 19, were acquitted. Key to the Crown's case was the testimony of Mohammed Babar [BBC profile], an American citizen also of Pakistani descent who worked with the defendants and later pleaded guilty to terrorism charges [CNN report] in New York in 2004. Mohammed Momin Khawaja [CBC backgrounder], arrested and charged [JURIST report] in connection with the operation in Canada and currently awaiting trial there, was identified at trial as another co-conspirator.

Prosecutor David Waters said the men were fully prepared and had acquired all the necessary items to go through with their plan, including 600kg of ammonium nitrate fertilizer which was confiscated in 2004 by police at a west London storage depot. It has also been revealed that some of the convicted men met two of the suicide bombers [MI5 press release] who carried out a deadly attack on the London transit system on July 7, 2005 [JURIST news archive], although that fact was kept secret from the jury so as not to influence their deliberations on the fertilizer bomb plot. The opposition Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have called for an inquiry to investigate the nature of the link between the groups and why the the suicide plot was not caught earlier, although a statement released by the MI5 security service Monday insisted [MI5 press release] that "the Security Service will never have the capacity to investigate everyone who appears on the periphery of every operation." BBC News has more.

[JURIST] Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock [official profile] said Monday that the government would amend an existing federal law preventing convicted criminals from profiting from their offenses if it became apparent that it allowed Guantanamo detainee David Hicks to sell his story. Hicks is currently set to be returned to Australia [JURIST report] to serve out an additional prison term after a March plea agreement at trial before a US military commission. Responding to suggestions from legal experts [Australian report] that the existing Proceeds of Crime Act [text] had a loophole because it might not apply to offenses recognized only by US military commissions, Ruddock said that his own advisers did not take that view but if it were borne out, then the law would be revised. He added that the bar was itself civil, not criminal, overcoming concerns about retrospective imposition of a criminal penalty. He did, however, admit that even pursuant to a legal change Hicks could "talk and ask that any profits be given to his favourite charity - that probably isn't covered." The Australian has more.

Ruddock was speaking on Macquarie Radio the day before the May 1 publication of the first book on the Hicks case [pre-publication excerpt; UMP book website], written by Australian Broadcasting Corporation national security correspondent Leigh Sales. Hicks himself is subject to a gag order on speaking to the media under the terms of his plea agreement. Ruddock has indicated that that order may not be enforceable under Australian law [JURIST report] once he returns home, but a civilian lawyer for Hicks has said he has no intention of violating it [JURIST report] in any event.

[JURIST] The number of executions worldwide dropped in 2006 from 2,148 the year previous to 1,591, according to new statistics [text; press release] issued by Amnesty International. Over 90 percent of the year's executions were conducted in six countries: Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan, the USA and China. At 177, Iran's execution rate nearly doubled in 2006. Iraq and Pakistan joined the ranks of the world's deadliest regimes with 65 hangings [JURIST report] and at least 82 executions respectively, and Amnesty reported at least 1000 executions in China, where rights activists say the true total may be closer to 8000. The United States, with 53 executions in 2006, is the only Western Hemisphere country to have carried out any executions since 2003.

Amnesty said that some 20,000 prisoners remain on death row worldwide, and repeated its call for a worldwide moratorium on executions, noting that 99 countries [Amnesty list] - most recently, the Philippines [JURIST report] - now support a ban on capital punishment for ordinary crimes.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] handed down decisions in five cases Monday, including Microsoft v. AT&T [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], where the Court held that Microsoft was not liable for patent infringement under 35 USC 271(f) [text] for foreign installations of Windows. AT&T filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft because Microsoft provides foreign manufacturers copies of its Windows operating system which contain computer codes patented by AT&T. AT&T argued that Microsoft's actions were in violation of Section 271(f), which prohibits a party from supplying "from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention, where such components are uncombined in whole or in part, in such manner as to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States in a manner that would infringe the patent if such combination occurred within the United States." The Supreme Court reversed the federal appeals court opinion [PDF text] in the case, holding that Microsoft's liability does not "extend to computers made in another country when loaded with Windows software copied abroad from a master disk or electronic transmission dispatched by Microsoft from the United States." Read the Court's opinion [text] per Justice Ginsburg, along with a concurrence [text] from Justice Alito, and a dissent [text] from Justice Stevens. Chief Justice Roberts did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. AP has more.

In another patent case, KSR International v. Teleflex [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], the Court reversed the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a dispute over adjustable pedal assemblies for automobile engines, holding that the lower court considered the question of whether a patent claim is "obvious" under 35 USC 103(a) [text] in a "manner inconsistent with §103 and [Supreme Court] precedents." The appeals court reversed [opinion, PDF] the district court's grant of summary judgment for KSR, holding that it erred in deeming the invention obvious, but the Supreme Court said the appeals court "analyzed the issue in a narrow, rigid manner." Read the Court's unanimous opinion [text] per Justice Kennedy.

In Scott v. Harris [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], the Court held that a police officer who bumped his police car into a fleeing suspect's car in order to end a high speed chase acted "reasonably" under the Fourth Amendment [text]. Harris, who was driving the fleeing car, sued Scott after the collision resulted in Harris' car being pushed off the road and Harris' paralysis. The Supreme Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit's decision [PDF text] in the case and held that "The car chase that respondent initiated in this case posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others; no reasonable jury could conclude otherwise. Scott's attempt to terminate the chase by forcing respondent off the road was reasonable, and Scott is entitled to summary judgment." Read the Court's opinion [text] per Justice Scalia, which also includes a link to video of the police chase that Scalia says "clearly contradicts the version of the story told by respondent and adopted by the Court of Appeals." This marks the first time the Court has linked to recorded video. Also available are a concurrence [text] from Justice Ginsburg, a second concurrence [text] from Justice Breyer, and a dissent [text] from Justice Stevens. AP has more.

In United Haulers Association v. Oneida-Herkmer Solid Waste Management [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], the Court held that local ordinances which require garbage haulers to use municipal facilities to process, sort and ship garbage to permanent disposal stations do not violate the US Constitution's Commerce Clause. The Court affirmed the Second Circuit's decision [PDF text] in the case, holding that the "flow control ordinances, which treat in-state private business interests exactly the same as out-of-state ones, do not 'discriminate against interstate commerce' for purposes of the dormant Commerce Clause." In 1994, the Court held 6-3 in C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown [opinion text] that a similar ordinance unconstitutionally restricted interstate commerce; in that instance, the mandated facility was privately owned. Read the Court's opinion [text] per Chief Justice Roberts, along with a concurrence [text] from Justice Scalia, a second concurrence [text] from Justice Thomas, and a dissent [text] from Justice Alito. AP has more.

Finally, in EC Terms of Trust v. US [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], the Court held that the trust, which sought to recover over $3 million the trust said was wrongfully levied, could not challenge the levy by bringing an action for a tax refund under 28 USC 1346(a)(1) [text] after missing the nine-month deadline for a wrongful levy action under 28 USC 7426(a)(1) [text]. Read the Court's unanimous opinion [text] per Justice Souter.

[JURIST] International judges appointed to the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) [official website] said Monday that the Khmer Rouge [JURIST news archive] genocide trials can move forward after the Cambodian Bar Association (BAKC) agreed to dramatically reduce the fees [JURIST report] it proposed to levy on foreign lawyers involved in the trials. The UN-nominated judges [JURIST report] boycotted a procedural session of the court last week to protest the BAKC's original proposed $4,900 fee for foreign lawyers. The registration fees have now been reduced to $500.

Cambodia's 1975-79 Khmer Rouge [MIPT backgrounder] regime was responsible for the deaths of over 1.7 million people from genocide, disease and malnutrition. The international judges are expected to approve the final rules for the tribunal at the end of May, which will then enable prosecutors to begin filing cases against lead defendants. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] Former CIA director George Tenet [BBC profile; Wikipedia profile] repeatedly denied that torture has been used during interrogations of terror suspects in an interview [text; recorded video part 1 and part 2] with CBS' 60 Minutes that aired Sunday. Tenet said that no one has ever died as a result of interrogation sessions and responded that he does not "talk about techniques" when asked if waterboarding [JURIST report; Wikipedia backgrounder] was ever used during questioning. Tenet did admit to "enhanced interrogation" methods, saying such methods were necessary after the Sept. 11 attacks [JURIST news archive]. Tenet reiterated that torture was not being used, however, despite acknowledging that he has never actually attended such interrogation sessions.

Tenet resigned [JURIST report] from his position at the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) [official website] in 2004 after increasing criticism that intelligence failures allowed the Sept. 11 attacks to occur. AFP has more.

[JURIST] China is not doing enough to remedy human rights abuses [press release] prior to the 2008 Olympics [official website] in Beijing, according to a report [text] released by Amnesty International [advocacy website] Monday. The group criticized China for the use of increased restrictions on domestic media and the Internet [JURIST reports] and for continuing to allow criminal suspects to be jailed for up to four years without trial, which many say has been used to detain political and religious activists. The rights watchdog said it welcomed China's decision to have all death penalty cases reviewed [JURIST report] by China's Supreme People's Court [official website] and revised rules which no longer mandate government approval prior to interviews by foreign journalists, but called on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) [official website] to pressure the country to make more headway on its overall rights record.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs [official website] responded with its own statement Monday rejecting Amnesty's accusations, labeling the group as an "organization with political prejudice." IOC members have just returned from spending two weeks in China [JURIST news archive] meeting with governmental officials and said they will need to further review Amnesty's report before responding to it. AP has more.