[JURIST] The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) [official website] will not reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, according to a letter [excerpts] released Thursday to Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) [official website] by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. The Fairness Doctrine [MBC backgrounder], under which broadcast licenses could be revoked if the broadcaster failed to give airtime to opposing sides of controversial issues, was struck down by the FCC in 1987. Recently, Democratic lawmakers have pushed for Congress to consider reinstating the doctrine, after recent attacks on immigration reform bills by radio talk shows. Pence and other lawmakers responded by introducing the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007 [HR 2905 text], which would prevent reinstatement of the doctrine.

Pence welcomed the FCC's announcement in a joint statement with Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) [official website]:

We commend the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission for his commitment to free and independent airwaves in America. Nevertheless it is imperative that Congress pass the Broadcaster Freedom Act to ensure that no future administration or FCC chairman have the power to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine without an act of Congress. Congress should heed the call of Chairman Martin and permanently reject the Fairness Doctrine by enacting the Broadcast Freedom Act into law.

[JURIST] City and town clerks in Massachusetts may issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples from New Mexico, according to recent instructions from the Massachusetts Registry of Vital Records [official website]. A July 18 internal notice to municipal employees said that because the New Mexico government has not explicitly banned same-sex marriage [JURIST new archive], Massachusetts may issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples from that state. Residents of New Mexico and Rhode Island are the only non-Massachusetts residents who currently can marry in Massachusetts, but neither state has confirmed that it will recognize all Massachusetts-issued same-sex marriage licenses. In February, Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch [official website] said Rhode Island would recognize [JURIST report] the same-sex marriages of state employees performed in Massachusetts. Massachusetts is the only state which allows same-sex marriage. AP has more.

In 2003, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage [Globe timeline] with the state high court's decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health [text; JURIST report]. More than 8,500 same-sex couples have been married in Massachusetts since May 2004. In June, Massachusetts lawmakers voted against [JURIST report] allowing a statewide vote on a proposed constitutional amendment [text] defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

[JURIST] A Zimbabwean judge has released 13 opposition activists held by the government because police faked evidence against them, defense lawyers said Thursday. All 13 belong to the opposition party Movement for Democratic Change [party website], and had been held since March when the government arrested [JURIST report] at least 100 people - including opposition presidential hopeful Morgan Tsvangirai [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] - in advance of a prayer meeting in the nation's capital. High Court Judge Lawrence Kamocha released the 13 on Wednesday after ruling that key police evidence, including supposed terrorist training locations and identities of key witnesses, were falsified.

Political tensions have run high in Zimbabwe [JURIST news archive] recently, especially since President Robert Mugabe [JURIST news archive] announced in December that he planned to extend his presidency from 2008 to 2010 to correspond with parliamentary elections. Also Wednesday, more than 150 members of the activist party National Constitutional Assembly [party website] were arrested [SW Radio Africa report] outside Parliament while rallying for constitutional reform. In February, police imposed a three-month ban [JURIST report] on anti-government protests after a political rally by the Movement for Democratic Change led to confrontations between police and citizen around the country. AP has more.

[JURIST] The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] ruled Thursday that Russian authorities were responsible for the shooting death of 11 unarmed civilians [judgment, DOC] in Chechnya and ordered Russia to pay damages and court expenses totaling 163,864 euro (approximately $224,500) to five Chechen plaintiffs. The court ruled that Russia was responsible for the February 2000 incidents, in which soldiers killed the victims, then looted and set fire to their properties, because the perpetrators were Russian federal troops. The court also found that the Russian military failed to investigate the matter in a "timely and coherent manner." Russia has three months to appeal the ruling.

In June, the ECHR ruled [JURIST report] in another case that Russian authorities were responsible for the 2003 death of four members of a Chechen family. ECHR President Judge Jean-Paul Costa estimated in May that almost one-fifth of the approximately 90,000 complaints [JURIST report] currently before the court are directed against the Russian government. AFP has more.

[JURIST] Former Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] is threatening to go on a hunger strike, his son Ziad Aziz told AFP Thursday. Ziad says that Aziz and 14 other detainees are threatening to initiate a hunger strike next week if Iraqi authorities do not allow Aziz's preferred lawyer, Badih Aref Izzat, to enter Iraq and be present during Aziz's interrogations. Ziad says that Izzat is currently prohibited from returning to Iraq for unspecified reasons.

Last Saturday, Izzat said that Aziz had fainted several times while in detention and was taken to a US military hospital [JURIST report]. Aziz, who surrendered to US forces in 2003, has complained of health problems [JURIST report] throughout his detention. In March, Aziz denied [JURIST report] that Hussein's government had ever carried out attacks while testifying before the Iraqi High Tribunal [official website] in the Anfal genocide trial [JURIST news archive; BBC trial timeline]. AFP has more

[JURIST] Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) [official website] issued subpoenas for White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and Deputy Director of Political Affairs J. Scott Jennings Thursday in the ongoing probe of the US Attorney firings scandal [JURIST news archive], ordering Rove and Jennings to provide documents and testify [subpoena materials] before the Senate Judiciary Committee no later than August 2. Announcing the subpoenas, Leahy said:

We have now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine United States Attorneys last year. Testimony and documents show that the list was compiled based on input from the highest political ranks in the White House, including Mr. Rove and Mr. Jennings. The evidence shows that senior officials were apparently focused on the political impact of federal prosecutions and whether federal prosecutors were doing enough to bring partisan voter fraud and corruption cases. It is obvious that the reasons given for these firings were contrived as part of a cover up and that the stonewalling by the White House is part and parcel of that same effort.

With our service of these subpoenas, I hope that the White House takes this opportunity to reconsider its blanket claim of executive privilege, especially in light of the testimony that President was not involved in the dismissals of these U.S. Attorneys. I hope that the White House steps back from this constitutional crisis of its own making so that we can begin to repair the damage done by its untoward interference with federal law enforcement. That interference has threatened our elections and seriously undercut the American people's confidence in the independence and evenhandedness of law enforcement. Mr. Rove and the White House must not be allowed to continue manipulating our justice system to pursue a partisan political agenda. Apparently, this White House would rather precipitate an unnecessary constitutional confrontation than do what every other Administration has done and find and accommodation with the Congress. If there are any cooler or wiser heads at the White House, I urge them to reconsider the course they have chosen.

There is a cloud over this White House and a gathering storm. I hope they will reconsider their course and end their cover up so that we can move forward together to repair the damage done to the Department of Justice and the American people's trust and confidence in federal law enforcement.

[JURIST] US District Judge James Munley [official profile] ruled Thursday that two anti-illegal immigration laws passed by the city of Hazleton, Pennsylvania [official website; legal defense website] are unconstitutional, issuing a permanent injunction [memorandum and order, PDF; docket] prohibiting the enforcement of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act and the Landlord Tenant Ordinance [PDF texts], which were intended to make it more difficult for illegal immigrants to live or work in the town. Munley wrote:

The ordinances disrupt a well-established federal scheme for regulating the presence and employment of immigrants in the United States. They violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution and are unconstitutional. ...

The Hazleton ordinances violate the procedural due process protections of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. They penalize landlords, tenants, employers and employees without providing them the procedural protections required by federal law, including notice and an opportunity to be heard. Our analysis applies to illegal aliens as well as to legal residents and citizens. The United States Constitution provides due process protections to all persons. ...

Whatever frustrations officials of the City of Hazleton may feel about the current state of federal immigration enforcement, the nature of the political system in the United States prohibits the City from enacting ordinances that disrupt a carefully drawn federal statutory scheme. Even if federal law did not conflict with Hazleton's measures, the City could not enact an ordinance that violates rights the Constitution guarantees to every person in the United States, whether legal resident or not. The genius of our Constitution is that it provides rights even to those who evoke the least sympathy from the general public. In that way, all in this nation can be confident of equal justice under its laws. Hazleton, in its zeal to control the presence of a group deemed undesirable, violated the rights of such people, as well as others within the community. Since the United States Constitution protects even the disfavored, the ordinances cannot be enforced.

[JURIST] A federal judge Thursday ordered [PDF text] the federal government to pay Peter Limone, Joseph Salvati [AP reports], and the families of two other men who died while in jail over $101 million after finding the government liable for malicious prosecution. The men were convicted of a 1965 murder after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) [official website] withheld evidence and encouraged people to commit perjury to frame the men for the crime. The men and their families filed a lawsuit against the federal government arguing that FBI agents knew that the mobster who accused them was lying to protect another FBI informant involved in the killing.

The men spent over 30 years in prison for the murder, and were released in 2001 when an FBI memo about the case revealed that they had been framed. AP has more.

[JURIST] Four Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Solicitor General Paul Clement [official website] Thursday asking Clement to appoint a special counsel to investigate whether US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales "may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress." The letter follows reports [AP report] that a 2006 memorandum from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) [official website] appears to contradict Gonzales' Tuesday testimony [transcript] before the committee that a March 10, 2004 meeting between administration officials and eight Congressional leaders did not focus on the reauthorization of the controversial warrantless domestic surveillance program [JURIST news archive]. Gonzales has said that the meeting concerned another intelligence program, which he refused to elaborate on, and that then-Deputy Attorney General James Comey [official profile] issued reservations reauthorizing this unspecified intelligence program and not the domestic surveillance program as widely reported. Gonzales also testified that there was a "consensus" among the congressional leaders that the intelligence activities should continue despite reservations from Comey. The DNI memorandum, sent to then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) in May 2006, outlines briefings given on the domestic surveillance program, and includes the March 2004 meeting as an occasion where congressional leaders were informed about the surveillance program. Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) sent a separate letter [text] to Gonzales Thursday asking him to review the transcript of Tuesday's hearing and "mark any changes you wish to make to correct, clarify or supplement your answers so that, consistent with your oath, they are the whole truth."

On Tuesday, Gonzales denied [JURIST report] pressuring then-Attorney General John Ashcroft [official profile] while Gonzales served as White House Counsel to give the Department of Justice's reauthorization of the controversial warrantless domestic surveillance program [JURIST news archive] while Ashcroft was hospitalized. In May, Comey testified [transcript, PDF] that Gonzales and then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card [official profile], in response to Comey's reservations about re-certifying the program, attempted to pressure Ashcroft [JURIST report] at his hospital bed in March 2004. Comey, who was acting attorney general because of Ashcroft's hospitalization, said that Ashcroft refused to authorize the program because he was without the powers of the attorney general and referred White House officials to Comey. AP has more.

[JURIST] Bulgarian Prosecutor General Boris Velchev Thursday defended Bulgaria's pardon of six medics [BBC Q&A; JURIST news archive] against Libyan criticism [JURIST report], saying that Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov [official profile] properly exercised his discretionary power to pardon the six defendants, who were within the legal jurisdiction of Bulgaria. On Wednesday, the Libyan Foreign Ministry issued a formal complaint [Reuters report] accusing Bulgaria of violating a prisoner exchange agreement dating back to 1984, under which the six were supposed to serve their life sentences. The Libyan Association for the Families of HIV-Infected Children has called on the Libyan government to sever diplomatic relations with Bulgaria and expel all Bulgarians residing in Libya.

The medics - five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor - were released by Libyan authorities on Tuesday under the pretense that they would serve their life sentences [JURIST reports] in Bulgaria. Parvanov promptly issued a presidential pardon for the six medics upon their arrival in Bulgaria. The medics, all of whom have consistently maintained their innocence and accuse Libyan authorities of eliciting confessions through torture [HRW report], have indicated they will testify against eleven Libyan police officers facing torture charges [JURIST report] in Bulgaria. AP has more.

[JURIST] Federal authorities have arrested and charged [DOJ press release] a former school teacher for accepting kickbacks from contractors attempting to obtain military contracts in Iraq, the US Justice Department announced Thursday. Carolyn Blake is alleged to have been involved in a scheme with her brother, Major John L. Cockerham, and his wife, Melissa Cockerham, in which she received $3.1 million from contractors in 2004 and 2005. According to US Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) [official website] Stuart W. Bowen Jr., the Cockerham scheme is the largest case of bribery connected with the Iraq reconstruction effort. The Cockerhams were arrested and charged with money laundering, bribery and conspiracy [DOJ press release] earlier this week for receiving up to $9.6 million in kickbacks.

In June, former US Army Reserve Lt. Col. Bruce D. Hopfengardner was sentenced to 21 months [JURIST report] in prison for taking bribes and defrauding the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) [official website] in Iraq. In May, Bowen testified before the US Senate Judiciary Committee, reporting that investigators would employ stricter standards [JURIST report] when dealing with companies performing contract work in Iraq. At the time of his testimony, 16 people had been convicted for fraud and kickbacks received in connection with the reconstruction. AP has more.

[JURIST] US Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) [official website] Wednesday urged members of Congress to adopt legislation suspending the United States' annual $3 million contribution to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website; JURIST news archive]. Coleman said that the UNHRC's focus on Israel and failure to address alleged human rights abuses in countries like North Korea, Myanmar, and Zimbabwe [JURIST news archives] resembles the body it was intended to replace, the UN Commission on Human Rights [UN backgrounder].

The Senate is currently considering Coleman's bill [S 1698 text, PDF] to suspend UNHRC funding. Meanwhile, Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) [official website] has introduced in the House of Representatives a UN reform bill [HR 2712 text, PDF] that faults the UNHRC for passing nine resolutions censoring Israel during its first year of operation while taking no similar actions against other states like Belarus, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan. The UNHRC was established in March 2006 [JURIST report] to replace the UN Human Rights Commission, which was also criticized for allowing states with poor human rights records to become members. AP has more.

[JURIST] The Kansas Supreme Court [official website] delayed a bid by Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison [official profile] to test the constitutionality of an anti-funeral picketing law [PDF text; supplemental note, PDF] Wednesday, saying it wasn't sure whether Gov. Kathleen Sebelius [official website] was correctly named as the defendant. The court sought clarification from Morrison before August 24. The court, which may dismiss the lawsuit, also asked Morrison to specify what relief his lawsuit is seeking because there was no "case or controversy" as the law has not yet entered into effect. Morrison has indicated that he will file a response [press release] to address the court's concerns. He had asked the court to rule on whether legislators had the authority to force Morrison to file a lawsuit against funeral picketers, and whether the law was constitutional.

The law, signed by Sebelius [JURIST report] in April, does not take effect until it is upheld as constitutional by the Kansas Supreme Court or a federal court. Morrison's lawsuit [JURIST report], filed in consultation with the Kansas legislature, is necessary because the Kansas Supreme Court does not issue advisory opinions. The law was passed in response to picketing at military funerals by members of the Westboro Baptist Church [WARNING: readers may find materials at this church website offensive; Wikipedia backgrounder], who claim that US soldiers have been killed because American tolerates homosexuals. The law will "prohibit persons from engaging in picketing or a directed protest within 150 yards of any entrance" where a funeral is held or "conducted within one hour prior to, during the funeral, or within two hours following the funereal." The law will also allow defamation lawsuits "by the estate on behalf of the person or any living relative of the deceased person" against protesters. More than 30 states have passed similar laws in response to the group, and a federal law [JURIST report] restricting protests at Arlington National Cemetery and other federal cemeteries has also been passed. AP has more.

[JURIST] Former Bangladeshi Telecommunications Minister Aminul Huq was sentenced to 31 years imprisonment Thursday for aiding Islamic extremists executed in March for the murder of two judges [JURIST reports] in 2005. The militants acted as part of a terror campaign to bring traditional Islamic rule to the country to replace the current secular, Muslim system. Nearly 30 people were killed in the attacks, and since then, over 1,000 people have been arrested in connection with bombings [JURIST report].

The sentencing is just one of many recent legal attacks against former Bangladeshi government officials. On Tuesday, former Bangladeshi Prime Minster Sheikh Hasina [party profile] was formally charged with extortion [JURIST report] for alleged kickbacks she received during her tenure in office, after she was arrested [JURIST report] last week. On Sunday, former lawmaker Wadud Bhuiyan was sentenced to 20 years [JURIST report] in jail for acquiring land and property through corrupt methods. AFP has more.

[JURIST] Nigerian Judge Anwuri Shekere Wednesday suspended court proceedings in the criminal case against pharmaceutical giant Pfizer [corporate website] until October 29, granting a request by prosecutors for more time to prepare. Pfizer is accused of conducting an illegal clinical trial in 1996 on approximately 200 Nigerian children, 100 of which were administered the then-experimental anti-biotic Trovan [FDA backgrounder] without the authorization of the Nigerian government or the consent of the patients' guardians.

In a separate $7 billion civil suit [BBC backgrounder] filed by the Nigerian federal government, amended charges were refiled against Pfizer last week after the government uncovered additional evidence alleging that Pfizer had committed fraud [JURIST report] relating to patient consent. In June, the Nigerian court rejected a motion by Pfizer [JURIST report] to dismiss the case on technical grounds. Pfizer is facing several civil and criminal lawsuits for its alleged conduct during a 1996 meningitis outbreak in Kano, Nigeria. AP has more.

[JURIST] Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] failed to attend a meeting Thursday with the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) [official website] which is probing possible tax evasion allegedly committed by Thaksin during his tenure in office. According to the DSI, Thaksin, who now resides in London, may have hid assets owned by his family in order to avoid paying taxes on them. A spokesperson for Thaksin said that he will not appear before the DSI, but will send legal representation in his place.

Thaksin, who has been living in exile since his ouster in a September 2006 military coup [JURIST report], is currently also facing corruption charges [JURIST report], which are scheduled to be heard [JURIST report] by the Thai Supreme Court on August 14. Earlier this month, Thaksin filed a lawsuit against the Thai Assets Examination Committee (AEC) for its seizure of Thaksin family assets [JURIST report], demanding that the AEC terminate its freeze of approximately $2.1 billion in assets and seeking an additional $1.7 billion in compensation. Australia's ABC News has more.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of Ohio [official website] ruled Wednesday that unmarried couples are subject to domestic violence statutes [opinion, PDF], despite the fact that the law refers to those "living as a spouse." The case arose when a man charged under the domestic violence statute for alleged abuse of his live-in girlfriend attempted to argue that the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage [text] prevented the state from giving legal status to any unmarried couples. The court held that a variety of couples are included within the definition of the law, as the law refers to those who are living together, rather than those who are married. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer [official profile] wrote that:

While the intent of the domestic-violence statute is to protect persons from violence by close family members or residents of the same household, the intent of the marriage amendment was to prevent the creation or recognition of a legal status that approximates marriage through judicial, legislative, or executive action. The statute and the constitution are not in conflict.

[JURIST] The US Military Academy at West Point's Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) [official website] said Wednesday that US military panels reviewing the status of detainees at Guantanamo Bay determined that most detainees represented a threat to US national security. The CTC report [PDF text; annex, PDF] was based on an analysis of unclassified Combatant Status Review Tribunal summaries [DOD materials]. The new report also criticizes a 2006 study [PDF text; JURIST report] by Seton Hall law professor Mark Denbeaux, who analyzed the same summaries, for making a number of speculative conclusions about the Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRTs) [DOD materials]. Denbeaux criticized CSRTs as "show trials" and, as characterized in the CTC report, found "that the DoD is wrongfully holding individuals who, based on the DoD's own data, neither pose a serious threat to America's national security, nor seem to have been involved in conducting or supporting hostile action against the United States."

The new West Point study concluded that 73 percent of detainees represented a "demonstrated threat," and that 53 percent of detainees have "definitively supported or waged hostile activities" against the US or its allies. The study also said that 35 percent of detainees have been identified as fighters for al Qaeda, the Taliban, or an affiliated extremist group, and that 92 percent of all detainees have been determined to constitute "potential threats" due to their affiliation with the groups. According to the report, only 1.16 percent of the CSRT summaries - representing six detainees - showed no evidence of involvement or evidence demonstrating a threat to the United States, although it emphasized that classified materials may indicate otherwise. The Combating Terrorism Center wrote:

a number of the Seton Hall report's findings do not appear to be supported available evidence. This Annex identifies the CTC's comments with the Seton Hall study's methodology, data coding process, interpretation of statistical results and analyses. The CTC has three primary concerns with the Seton Hall report on the 516 CSRT summaries:

1. The Seton Hall study excludes a number of the data fields used in the CTC study from consideration. Disregarding this relevant information limits the explanatory potential of the Seton Hall study and provides a much less robust analysis of the data available on the detainees.

2. In multiple instances the Seton Hall study interprets language contained in the 516 unclassified CSRT summaries in ways that ignore the contextual meaning of the summaries. By doing so, the Seton Hall report mischaracterizes the nature of a number of important variables.

3. In a number of cases, the Seton Hall report makes speculative conclusions about the detainee data that lack factual support.

ALSO ON JURIST  Topic: Guantanamo Bay | Topic: Enemy combatants