JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE ARCHIVEDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.
Listen to Paper Chase!


Legal news from Thursday, March 26, 2009




UN human rights body adopts resolution urging defamation of religion laws
Andrew Gilmore on March 26, 2009 5:14 PM ET

[JURIST] The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] passed a resolution Thursday calling for laws against defamation of religion, in preparation for next month's Durban Review Conference [official website] on racism, discrimination, and xenophobia. The vote was 23-13 in favor of the resolution. Ahead of Thursday's vote, a number of critics of international defamation of religion legislation urged the Human Rights Council to reject the resolution [Reuters report], arguing that the concept has no validity under international law because only individuals, not concepts or beliefs, can be defamed. Several national delegates, including those from Muslim countries, called for passage of the resolution on Wednesday, saying that defamation of religion protection was needed [UNHRC press release] due to rising Islamophobic incidents, persisting manifestations of racism and acts of intolerance including religious profiling.

In December 2007, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution against defamation of religion [JURIST report], expressing concern about laws that have led to religious discrimination and profiling since 9/11 terrorist attacks [JURIST news archive]. Then-Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf called for the resolution [JURIST report] in the General Assembly in 2006, citing feelings in the Muslim world of "desperation and injustice" in the wake of the Danish publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad [JURIST news archive]. The UNHRC passed a similar resolution [JURIST report] opposing defamation of Islam in March 2007, with many western nations and advocacy groups standing in opposition.






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


New Hampshire House passes same-sex marriage bill
Andrew Gilmore on March 26, 2009 4:28 PM ET

[JURIST] The New Hampshire House of Representatives [official website] voted Thursday to approve a bill [HB 436 text] that would permit same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive] in the state. The bill passed by a vote of 186-179, and now moves on to the New Hampshire State Senate [official website]. If approved by the Senate and signed into law by New Hampshire Governor John Lynch (D) [official website], the bill would "eliminate[] the exclusion of same gender couples from marriage, affirm[] religious freedom protections of clergy with regard to the solemnization of marriage, and provide[] a mechanism by which same gender couples who have entered into a civil union prior to the enactment of this bill may obtain the legal status of marriage." The New Hampshire House vote was met with derision [New Hampshire Union-Leader report] from New Hampshire Republican Party chairman John Sununu. Lynch has opposed same-sex marriage in the state, saying that the New Hampshire civil union law [JURIST report] passed in 2007 provides the same legal protections for same-sex couples.

The New Hampshire attorney general was one of ten state attorneys general to petition the Supreme Court of California to postpone implementation of its decision [JURIST reports] to allow same-sex marriages in that state. The New Hampshire same-sex civil union law, which took effect in 2008 [JURIST report], allows same-sex couples to enter into civil unions with the "same rights, responsibilities, and obligations as married couples." In 2005, a New Hampshire Senate commission on same-sex marriages voted to recommend [JURIST report] that the state not allow same-sex couples to marry, not recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, and not establish a domestic partner registry.






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


Pennsylvania court overturns hundreds of juvenile sentences in judge kickback scandal
Caitlin Price on March 26, 2009 3:58 PM ET

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania [official website] on Thursday ordered [text, PDF] hundreds of juvenile convictions to be overturned and records to be expunged without hearing pursuant to the recommendation of a Special Master [text, PDF], in an attempt to rectify "the alleged travesty of juvenile justice" committed by two state judges involved in an alleged kickback scheme. In February, Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas [official website] President Judge Mark Ciavarella and former President Judge Michael Conahan pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to federal corruption charges [criminal information, PDF] that claimed that between June 2000 and January 2007 they accepted more than $2.6 million in kickbacks for sentencing teenagers to two private juvenile detention facilities in which they had a financial interest. Special Master Arthur Grim noted that Pennsylvania jurisprudence provides that "the appearance of [judicial] impropriety is sufficient justification for the grant of new proceedings before another judge." The state Supreme Court accepted Grim's recommendation that consent decrees and adjudications should be vacated and records should be expunged for isolated, non-serious offenses where the juveniles appearing before Ciavarella were not represented by lawyers. Grim wrote:

This prompt action in these non-serious cases will be at least one step towards righting the wrongs which were visited upon these juveniles and will help restore confidence in the justice system. Furthermore, it is not in the interest of the community to relitigate these non-serious cases, nor do I believe that the victims would be well-served by new proceedings.
Each affected juvenile offender will be given an opportunity to object to the decision, and the Supreme Court will issue future findings on other, more serious classes of affected cases. A spokesperson for the Philadelphia-based Juvenile Law Center (JLC) [advocacy website], which filed the case, welcomed [Philadelphia Inquirer report] the court's decision.

Ciavarella and Conahan were specifically accused of honest services fraud and tax fraud. A spokesperson for the JLC said that juveniles arraigned before Ciavarella between 2003 and 2006 received excessive sentences. Both judges agreed to 87-month prison sentences for themselves, but the pleas will not be formally accepted until sentencing, which could take up to 90 days. University of Pittsburgh School of Law Professor David Harris [professional profile] criticized the plea agreement [JURIST op-ed], saying, "I don’t think seven years is nearly enough for the harm they did to the system of justice, to our collective belief in the rule of law, to these children, and to their families." Yet to be determined are the amount the judges will be ordered to pay in restitution, and whether Ciavarella wrongly incarcerated juveniles to benefit the two companies involved. These issues will be resolved [Scranton Times report] during the presentence investigation and through a possible hearing before the US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania [official website]. The judges have also agreed to resign their positions and be disbarred. Families whose children were sentenced to the detention centers filed a lawsuit [Scranton Times report] against the judges and 14 other defendants, including the company that ran the detention facilities and two individuals who allegedly paid the judges. The judges allegedly received the payments into businesses they owned and in some cases falsely characterized the payments as rental income from a Florida condominium.





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


Taiwan corruption trial begins for ex-president Chen
Caitlin Price on March 26, 2009 3:04 PM ET

[JURIST] The corruption trial of former Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] opened Thursday, one day after Chen criticized the proceedings as "political persecution." Chen was indicted [JURIST report] in December and faces possible life in prison on charges of embezzlement, receiving bribes, forgery, and money laundering. Chen has maintained that the charges against him are politically motivated, alleging that the administration of current President Ma Ying-jeou [official website; JURIST news archive] is using the trial to distance itself from Chen's anti-China views. On Wednesday, Chen issued a statement of protest [Taipei Times report], declaring that a verdict against him had been determined before the trial began. Also Wednesday, the Taiwanese Ministry of Justice [official website] announced that it will investigate statements made by a prosecutor [Taiwan News report] in the Chen trial on a television talk show to determine whether any confidential information was revealed. Chen's trial is expected to conclude in mid-April [NYT report].

Chen has staged two hunger strikes [JURIST report] in protest of the charges against him, and in January he unsuccessfully appealed [JURIST report] his pretrial detention. In February, Chen's wife, Wu Shu-Chen, pleaded guilty to charges [JURIST report] of money-laundering and forgery, but denied charges that she embezzled from the presidential state affairs fund. Chen's sister-in-law has also pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to charges that she had forged documents and transferred money to bank accounts upon orders from Chen and Wu. Chen has asserted that he was unaware of Wu's actions. In September 2008, Chen was cleared [JURIST report] of separate defamation charges.






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


UK police to investigate MI5 agent role in US detainee alleged abuse
Devin Montgomery on March 26, 2009 12:53 PM ET

[JURIST] UK Attorney General Janet Scotland [official profile] said Thursday that police would conduct an investigation [statement, PDF] into claims that an agent of the country's MI5 [official website] intelligence service took part in the allegedly abusive interrogation of former Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Binyam Mohamed [BBC profile; JURIST news archive]. Scotland said she determined the investigation was necessary after reviewing allegations [JURIST report] that an MI5 agent gave US CIA agents questions that were asked of Mohammed during his alleged torture in Morocco. Mohamed, a native of Ethiopia who claims to have been transferred to Morocco for torture under a US program of extraordinary rendition [JURIST news archive], said he obtained the documents through the US legal process while seeking his release from Guantanamo Bay.


Earlier this month, the UK government's independent reviewer of terror laws called for a judicial inquiry [JURIST report] into British complicity in US rendition and torture. British media reported last week that UN special rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak told British ministers that MI5 may have been complicit [JURIST report] in torture committed while detainees including Mohamed were in US custody. Mohamed was returned to the UK [JURIST report] last week following seven years of detention, including five at Guantanamo Bay, where he was held on charges of conspiring to commit terrorism. Those charges were dismissed [JURIST report] in October, but Mohamed remained in custody while US authorities considered filing new charges.





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


House committee approves journalist shield bill
Andrew Morgan on March 26, 2009 12:12 PM ET

[JURIST] The US House Judiciary Committee [official website] on Wednesday approved a bill [HR 985 materials] that would limit the government's ability to compel reporters to disclose confidential sources. Under the terms of the Free Flow of Information Act of 2009, parties seeking the identity of confidential sources from reporters in federal court must show that the information relates to an act of terrorism, national security, disclosure of trade secrets, or the imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm. The court must further be convinced that the party seeking the disclosure has exhausted all other means of acquiring the information, and that "the public interest in compelling disclosure of the information or document involved outweighs the public interest in gathering or disseminating news or information". The bill also requires that the subject of a disclosure request be informed and given an opportunity to be heard before a communications service provider is compelled to disclose information about his or her activity. The protections in the proposed bill would extend only to reporters who receive "a substantial portion of the person's livelihood or ... substantial financial gain," leaving courts free to compel the disclosure of confidential sources from many bloggers. The bill passed the committee on a voice vote, with passage expected in the full House [RCFP report].

The committee passed a similar bill [JURIST report] in 2007, which was approved by the full house 398-21. The measure died in the Senate under threat of presidential veto, despite a 15-2 vote [JURIST report] in the Senate Judiciary Committee [official website]. The administration of former president George W. Bush continuously opposed the enactment of a federal reporter shield law [JURIST news archive] citing national security concerns, while proponents, including media outlets, argue the legislation is necessary to protect freedom of the press. The bill was first proposed in May 2006, partially in response to the controversial 85-day jailing of New York Times journalist Judith Miller [JURIST news archive] after she refused to reveal a source to the federal grand jury investigating the leak of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame [JURIST news archive]. Other journalists have faced contempt charges for refusing to reveal sources. In November, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated [JURIST report] a contempt order [JURIST report] against former USA Today reporter Toni Locy [JURIST news archive], who had refused to reveal government sources for a series of articles she wrote about the 2001 anthrax attacks [JURIST news archive].






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


New Hampshire House votes to repeal death penalty
Benjamin Hackman on March 26, 2009 11:46 AM ET

[JURIST] The New Hampshire House of Representatives [official website] voted 193-174 Wednesday to pass a bill [text] repealing the death penalty [JURIST news archive]. The proposed legislation would amend New Hampshire's criminal code by extending the definition of first-degree murder to encompass capital murder. The bill would take effect January 1, 2010, but Governor John Lynch (D) [official website] has said that he intends to veto the legislation [news release]. The bill will now come before the New Hampshire Senate [official website], where it is less likely to pass [Concord Monitor report], as it has no Senate co-sponsors.

Last week, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) [official website] signed [JURIST report] a bill [text, PDF; HB 285 materials] repealing the death penalty, making New Mexico the second state to abolish the death penalty since the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] reinstated it nationally in 1976. New Jersey was the first state to pass [JURIST report] such a law in 2007. Earlier this week, Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] reported [text, PDF; JURIST report] that global executions rose in 2008. Last year, the US performed the smallest number of executions since 1995 with one state, Texas, accounting for half of those executions.






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


Czech Republic PM resigns casting doubt on future of EU reform treaty
Devin Montgomery on March 26, 2009 11:18 AM ET

[JURIST] Czech Republic Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek [official website; JURIST news archive] formally resigned Thursday, casting doubt on the future of the European Union (EU) reform pact known as the Treaty of Lisbon [EU materials; text]. Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra [official website] said Wednesday that the recent collapse of the country's ruling coalition would likely "complicate" its ratification of the treaty. The coalition had been led by Topolanek, but the government on Tuesday lost a no-confidence vote [Prague Post report] in the country's parliament, leading to his Thursday resignation [Czech Radio report]. There has also been speculation that the failure could cause other problems [Prague Monitor report] for the EU given the Czech Republic's presidency [EU presidency website] of the Union, but Topolanek said he doesn't expect the power change to affect the country's participation in the role. The Czech Senate [official website] had been expected to vote on the treaty next month, but it is not clear whether that timeline will now be met.

The Czech Republic's Chamber of Deputies [official website], or lower house of parliament, in February approved [press release; JURIST report] the Lisbon Treaty, but both the senate and President Vaclav Klaus [official website] must also approve the treaty for it to be adopted. Beyond challenges in the Czech Republic, the treaty still must pass a referendum in Ireland where voters had earlier rejected [JURIST reports] the treaty in a June 2008 referendum, prompting Polish President Lech Kaczynski [official website] to refuse [JURIST report] to sign, calling it "pointless." In November, Sweden became the 24th EU state to ratify the charter [JURIST report]. In 2005, a proposed European constitution [JURIST news archive] failed when voters in France and the Netherlands [JURIST reports] rejected the proposal in national referenda.






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


UN Hariri tribunal appoints officials, adopts procedural rules
Steve Czajkowski on March 26, 2009 10:31 AM ET

[JURIST] The UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) [official website] has named several key officials and finalized procedural and evidentiary rules in order to begin investigating and trying those involved in the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri [JURIST news archive], according to a statement [UN News Centre report] issued by the court Wednesday. The STL, which was created [JURIST report] in May 2007, will be headed by Antonio Cassese, who was the first president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website]. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official website] appointed Francois Roux of France as the head of the defense office. Daniel Bellemare [Ya Libnan profile], who formerly headed the International Independent Investigation Commission (IIIC) [authorizing resolution; UN materials] that assisted Lebanese authorities with the investigation of Hariri's assassination, was appointed as lead prosecutor of the STL earlier this month. While the court has named Cassese and pre-trial judge Daniel Fransen of Belgium, it said that it will refrain from naming the remaining judges for the trial and appeals chamber until the appropriate security precautions are in place.

Last month, the STL's registrar Robin Vincent [official profile, PDF] said that it plans to ask the Lebanese government to transfer four generals [Daily Star report; JURIST report] being held on suspicion of involvement in Hariri's assassination to the court's custody. In March 2008, Bellemare said he believed a criminal network was behind the assassination [JURIST report]. The STL will consist of 11 international and Lebanese judges and have a budget of $51 million [JURIST report] for its first year . The investigation into the assassination, which had been extended past its original anticipated end date and expanded to cover other assassinations in the country, has increased existing tensions between Lebanon and Syria as several IIIC reports have implicated Syrian officials in Hariri's death [JURIST reports].






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


Vermont governor warns he will veto same-sex marriage bill
Steve Czajkowski on March 26, 2009 9:31 AM ET

[JURIST] Vermont Governor Jim Douglas (R) [official website] said Wednesday that he would veto a bill [S.0115 text, PDF] approved [JURIST report] earlier this week by the Vermont State Senate [official website] that authorizes same-sex marriages [JURIST news archive] in the state. In a statement [Flash audio; transcript] made to reporters, Douglas said that he announced his position early because he wanted to allow the legislature to focus on more crucial issues. Douglas' opposition to the bill is based on his belief that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman, and that Vermont civil union laws [official backgrounder] provide enough rights and benefits for same-sex couples:

Vermont’s civil union law has extended the same state rights, responsibilities and benefits of marriage to same-sex couples. I believe our civil union law serves Vermont well and I would support congressional action to extend those benefits at the federal level to states that recognize same-sex unions. But like President Obama and other leaders on both sides of the aisle, I believe that marriage should remain between a man and woman.
Despite his disapproval of the proposed law, Douglas said that he believes the legislature has enough votes to override his veto. The bill is expected to be presented [Burlington Free Press report] before the Vermont House of Representatives next week.

On Monday, the Vermont State Senate approved [Senate journal, PDF], by a vote of 26-4, the bill, entitled "An Act to Protect Religious Freedom and Promote Equality in Civil Marriage." If the proposed legislation passes, Vermont would join Massachusetts [JURIST news archive] and Connecticut [JURIST report] in extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. Previously, Vermont became the first state to offer civil unions to same-sex couples when then-Governor Howard Dean signed H.B.847 [text] into law in April 2000.





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


Treasury secretary to propose strengthened regulations in response to financial crisis
Ximena Marinero on March 26, 2009 8:01 AM ET

[JURIST] US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner [official profile] said that the US Department of the Treasury [official website] will propose stronger rules [prepared remarks; transcript] in response to the current economic crisis, at a meeting with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) [advocacy website] Wednesday. Geithner also said that the US should push for global financial reforms when he accompanies US President Barack Obama [official profile] to the G-20 [official website] meeting next week. Geithner said:

In the coming weeks, we will take additional steps, among them, proposing new and stronger rules to protect American consumers and investors against financial fraud and abuse. These will help us deal in the future with threats like the practices in subprime lending that kicked off the current crisis. And because we have learned that risk respects no borders, our plan will not focus solely on financial regulations in the United States, but - with the help of other interested nations and strengthened international bodies - on stronger standards globally, as well.
Fielding questions from the Council, Geithner said the International Monetary Fund (IMF) [official website] governor's plan [IMF factsheet] to "increase the use of the IMF's special drawing rights" deserves to be considered, and should not be thought of as a motion towards a global monetary union, but rather as building on current structure. Geithner also said that global response to the current financial crisis is already different from and motivated by the lessons of prior experiences.

Geithner has emphasized increased restrictions on financial institutions [press release, JURIST report] receiving government assistance. Geithner advocates expanding the powers of the chief financial regulating entities such as the Treasury and the Federal Reserve. Last month, a group of lawyers called for the formation of an International Finance Court [JURIST report] to adjudicate the issues around the Bernard Madoff [JURIST news archive] fraud case, and they will also seek to present their proposal at next week's G-20 meeting.





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

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


LATEST OP-ED

In Alabama, "Back Door" Restrictions on Abortion and Roe
DOMESTIC
LaJuana Davis
Cumberland School of Law

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

SYNDICATION

Add Paper Chase legal news to your RSS reader or personalized portal:
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Add to My AOL

E-MAIL

Subscribe to Paper Chase by e-mail. JURIST offers a free once-a-day digest [sample]. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.


R|mail e-mails individual Paper Chase posts through the day. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.

PUBLICATION

Join top US law schools, federal appeals courts, law firms and legal organizations by publishing Paper Chase legal news on your public website or intranet.

JURIST offers a news ticker and preformatted headline boxes updated in real time. Get the code.

Feedroll provides free Paper Chase news boxes with headlines or digests precisely tailored to your website's look and feel, with content updated every 15 minutes. Customize and get the code.

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org