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 Wednesday, March 24, 2010




Supreme Court hears arguments on shipment of goods, habeas corpus
Jaclyn Belczyk on March 24, 2010 3:14 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF; merit briefs] Wednesday in two cases. In Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha v. Regal-Beloit Corporation [oral arguments transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court heard arguments on whether the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 [49 USC § 11706] applies to the inland rail transportation of goods in the US that originate out of the country when the shipment involved an extension of the Carriage of Good by Sea Act (COGSA) [46 USC § 30701]. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found [opinion, PDF] that the district court did not consider whether the parties had properly opted out of the Carmack Act, without which the COGSA does not apply. Counsel for the petitioners argued:

From its enactment in 1906 until very recently, it has been settled law for a century that the Carmack Amendment does not apply to the inland leg of an import through shipment. ... [T]he current scope of Carmack is consistent with its historic scope, which had a very limited special application to exports to Canada and Mexico. Other than that, it doesn't apply to foreign trade at all.
Counsel for the US government argued as amicus curiae on behalf of petitioners. Counsel for the respondents argued that, "[i]t does not take great mental gymnastics to read the plain language of this statute and resolve it the way the Ninth Circuit did in favor of Respondents."

In Magwood v. Patterson [oral arguments transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court heard arguments on whether, when a person is resentenced after having obtained federal habeas relief from an earlier sentence, a claim in a federal habeas petition challenging that new sentencing judgment a "second or successive" claim under 28 USC § 2244(b) [text] if the petitioner could have challenged his previous sentence on the same constitutional grounds. The basic issue is whether a defendant can raise a challenge that could have been but was not raised in an earlier habeas petition. The case involves defendant Billy Joe Magwood, on death row in Alabama. Magwood was sentenced to death for murdering a county sheriff. His original death sentence was overturned in 1986, but he was later sentenced to death again. He challenged the second sentence, but the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled [opinion, PDF] that his claim should have been raised in the first sentencing. Counsel for Magwood argued Wednesday that, "a petition, as here, that challenges a new death sentence cannot be a second or successive petition for the very simple reason that it challenges a State court judgment that has no - never been covered in a habeas petition before." Counsel for the respondents argued:
You have equitable principles that say when you have two parties, a party has a full and fair opportunity to praise a claim or to litigate. But the other party also has a finality interest. And once you take away your full and fair opportunity by not using it, the other party's interest in finality outweighs. That's what Congress envisioned in AEDPA. That's what this Court envisioned with the abuse of the write [sic] doctrine. That's why we don't allow someone who had a claim previously available that didn't use it to bring it again.





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


US transfers 2 Uighur Guantanamo detainees to Switzerland
Michael Kraemer on March 24, 2010 1:13 PM ET

[JURIST] Two Uighurs held at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archives] were transferred to Switzerland [press release] on Wednesday. Switzerland granted humanitarian type B residence permits allowing the two to live in the canton of Jura. Both have agreed to respect Swiss laws, learn the local language, and secure gainful employment. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] reported that the detainees had been cleared for release [press release] by the interagency Guantanamo Review Task Force and were transferred pursuant to an agreement with the government of Switzerland. The Swiss Federal Council announced [press release] earlier this month that it would provide sanctuary, despite warnings [JURIST report] from Chinese officials that doing so would jeopardize relations between the two countries.

Of the 22 Uighurs originally detained at Guantanamo Bay, 15 others have also accepted offers of relocation to other countries. Six Uighurs were transferred to Palau, four to Bermuda and five to Albania [JURIST reports]. This transfer comes after the US Supreme Court on Monday declined to rule [JURIST report] in Kiyemba II, a case regarding issues surrounding the transfer of Uighur Guantanamo Bay detainees. Lawyers for four Uighurs detained at Guantanamo were appealing [JURIST report] an April ruling [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Columbia Circuit, which held that US courts cannot prevent the government from transferring Guantanamo detainees to foreign countries on the grounds that detainees may face prosecution or torture in the foreign country. The case is separate from a case the court remanded [JURIST report] to the DC circuit court earlier this month, known as Kiyemba I. The Chinese government maintains that the Uighurs are members of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) [CFR backgrounder], a militant group that calls for separation from China and has been a US-designated terrorist group since 2002. The US has previously rejected China's calls to repatriate [JURIST report] the Uighurs, citing fear of torture upon their return.






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


Rights group urges El Salvador to repeal amnesty law
Carrie Schimizzi on March 24, 2010 12:04 PM ET

[JURIST] Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] on Tuesday urged government officials in El Salvador to repeal [press release] a 1993 amnesty law that prevents any investigation [JURIST report] into killings committed during the country's 12-year civil war [PBS backgrounder], including the killing of respected Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero [BBC backgrounder, JURIST news archive]. AI also urged officials to cooperate with any investigation into the prosecution of those who committed criminal acts during the conflict. No offenders have been brought to justice for any crimes committed during the war. AI deputy director Kerrie Howard recommended the law be immediately repealed:


It is unacceptable that those responsible for thousands of disappearances, killings and torture have not been held to account for their crimes. The Amnesty law must be urgently repealed and full investigations, initiated.

Wednesday marks the thirtieth anniversary of Romero's death.

In November, El Salvador government officials agreed to a state investigation [JURIST report] into the death of Romero, nearly a decade after the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights [official website] first recommended an inquiry into the murder. Romero was assassinated by a death squad while saying mass in San Salvador. An outspoken critic of the military junta, his death is viewed as one of the catalysts of the war, which left more than 70,000 people dead. In 2004, a US federal court held Alvaro Saravia liable [CJA case backgrounder] for Romero's murder and ordered him to pay $10 million in damages to the archbishop's family. While other suits have been brought [JURIST report] against former Salvadoran state agents in US courts, human rights groups contend that the amnesty laws [ISP report] have undermined the rule of law and led to impunity in El Salvador. Other Latin American countries have recently overturned similar amnesty laws including Uruguay and Argentina [JURIST reports].





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


NYT to pay damages to Singapore leaders for dynasty article
David Manes on March 24, 2010 11:03 AM ET

[JURIST] The New York Times (NYT) [media website] on Wednesday agreed to pay a total of $114,000 in damages to Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew [official profiles], for an article that may have implied that the current prime minister attained his position as a result of their relationship. The paper also apologized [text] to the two leaders. The offending article, written by International Herald Tribune [media website] contributor Phillip Bowring on February 15, was titled "All in the Family," and identified several political dynasties in Asia. In its apology, the NYT wrote:


In a February 15, 2010, article, Mr. Bowring ... included these two men in a list of Asian political dynasties, which may have been understood by readers to infer that the younger Mr. Lee did not achieve his position through merit. We wish to state clearly that this inference was not intended. We apologize to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong for any distress or embarrassment caused by any breach of the undertaking and the article.

Bowring's article contained a single reference to Singapore: "The list of Asian countries with governments headed by the offspring or spouses of former leaders is striking. ... Singapore's Lee Hsien Loong is Lee Kuan Yew's son." The newspaper removed the article, but it remains available [Khaleej Times text] from other sources.

Singapore leaders have sought damages against media organizations for alleged defamation before. Last March, a judge for the Supreme Court of Singapore [official website] ruled that a Wall Journal Journal Asia [media website] editor was in contempt of court and personally liable for damages [JURIST report] for publishing two editorials and a letter that criticized the impartiality of the city-state's judiciary.





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


Russia ex-police officer found guilty of slander for YouTube corruption video
Jay Carmella on March 24, 2010 9:03 AM ET

[JURIST] Former Russian police officer Alexei Dymovsky [advocacy website, in Russian] was found guilty Tuesday in a defamation lawsuit for accusing Russian law enforcement officials of corruption on YouTube [corporate website]. A district court in the Russian city of Novorossiisk ordered [ITAR-TASS report] Dymovsky to pay both the chief of Novorosiisk police Vladimir Chernositov and chief of the Primorye precinct Valery Medvedev 50,000 rubles ($1,800) each. Dymovsky criticized [RIA Novosti report] the law enforcement officials last September. In the YouTube video addressed to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin [official website, in Russian; JURIST news archive], Drmovsky accused his superior officials of pressuring officers to improve their own crime statistics. He was also critical of the condition under which officers are expected to work. Dymovsky was fired following the video's posting, and was imprisoned [RIA Novosti report] for six weeks earlier this year. The Ministry of the Interior [official website] has ordered a probe into Dymovsky's accusations.

Dymovsky provides yet another example of corruption in the Russian law enforcement community. Six Russian officers disappeared [Moscow Times report] on Wednesday after their names were released to the media for falsely arresting homeless people in order to improve their crime figures. In January, Putin called for a new age of human rights and safety [JURIST report] in the Caucasus region of Russia, where the killings of journalists and activists have become increasingly common. Deaths of human rights workers are often blamed on the local police and security forces, who rarely face charges. Also in January, a Russian journalist died in prison [JURIST report] from injuries suffered during a police beating. In December, Putin called for greater oversight of officials [JURIST report] after a nightclub fire in Perm exposed widespread corruption among bureaucrats.






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


Malaysia urged to drop sodomy charges against opposition leader
Tara Tighe on March 24, 2010 8:27 AM ET

[JURIST] Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] on Wednesday urged [press release] the Malaysian government to drop all charges against former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim [official profile; JURIST news archive]. Anwar is accused of inappropriate sexual advances toward a male aide in 2008. HRW alleges that the trial has been "plagued by serious due process problems and government interference" and that the government should therefore drop all charges against Anwar. HRW Deputy Asia Director Phil Robertson said, "[t]he government should end this charade of justice and drop the charges against Anwar. Every step of the way, the court has blocked Anwar's lawyers from preparing a thorough defense." Anwar's trial is expected to resume on March 25.

Earlier this month, the Malaysian Federal Court rejected Anwar's claim [JURIST reports] that his 1998 removal from office was unconstitutional. Anwar went on trial in July on new allegations of sodomy, to which he has pleaded not guilty [JURIST reports]. Anwar's attempts to have the case dismissed have been repeatedly rejected [JURIST report] by the court. Anwar was removed from office [BBC report] in 1998 and banned from political life [JURIST report] for 10 years amid accusations of corruption, abuse of office, and sexual misconduct of which he was acquitted in 2004.






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


US transfers 3 Guantanamo detainees to Georgia
Erin Bock on March 24, 2010 8:22 AM ET

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced [press release] Tuesday that three Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees had been transferred to the country of Georgia [BBC profile]. The transfer was approved by unanimous consent of the Guantanamo Review Task Force, an inter-agency group that reviewed several factors regarding the detainees, including security. The identities of the released detainees are being withheld due to security and privacy concerns. The DOJ stated that the US "is grateful to Georgia for its willingness to support US efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay facility." More than 580 detainees have been transferred from Guantanamo Bay since 2002. With the departure of these last three detainees, 183 detainees remain [AP report] in the military prison.

This latest transfer comes after the Supreme Court on Monday declined to rule [JURIST report] in Kiyemba II, a case regarding issues surrounding the transfer of Uighur Guantanamo Bay detainees. Also on Monday, a judge in the US District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the release of Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a Guantanamo detainee who had been accused of planning the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In February, four detainees were transferred to Albania and Spain [JURIST report]. Other countries that have accepted transfers include Latvia, Switzerland, Slovakia, Afghanistan, Palau, Bermuda, Algeria, and Somaliland [JURIST reports]. The Obama administration failed to meet its deadline [JURIST report] of closing the prison by January 2010 after running into several hurdles, including opposition from members of Congress and the suspension of detainee transfers to Yemen [JURIST report].






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


Bulgaria, Romania legal systems need improvement: EU report
Steve Czajkowski on March 24, 2010 7:46 AM ET

[JURIST] The European Commission (EC) [official website] released reports [press release] Tuesday that said Bulgaria [report, PDF; summary, PDF] and Romania [report, PDF; summary, PDF] must do more to combat corruption and organized crime, and conduct judicial reforms in order to enjoy their full rights as members of the EU. The reports represent the sixth assessments for the newest members of the EU under the Control and Verification Mechanism (CVM), which was setup as a way to verify progress of the two nations in meeting EU benchmarks on the issues. The EC said Romania has struggled to keep momentum on judicial reform, but commended it for making progress on corruption while warning more work is needed:

Only limited results can be demonstrated in judicial reform while no effective improvement could be noted for the difficult human resourcing situation in the judiciary and the capacity of the judicial system has been put under further strain by net staff losses. Regarding the fight against corruption, the report commends the continuously convincing track record of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate in the investigation and prosecution of high-level corruption cases. ... However, continued delays in high-level corruption trials, together with inconsistency and leniency in penalties applied by the courts, continue to present important challenges for Romania.
The EC made similar comments on Bulgaria:
Since mid-2009, Bulgaria responded to some recommendations of the Commission notably by an initiative to improve the objectivity of the annual appraisal of magistrates, the results of which however cannot be yet assessed. ... With regard to the fight against corruption and organised crime, Bulgaria plans to improve the effectiveness of the forfeiture of criminal assets by applying forfeiture to a wider group of persons related to a crime unless the legal origin of assets can be proven. ... Although a number of new investigations and indictments for high-level corruption and organised crime have recently been reported, delays in important cases continued and no conviction in a high-level case could be reported since mid 2009.
According to the EC, it will continue support for the countries and provide its next assessment by this summer.

The current assessments echo statements made in previous CVM progress reports [materials; JURIST report]. In January 2007, Bulgaria and Romania officially joined the EU [JURIST report] following six years of accession negotiations. Both countries have been required to comply with a series of benchmarks; failing to do so could result in EU intervention and the potential loss of economic aid under Articles 36-38 of the Act of Accession [text], which lays out safeguard mechanisms [EC backgrounder] in the event of problems posing a threat to the functioning of the EU.





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


Myanmar high court rejects Suu Kyi lawsuit challenging election laws
Tara Tighe on March 24, 2010 7:30 AM ET

[JURIST] The Myanmar Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a lawsuit to repeal election laws [JURIST report] preventing pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] from participating in upcoming elections. The lawsuit was filed by Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) [party website] in response to the recently enacted laws, which have garnered criticism [JURIST report] for prohibiting persons with criminal records or overt religious affiliations from attaining candidacy in the upcoming elections. Suu Kyi has said that she believes the NLD should not participate [Reuters report] due to the restrictive nature of the election laws. The NLD will be required to decide whether to register for participation in the elections in the coming weeks.

Last month, Myanmar's Supreme Court dismissed Suu Kyi's latest appeal [JURIST report] to the 18-month extension of her house arrest. Suu Kyi appealed to the high court in November after a lower court found her guilty [JURIST reports] of violating the terms of her house arrest when she allowed an American to stay with her after he swam across a lake to her home. Suu Kyi, who has been in prison or under house arrest for 14 of the past 20 years, will be released in November [JURIST report], according to a government official, likely after the upcoming elections have taken place.






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

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


LATEST OP-ED

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

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