[JURIST] Police used unnecessary force to disperse demonstrations at the Pittsburgh Group of 20 (G-20) Summit [official websites], several civil liberties groups said Friday. Witold "Vic" Walczak, Legal Director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania (ACLU-PA) [advocacy website] said that police deployed throughout the city in a manner that prevented lawful demonstrations [AP report], suppressed free speech and failed to prevent criminal activity. ACLU-PA is collecting complaints [ACLU materials] about law enforcement activities during protests against the G-20 meeting, and has already filed a lawsuit [complaint, PDF] on behalf of Seeds of Peace and Three Rivers Climate Convergence (3RCC) [advocacy websites] alleging that police violated their constitutional rights. The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) [advocacy website] questioned [press release] the methods used by police during protests in the Lawrenceville and Oakland [JURIST reports] sections of Pittsburgh:

Police deployed chemical irritants, including CS gas, and long-range acoustic devices (LRAD) in residential neighborhoods on narrow streets where families and small children were exposed. Scores of riot police formed barricades at many intersections throughout neighborhoods miles away from the downtown area and the David Lawrence Convention Center. Outside the Courtyard Marriott in Shadyside, police deployed smoke bombs in the absence of protest activity, forcing bystanders and hotel residents to flee the area.

[JURIST] The Obama administration may not be able to meet the January deadline set early this year for the closure of Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive], senior administration officials said Friday. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the officials told AP, the Washington Post, CNN [reports] and other media outlets that the difficulty in finding host countries for detainees who can be released and domestic facilities to hold prisoners who won't be released is unlikely to be resolved by January. The Washington Post reports that White House Counsel Gregory Craig - already an object of criticism [WSJ report] on this and other issues - has been relieved of his responsibility for overseeing the closure of the detention center. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) [official website] said that he would continue to oppose [FOX report] the closure "until there is a plan that keeps Americans as safe or safer than keeping detainees in the secure detention center." Meanwhile, Marine Major General Michael Lehnert [official profile], who oversaw the construction and initial operations at Guantanamo Bay, has said he supports closing the facility [AP report] as soon as practicable but rejected proposals to send detainees to domestic military installations.

Earlier this week, the Obama administration said that it will not push Congress [JURIST report] for legislation to authorize the indefinite detention of terror suspects, but will rely on its existing authority. In early September, US Department of Defense (DOD) [official website] general counsel Jeh Johnson [official profile] said that the administration remains committed [JURIST report] to closing the military detention facility by early next year. Officials are reportedly still considering creating a military-civilian prison facility that would house its own court at a site in Michigan, but local residents have strongly opposed [JURIST reports] the plan. Officials are also considering trying detainees in federal courts, with cases assigned to federal prosecutors [JURIST report] last month.

[JURIST] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] Saturday denied that Iran had broken nuclear development regulations in respect to a newly-disclosed nuclear facility, insisting that the applicable disclosure rules only require notice six months before nuclear material is introduced into the facility for the first time [Al Jazeera report]. At a press conference [WP report] Friday, US, British, French, and German leaders gathered in Pittsburgh for the G-20 summit said in a joint statement [press release] that Iran had violated the terms of agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)[official website] by failing to disclose in a timely manner the existence of a nuclear facility. Under the terms [IAEA board report, PDF] of a 2003 protocol [text, PDF] to Iran's original IAEA Safeguards Agreement [text, PDF], Iran was obligated to disclose the existence of the plant prior to construction. Iran unilaterally opted out [IAEA board report, PDF] of the protocol in May 2007, however, claiming that it did not apply as Iran had not yet ratified it [IPS report]. This position is not accepted by experts [WP/Carnegie Endowment Q & A]. The joint statement came a few days after Iran wrote [Daily Telegraph report] to the IAEA indicating the location of a new facility in the mountains near the city of Qum. French President Nicholas Sarkozy [official website, in French] said Iran must now disclose [AP report] any additional information it has about the facility by December or face sanctions.

In December 2006 the UN Security Council imposed sanctions [JURIST report] on Iran for continuing to enrich uranium and broadened them [JURIST report] three months later. The UN had previously ordered Iran to stop expanding [JURIST report] its nuclear program by August 31, 2006. Iran has said it will completely withdraw [JURIST report] from the IAEA if its "nuclear rights" are taken away. The IAEA and the western powers are particularly concerned about Iranian activities that might lead to the production of nuclear weapons. Iran has repeatedly insisted that its enrichment activities are not weapons-related.