 |
|

Legal news from Friday, February 15, 2008 |
 |
|


Danish reprint of Muhammad cartoon sparks renewed protests
Steve Czajkowski on February 15, 2008 4:03 PM ET

[JURIST] Protests broke out in the Gaza Strip, Pakistan, and Denmark Friday over the reprinting of a cartoon depiction of the Muslim prophet Muhammad [JURIST report] by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Poste [media website]. Thousands marched and chanted in the Jebaliya refugee camp in the Gaza strip, while hundreds protested in Pakistan by burning Danish flags and demanding the removal of the Danish ambassador. In Copenhagen, approximately 800 people marched in a peaceful protest organized by radical Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir [advocacy website; Global Security backgrounder]. Also Friday, a Danish Imam, Mostafa Chendid, called for calm and urged Muslim youths to stop clashing with police after five consecutive nights of violence in Copenhagen and other Danish cities.
The cartoon was reprinted by Jyllands-Poste on Wednesday, one day after Danish police arrested three people [JURIST reports] suspected in a plot to murder Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard for his characterization of Muhammad. Westergaard was one of 12 cartoonists who created the Muhammad cartoons [Le Monde slideshow; JURIST news archive] first published in 2005, sparking widespread protests across the Islamic world. Several other Danish newspapers also reprinted Westergaard's depiction Wednesday, accompanied by statements defending freedom of speech and the public's right to see the cause of the backlash. AP has more.


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

|

Bush chides House for not passing FISA bill in time to replace expiring act
Eric Firkel on February 15, 2008 3:25 PM ET

[JURIST] US President George W. Bush Friday chided the US House of Representatives for failing to pass [WH fact sheet] the FISA Amendments Act [S 2248 materials] before leaving for a 12-day recess, saying that the US would be in greater danger of an attack when the temporary Protect America Act [S 1927 materials; JURIST report] expires on Saturday. The US Senate voted 68-29 [JURIST report] Tuesday to pass the FISA Amendments Act, but the House failed to pass the bill this week. The version approved by the Senate provides immunity for telecommunications companies [JURIST report] from lawsuits related to their participation in the NSA warrantless surveillance program [JURIST news archive]. The House version [HR 3773 materials] of the legislation, approved [JURIST report] in November, does not include the immunity provisions. Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) rejected Bush's comments [press release] Friday, saying: The President is misrepresenting the facts on our nation's electronic surveillance capabilities. Last August, he insisted that Congress pass the Protect America Act; but this week, he refused to support an extension, which can only mean he knows our intelligence agencies will be able to do all the wiretapping they need to do to protect the nation. That surveillance can be undertaken under broad orders authorized under the PAA or under orders that can be obtained through the FISA court.
The President knows the facts; if he did not want the PAA to expire this weekend, he should have supported an extension of it, as the overwhelming majority of House Democrats did on Wednesday. Having guaranteed the lapse of the August law, the President should now work in a cooperative way with Congress to pass a strong FISA modernization bill that protects our nation's security and the Constitution. The FISA Amendments Act, supplementary to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) [text], would make it easier for the government to monitor foreign phone calls and e-mails that pass through the United States. Strong critics of the legislation, including Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) [official website], have deplored its retroactive grant of immunity to participating telecom companies as an effective endorsement of warrantless wiretapping contrary to the rule of law [transcript; recorded video]. In the absence of new legislation, the government can get an order from the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to monitor calls and e-mails, set up under FISA. Amendment supporters have rejected this option, saying it creates too much red tape. AP has more.


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

|

Serbia denounces expected Kosovo secession as legally 'invalid'
Jaime Jansen on February 15, 2008 10:53 AM ET

[JURIST] Any unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo [JURIST news archive] from Serbia will be "invalid and void," Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic said [press release, in Serbian] Thursday, hours before the UN Security Council [official website] was scheduled to discuss the possibility of Kosovar secession. Kosovo, the UN protectorate now dominated by ethnic Albanians which is still technically a part of Serbia, is widely expected to secede from Serbia in the next few days; local Kosovar authorities have been working with the European Union [official website] for months to move toward independence [JURIST report]. The independence option has run into considerable resistance from Russia, a traditional Serbian ally, prompting the UN Security Council to abandon a resolution [JURIST report] endorsing the independence plan last July. The US and European Union continue to support [JURIST report] an independent Kosovar state.
A decision [text] formally adopted by the Serbian government Thursday said that: The acts and actions of the Provisional Institutions of Self-government of Kosovo and Metohija whereby unilateral independence is declared are hereby annulled as they violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, the United Nations Charter, Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999), other relevant Security Council Resolutions as well as by international law in force. These acts represent a violent and unilateral secession of a part of the territory of the Republic of Serbia and this is why they are invalid and void. These acts do not produce any legal effect either in the Republic of Serbia or in the international legal order. Unilateral secession of a part of the territory of a sovereign state constitutes legal violence against the Republic of Serbia and violence against international law in force. Serbia has demanded that the Security Council similarly annul any Kosovar declaration of independence by Kosovo. Members of Kosovo's parliament, however, say Serbia's demands will not affect Kosovo's actions. Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that he still opposes Kosovo's plan to secede, calling it "not moral and not legal." AFP has more.


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

|

Bush to veto intelligence bill restricting CIA interrogation tactics
Jaime Jansen on February 15, 2008 10:30 AM ET

[JURIST] US President George W. Bush said in a BBC interview [transcript; recorded video] Thursday that he will veto an intelligence funding bill [HR 2082 materials] that would restrict CIA interrogators to using only interrogation techniques explicitly authorized by the 2006 Army Field Manual. Bush said that: The reason I'm vetoing the bill - first of all, we have said that whatever we do... will be legal. Secondly, they are imposing a set of standards on our intelligence communities in terms of interrogating prisoners that our people will think will be ineffective. And, you know, to the critics, I ask them this: when we, within the law, interrogate and get information that protects ourselves and possibly others in other nations to prevent attacks, which attack would they have hoped that we wouldn't have prevented? And so, the United States will act within the law. We'll make sure professionals have the tools necessary to do their job within the law. Now, I recognize some say that these - terrorists - really aren't that big a threat to the United States anymore. I fully disagree. And I think the president must give his professionals within the law the necessary tools to protect us. So, we're not having a debate not only how you interrogate people. We're having a debate in America on whether or not we ought to be listening' to terrorists making' phone calls in the United States. And the answer is darn right we ought to be. Though the US Senate approved [JURIST report] the measure Wednesday, it failed to approve it by the two-thirds majority necessary to override a presidential veto. The US House agreed to the measure [JURIST report] in December.
Field Manual 2-22.3 [PDF text; press release], Human Intelligence Collector Operations, explicitly prohibits the use of waterboarding [JURIST news archive], electrocution, sensory deprivation, inducing hypothermia, or depriving the subject of food, water, or medical care. The 2006 manual also specifies that the Geneva Conventions [ICRC materials] apply to all detainees [JURIST report] and eliminates separate standards for the questioning of prisoners of war and enemy combatants. AFP has more.


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

|

US government appeals 'enemy combatant' evidence ruling to Supreme Court
Jaime Jansen on February 15, 2008 8:54 AM ET

[JURIST] The Bush administration filed a petition for certiorari [PDF text] with the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] Thursday in the case of Gates v. Bismullah, seeking to limit the information it must provide to courts in cases involving Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees classified as "enemy combatants." Last July, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled [PDF text; JURIST report] that federal appeals courts reviewing enemy combatant designations must review all evidence regarding that detainee, rejecting the government's argument that it should only have to turn over the same evidence presented to the Combatant Status Review Tribunal that designated the detainee as an enemy combatant. The full appeals court earlier this month refused to reconsider [order, PDF; JURIST report] its decision. The administration has also requested a stay [PDF text] of the appeals court's judgment pending the Supreme Court ruling.
The Bush administration asked the Court to either accept the Bismullah case with expedited review [motion, PDF], or defer action until the Court rules on Boumediene v. Bush (06-1195) [docket; merit briefs], a case already pending [JURIST report] before the Court. In Boumediene, the Court heard arguments in December on whether Guantanamo detainees should be allowed to challenge their detentions in federal court. The Boumediene case is also on appeal from the DC Circuit, which last year upheld [PDF text; JURIST report] the habeas-stripping provision of the controversial Military Commissions Act of 2006 [PDF text; JURIST news archive] as applied to enemy combatants. The New York Times has more. Reuters has additional coverage.


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

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