The Obama administration first announced a drilling moratorium [JURIST report] in May, suspending several offshore drilling activities including pending lease sales in the Gulf and Virginia and the drilling of 33 deepwater exploratory wells in the Gulf. In June, a federal judge ordered a preliminary injunction [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] against the original moratorium, stating that the blanket moratorium on drilling was too harsh and that the administration failed to consider less-restrictive alternatives. Last month, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit [official website] rejected a request [JURIST report] by the administration to stay the preliminary injunction. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] asked the appeals court to stay the injunction, claiming the district judge abused his discretion [JURIST report] and that another deepwater spill could overwhelm the ongoing efforts to clean up the spill with catastrophic results. The six-month drilling moratorium was issued in response to the court of appeals decision. More than 200 million gallons of oil leaked from the rig's broken pipe, surpassing the Exxon Valdez oil spill [JURIST news archive] as the worst in US history.

In June, the Thai government indicated it will study the possibility of extending amnesty to red shirt protesters [JURIST report] convicted of minor offenses in order to facilitate reconciliation within the country. The offer of amnesty would not be given to the protesters charged with terrorism but could be extended to the 27 red shirt protesters who were sentenced to six months in prison [JURIST report] for violating the emergency decree prohibiting political gatherings of more than five people. The protests came to an end [JURIST report] last month when red shirt leaders surrendered to police, which led to rioting, arson and the imposition of a curfew to protect citizens of Bangkok and its surrounding areas. The red shirts are supporters of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], who was removed from power in 2006 [JURIST report]. Last week, Thaksin lost an appeal [JURIST reports] to the Supreme Court of Thailand [GlobaLex backgrounder] challenging the seizure of his assets [JURIST report] by the government after the Constitutional Court had found him guilty of using his power in office to personally benefit himself and other family members.

DeLay and two other Republicans are accused of transferring $190,000 in corporate money directly to the Republican National Committee, which then donated the same amount to local Texas campaigns. DeLay and the other suspects have denied raising or spending money illegally. In August 2008, a Texas appeals court allowed the money-laundering indictment [JURIST report] against DeLay's associates to stand. In 2007, a Texas appeals court ruled against reinstating a charge of conspiracy to violate the state's election against DeLay and his two associates. After he was indicted, DeLay stepped down as House majority leader and later resigned from Congress [JURIST reports].

It's clear that the massive ethnic violence posed colossal challenges for Kyrgyz security forces, yet we found that some of the security forces became part of the problem rather than the solution. National and international inquiries need to find out just what the government forces did and whether the authorities did everything they could to protect people. This is crucial both for justice and to learn lessons about how to respond to any new outbreaks. Those responsible for the heinous crimes against both Kyrgyz and Uzbeks during the June violence should be prosecuted irrespective of their ethnicity, title, or rank.

Last month, UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay [official website] issued a warning [JURIST report] about ongoing human rights violations in Kyrgyzstan following the recent ethnic violence in the country. According to Pillay, security forces in the southern part of the country have been arbitrarily detaining large numbers of Uzbeks in violation of both Kyrgz and international laws. Additionally in July, Kyrgyz interim President Roza Otunbayeva [Telegraph profile] established a commission [JURIST report] to investigate the ethnic violence against the country's Uzbek population. It will consult with government and international experts and present its findings [AP report] on the causes and repercussions of the violence in September.

KP approved the sale of the diamonds [JURIST report] from the Marange mines last month, after reaching an agreement with the Zimbabwean government. Under the agreement, KP will allow Zimbabwe to sell [NYT report] a portion of its estimated USD $1.7 billion worth of mined diamonds before September, and the Zimbabwean government will allow KP experts to enter the country to certify that the diamond mines meet international standards. Diamonds sales after September will be contingent upon this certification. Last November, rights groups urged KP to suspend [JURIST report] Zimbabwe's international diamond trade due to the human rights violations [Telegraph report] allegedly committed by the Zimbabwean army against civilians and illegal workers in the Marange diamond fields.

Habeas corpus relief for enemy combatants has been a prominent issue in US federal courts. Last month, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] released a redacted opinion [JURIST report] holding that evidence against Algerian Guantanamo Bay detainee Belkacem Bensaya must be reviewed to determine if he was "part of" al Qaeda [JURIST archive]. Circuit Judge Douglas Ginsburg, writing the opinion for the panel, held that there appeared to be no direct evidence linking Bensaya to al Qaeda, and that the government's authority under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) [text, PDF] only extends to the detention of individuals who are "functionally part of" a terrorist organization. Bensayah was the only one of the six petitioners from the 2008 Boumediene v. Bush [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] decision who was not granted habeas relief after the Supreme Court remanded the case for further review of evidence. In Ma,y the DC Circuit ruled in Al Maqaleh v. Gates that Boumediene was narrowly tailored to detainees being held at Guantanamo [JURIST report] and that detainees held at Bagram Air Force Base [official website; JURIST news archive] in Afghanistan cannot bring habeas corpus challenges in US courts.

Kaing unexpectedly asked to be released [JURIST report] at the close of his trial in November. His request was a complete departure from his previous conduct, as he had cooperated with the trial and repeatedly apologized to his victims and their families, mitigating conduct that earned him a reduced sentence from the 40 years prosecutors originally sought. His lawyers took different approaches in their closing remarks, with one stating that his client was not guilty and the other asking for clemency. In March 2009, Kaing accepted responsibility and apologized [JURIST report] for his conduct at the detention facility. He is the first of eight ex-Khmer Rouge officials expected to be tried before the ECCC. In April, the pre-trial chamber of the ECCC dismissed appeals by three other former Khmer Rouge officials [JURIST report] to block the extension of their provision detention. The three prisoners, Ieng Thirith, Ieng Sary and Khieu Samphan, were arrested in November 2007 and face charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, murder, torture and religious persecution.