[JURIST] The Italian judge presiding over the corruption trial [JURIST report] of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] and his former lawyer David Mills said Friday accord to Reuters that hearings in the case will continue despite a request for her removal by Berlusconi's lawyers. Berlusconi's legal team claimed [ANSA report] judge Nicoletta Gandus was biased after she commented on laws passed by the previous Berlusconi government; they also said she had a vested interest in another trial involving Berlusconi and Mills because she previously owned shares of Berlusconi's broadcasting company, Mediaset [corporate website]. Berlusconi faces charges of corruption arising from his alleged payment of $600,000 to Mills for favorable testimony at trials in the 1990s. The trial is set to continue on July 7. Gandus's removal hearing is also set for July. Reuters has more.

Earlier this week Berlusconi suggested that proposed changes to Italian law [PDF text, in Italian] designed to suspend older trials for nonviolent crimes would allow the country's judiciary to consider more important cases [Senate letter, in Italian] and would give the government time to introduce judicial reforms. The changes would protect high-ranking government officials from prosecution during their terms in office. Critics of the proposal have charged that the move is personally motivated since Berlusconi's trial would be among those suspended. Berlusconi has faced trial on at least six occasions involving charges of embezzlement, false accounting, tax fraud, money laundering, and giving false testimony [JURIST reports] involving Mediaset.

[JURIST] Serbian officials transferred former Bosnian Serb police commander Stojan Zupljanin [Trial Watch profile] to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website; JURIST news archive] Saturday after the War Crimes Chamber of the Belgrade District Court refused his appeal [B92 report] against extradition. Serbian Minister of Justice Dusan Petrovic [official profile] approved [press release] the transfer Friday. Zupljanin was arrested [JURIST report] earlier this month. He was indicted [text] by the ICTY on charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws of war for allegedly killing civilians during the Balkan ethnic conflicts of the 1990s. AFP has more. The International Herald Tribune has additional coverage.

The EU has made Serbia's cooperation with the ICTY a key element of its membership negotiations [EU accession materials]. There have been 43 Serbian suspects transferred to the tribunal since its inception in 1993. The remaining fugitives sought by the tribunal are Bosnian Serb leaders Ratko Mladic [BBC profile] and Radovan Karadzic, and Croatian Serb war crimes suspect Goran Hadzic [ICTY indictments].

[JURIST] The trial of British national Simon Mann [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], charged with participating in an alleged coup attempt [BBC backgrounder] against Equatorial Guinea President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo [BBC profile] in 2004, concluded on Friday with his defense lawyer seeking leniency. Mann, who has claimed that Sir Mark Thatcher was involved in the plot [JURIST report], testified that he was “only a junior member” in the organization plotting to overthrow Mbasogo. Defense counsel portrayed Mann as a "poor victim" of the failed coup in his closing argument, asking the court to consider his level of involvement and his collaboration with the authorities. Mann faces a maximum sentence of 32 years, to be served in Blackbeach prison in Malabo. AP has more.

Mann is a former British military officer arrested four years ago after a plane carrying him and approximately 60 mercenaries landed in Zimbabwe. Mann was sentenced [JURIST report] in 2004 in Zimbabwe for plotting the coup, and was deported [JURIST report] to Equatorial Guinea in secret in February 2007 before his appeal process against extradition in Zimbabwe was complete. His lawyers argued that Mann would face torture and possibly the death penalty if extradited, but the Zimbabwe High Court ruled against his appeal [JURIST report] this past January, finding that there was enough evidence of his involvement to carry out extradition, and that the defense failed to show a sufficient likelihood of torture.

[JURIST] The Kansas Supreme Court [official website] ruled [text; press release] 6-1 Friday that juvenile defendants in the state have a constitutional right to a jury trial. The Court found that recent changes to the Kansas Juvenile Justice Code [PDF text] made juvenile proceedings "more akin to an adult prosecution" in which jury trials are constitutionally provided under Section 10 of the Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights [text] stating that "In all prosecutions, the accused shall be allowed to appear and defend in person, or by counsel…[and have] a speedy public trial by an impartial jury". In finding for the juvenile right the Kansas court overturned its own 1984 decision in Findlay v. State and distinguished the US Supreme Court's 1971 ruling in McKeiver v. Pennsylvania [opinion text]. Justice Eric Rosen [official profile] wrote for the majority:

The United States Supreme Court relied on the juvenile justice system's characteristics of fairness, concern, sympathy, and paternal attention in concluding that juveniles were not entitled to a jury trial. Likewise, this court relied on that parens patriae character in reaching its decision in Findlay. However, because the juvenile justice system is now patterned after the adult criminal system, we conclude that the changes have superseded the McKeiver and Findlay courts' reasoning and those decisions are no longer binding precedent for us to follow. Based on our conclusion that the Kansas juvenile justice system has become more akin to an adult criminal prosecution, we hold that juveniles have a constitutional right to a jury trial under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments [text].

[JURIST] The Bush administration on Friday invoked executive privilege [JURIST news archive] in refusing to turn over documents to the US House Oversight and Government Reform Committee [official website] now investigating what it claims to be a politically-motivated decision [JURIST report] by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] to deny California permission to implement its own vehicle emission standards. Administration officials have refused to respond to subpoenas for documents concerning White House intervention in EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson’s December 2007 decision to overrule EPA officials [JURIST report] in favor of granting California and 17 other states permission to mandate the reduction of vehicle emissions by 30 percent by 2016. The Oversight Committee held off on scheduled contempt-of-Congress proceedings against the EPA following the administration’s claim of executive privilege. The White House made public a June 19th letter [text] by Attorney General Michael Mukasey stating that the release of internal documents "could inhibit the candor of future deliberations among the president's staff."

The California emission standards would have required car manufacturers to cut emissions by 25 percent from cars and light trucks, and 18 percent from SUVs, beginning with the 2009 model year. California's Air Resources Board [official website] adopted the greenhouse gas standards in 2004 [press release], but it could not mandate them unless the EPA granted a waiver of the lighter Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) [text] standards. In December 2007, the EPA Administrator told reporters that the White House prefers a single unified national standard to a state-by-state network of regulations, pointing to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 [HR 6 materials; WH fact sheet]. This is the first time that the EPA has denied California a waiver since Congress established the state's right to seek Clean Air Act (CAA) waivers in 1967. AP has more.

[JURIST] European Union [official website] government leaders meeting in Brussels Friday directed member states [official report, PDF] to draft tougher border security legislation to curb the growing problem of illegal immigration in Europe. The security overhaul is aimed at setting common security standards at airports, harbors and border checkpoints in an effort to filter out illegal immigrants and to catch criminals and terror suspects before they enter the 27-country bloc. In addition to fingerprinting all foreign visitors, the EU leaders proposed the use of new technological initiatives, including satellite systems and an Internet-based pre-travel authorization system, to detect illegal immigrants and screen foreigners.

On Wednesday the European Parliament [official website] approved [JURIST report] a new set of immigration rules [press release] to help combat the growing number of illegal immigrants in the EU, currently estimated at eight million. The rules allow EU states to detain illegal immigrants for up to 18 months to decrease flight risk while deportation is being processed as well as impose a re-entry ban of up to five years on expelled immigrants who do not cooperate or are deemed a security threat. The plan also requires that immigrants be given access to free legal advice, and that minors and families with children only be detained as a last resort. AP has more.