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, February 2, 2011




Federal appeals court upholds life sentence for Bush assassination plotter
Daniel Makosky on February 2, 2011 3:38 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit [official website] on Tuesday affirmed [opinion, PDF] the life sentence of Ahmed Abu Ali, a US citizen who joined al Qaeda while studying abroad in Saudi Arabia. Abu Ali was convicted in November 2005 on nine charges [JURIST report] related to conspiracy to commit terrorist acts, including plotting to assassinate then-president George W. Bush. Attorneys for Abu Ali argued that the life sentence was unconstitutional and procedurally and substantively unreasonable, though the court ruled that the sentence fell within "well-established boundaries" and did not reflect an abuse of discretion.

Abu Ali's original sentence of 30 years imprisonment [JURIST report], imposed in March 2006, was increased to life [Reuters report] following a successful appeal in 2008 brought by the US Department of Justice [official website]. Sentencing proceedings were initially delayed [JURIST report] to allow lawyers in the case time to investigate whether evidence against Abu Ali had been obtained through warrantless domestic surveillance. His conviction came after a federal judge denied Abu Ali's motion to suppress his confession, which he claimed was a byproduct of torture [JURIST reports] at the hands of Saudi Arabian domestic security police. The Saudi Arabian government denied the torture allegations [JURIST report]. Abu Ali, arrested in 2003, pleaded not guilty at trial, which commenced [JURIST reports] in October 2005.




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


Obama signs documents ratifying New START treaty
Hillary Stemple on February 2, 2011 2:29 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] US President Barack Obama [official website] on Wednesday signed documents ratifying [WH blog] the New START treaty [materials, PDF; JURIST news archive], an agreement between Russia and the US intended to reduce nuclear arms in both countries. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev [official website, in Russian; JURIST news archive] signed a bill into law last week ratifying the treaty after the Russian Federation Council approved [JURIST reports] the treaty's ratification. The new treaty, which replaces the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START 1) [materials] that expired in December 2009, calls for each country to reduce its nuclear arsenal by about 30 percent and allows each country to maintain a nuclear arsenal of 1,550 warheads, as opposed to the 2,200 allowed under START 1. The treaty, agreed to [JURIST report] in February, also allows for visual inspections of nuclear capabilities [BBC report] in order to verify compliance with the treaty's terms. The previous right of mutual inspection of the nuclear arsenals ended [CNN report] with the expiration of START 1. New START will formally go into effect on Saturday when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov [official profiles] exchange the signed documents.

New START is the first nuclear agreement between the two nations in nearly 20 years. In December, the US Senate voted 71-26 to ratify the treaty after the Russian Duma voted overwhelmingly for approval [JURIST reports] earlier in the month. US approval of the treaty came after some members of the legislative body expressed doubt [JURIST report] that the Senate would have the 67 votes required for approval. Obama and Medvedev signed the treaty in April after the US State Department began negotiating the treaty [JURIST reports] with Russia in 2009. Nuclear disarmament between the US and Russia, whose nuclear arsenals comprise 95 percent of the world's nuclear weapons, languished during the Bush administration. The treaty is considered a key part of easing tensions between the two countries, which reached a high point after the 2008 Georgia conflict [BBC backgrounder].




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


Rights group accuses Indian security forces of human rights violations
Aman Kakar on February 2, 2011 1:30 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The human rights advocacy group Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] released a report [PDF] on Tuesday accusing Indian security forces of committing human rights violations in response to terrorist attacks and urging reforms in the country's justice system. The report titled "The 'Anti-Nationals': Arbitrary Detention and Torture of Terrorism Suspects in India", accuses Indian security forces at all levels of arbitrary arrests, detention, torture and religious discrimination in the aftermath of three deadly bombings of major Indian cities in 2008, for which the Indian Mujahideen [IDSA Backgrounder] took responsibility. The report also addresses the treatments of Hindu nationalists suspected to be responsible for a separate 2008 bombing. According to the report, suspected terrorists are labeled "anti-national", held without bail, often jailed without being registered and forced to give confessions to crimes. Lawyers who represent the suspected Muslim terrorists operate in an environment of open hostility, with several bar associations issuing instructions to their members to not represent the suspected terrorists. HRW also criticizes magistrates for not ordering independent investigations and ignoring the complaints of the suspected terrorists. The report takes aim at state and federal laws that facilitate the abuse of terrorism suspects. The Amendments to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) [legislative materials] are criticized for vague definitions of terrorism, increased police powers and extending the pre-detention period for suspected terrorists to 180 days. HRW analogizes these amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism Act, a law that was repealed in 2004 because it encouraged abuse. Among its many recommendations HRW urged Indian government at all levels to repeal unlawful provisions that encourage abuse, enact a Prevention of Torture Bill and investigate allegations of abuse by police.

The Indian government has faced both international and domestic criticism for its anti-terror laws. In December 2010, Amnesty International] criticized the guilty verdict for Binayak Sen [JURIST report] on charges of aiding rebels of the Naxalite Maoist rebellion [CFR Backgrounder]. In 2008, AI urged Indian President Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil [official website] to reject [JURIST report] the UAPA Amendment of 2008. The bill, which came in response to the Mumbai terror attacks [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. Proponents of the UAPA have said that there are safeguards in place to make sure that the law is not misused. In 2006, the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) [party website], alleged that the Mumbai train bombings [BBC report] were a fallout from [JURIST report] the country's Prevention of Terrorism Act, set aside by the incumbent United Progressive Alliance (UPA) in 2004.




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


Kazakhstan parliament votes to hold presidential election in 2012
Sarah Posner on February 2, 2011 12:24 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Kazakhstan's parliament [official website, in Kazakh] on Wednesday approved amendments to the constitution which allow President Nursultan Nazarbayev [official website, in Kazakh; BBC profile] to hold presidential elections in 2012 instead of extending his presidency until 2020. The bill was signed into law by Nazarbayev after unanimous approval by both houses of parliament. On Monday, Kazakhstan's Constitutional Council [official website, in Kazakh] rejected a proposed referendum [JURIST report] extending Nazarbayev's presidency until 2020. Following the council's decision, Nazarbayev announced a proposal for snap elections [RFE/RL report, in Kazakh] during an address to the citizens of Kazakhstan. Nazarbayev's current term in office expires in 2012 and he has already expressed his intention to run for president again in the upcoming election. A date for the new elections has not yet been announced but may be scheduled for as early as this spring.

The proposed referendum was forwarded [press release, in Kazakh] to Kazakhstan's Constitutional Council after the parliament unanimously approved [JURIST report] the proposal on January 14. The parliament's vote overruled Nazarbayev's decision earlier in the month to veto the proposed referendum [Reuters report]. Supporters of the referendum maintain that it is necessary [Interfax report] in order to ensure that Nazarbayev can continue to address issues facing the country. They also indicated that continuity of government is necessary for the country's continued growth. Opponents have argued that Nazarbayev's political party is attempting to eliminate any political competition. The Kazakhstan Parliament initially approved [JURIST report] the referendum last month. In June 2010, Nazarbayev announced that he would not sign a controversial law [JURIST report] that would grant him several presidential powers for life, even if he stepped down from office.




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


Mississippi AG seeks to remedy deficiencies of BP oil spill victim fund
Daniel Makosky on February 2, 2011 12:00 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood [official website] on Tuesday requested that the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana [official website] order the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) [official website] to fulfill its legal obligations to aid victims of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive] in the Gulf of Mexico. Hood is seeking a federal judge to direct Kenneth Feinberg [WP profile], administrator of the $20 billion fund established by British Petroleum (BP) [corporate website] in the wake of the disaster, to remedy inadequate claims mechanisms and expedite the processes. The filing alleges that Feinberg has yet to establish a claims process [Reuters report] consistent with the standards outlined in the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 [materials], state laws and the company's earlier promises. Hood contends that the $3.3 billion GCCF has paid to individual and business claimants represents only a fraction of the victims seeking relief and the damages claimed, and that monitoring the process is significantly inhibited by a lack of transparency.

The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill [official website] released its full final report [text; JURIST report] earlier this month, tracing the deeper root causes of the spill and recommending steps to avoid future incidents. In October, several environmental advocacy groups filed a federal lawsuit [JURIST report] against BP for the ongoing harm to endangered and threatened wildlife caused by the spill. The GCCF, an independent facility, began processing claims in August following the completion of negotiations [JURIST reports] between BP and the US Department of Justice [official website]. Alabama Attorney General Troy King [official website] filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in August against BP for damages to the state's coast and economy, claiming that the oil giant has failed in its efforts to accept responsibility for the oil spill. In July, a class action lawsuit [JURIST report] was filed against the company in a Louisiana state court alleging that its negligent actions led to the spill and that BP was further negligent in its oversight of the cleanup effort, resulting in volunteers falling ill due to inadequate protective equipment. In June, two lawsuits were filed against BP [JURIST report] alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) [18 USC § 1961 et seq.] statute. The lawsuits allege that BP purposefully defrauded the American public in order to increase company profits. Also in June, US Attorney General Eric Holder [official website] announced that the DOJ is reviewing whether any civil or criminal laws were violated [JURIST report] by BP resulting in the oil spill.




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


Rights group accuses Iraq of running secret prison
Matt Glenn on February 2, 2011 11:07 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] on Tuesday accused military officials [HRW report] overseen by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] of running a secret jail in Iraq that is not subject to inspection by international groups and torturing suspects [JURIST news archive] in another detention center. The report claims that the Iraqi Army's 56th Brigade controls the secret prison located in Camp Justice, and that Iraqi authorities ordered 280 detainees transferred there from Camp Honor in November 2010 days before international inspectors were to visit Camp Honor. The HRW report found that the 56th Brigade tortured suspects at Camp Honor, echoing a Los Angeles Times report [text] from last week. The Times found that the Camp Honor jail is run by the 56th Brigade rather than the Ministry of Justice, that prisoners face inhumane conditions, are held indefinitely and are often denied access to family members and lawyers. According to the HRW report, personnel in the overcrowded Camp Honor extracted confessions from suspected terrorists by beating them, suffocating them and making threats against their families. Deputy Justice Minister Buso Ibrahim denied the Times report [AFP report] last week, claiming that inmates can communicate with lawyers and family members and that they do not face torture or inhumane conditions. Ibrahim claimed the International Committee of the Red Cross [advocacy website] had visited Camp Honor, but the ICRC denied this, saying that it canceled the planned visit because the Iraqi government wanted to restrict its ability to talk to prisoners. Deputy Middle East director at HRW Joe Stark commented, "Revelations of secret jails in the heart of Baghdad completely undermine the Iraqi government's promises to respect the rule of law. The government needs to close these places or move them under control of the justice system, improve conditions for detainees, and make sure that anyone responsible for torture is punished."

In October, UN High Commissioner for Civil Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] called for the US and Iraq to investigate and prosecute [JURIST report] those responsible for alleged abuses that came to light after WikiLeaks [website] released documents showing extensive human rights abuses in Iraq and accusing US forces of turning prisoners over to Iraqi forces despite knowing those prisoners were likely to face torture. Days earlier, HRW called for the Iraqi and US governments to launch an investigation [JURIST report] and prosecute those responsible for alleged detainee abuse. The group said the WikiLeaks reports detail the US military's failure to prevent abuses, including beatings, burnings and lashings, of Iraqi detainees at the hands of their captors. In September, Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] accused the Iraqi government [JURIST report] of illegally detaining over 30,000 people and torturing many of them. Last April, HRW accused Iraqi authorities of torturing detainees [JURIST report] in another secret prison.




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


UN rights chief concerned over Egypt protest casualties
Julia Zebley on February 2, 2011 9:04 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official website] on Tuesday praised the efforts [press release] of Egyptian protesters while repeating concerns over casualties [JURIST report], calling on the nation's leaders to give citizens the democratic reform they demand. There are currently unconfirmed reports of 300 casualties and 3,000 injured. Citing Article 21 of the of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [text], Pillay stated that the will of the people should determine the government:
The authorities have a clear responsibility to protect civilians, including their right to life, and to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression. People must not be arbitrarily detained, simply for protesting or for expressing their political opinions—however unwelcome those opinions may be to those in power.
President Hosni Mubarak [Al Jazeera profile] has announced that he will not seek re-election [speech transcript], although he does not plan on stepping down nor leaving Egypt. Protesters were not mollified by this statement, and protests have increased substantially since his speech. The protesters released their official demands [AP report], which include the removal of Mubarak and no transfer of power to his son, Gamal; negotiations with the military only after Murbarak's departure; and free and fair elections for the presidency and parliament.

As of Thursday, more than 1,000 protesters have been reported as detained [JURIST report] as demonstrations against the 30-year reign of Mubarak continued. Meanwhile, Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei [Nobel Prize profile] expressed his willingness to lead a transitional government [BBC report]. Elbaradei, who previously led the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [official website], returned to Egypt and is reported to have joined the protests. According to some commentators, the unrest in Egypt is modeled after recent civil unrest in Tunisia that culminated with the resignation of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali [JURIST report] The similarities between recent protests was analyzed by Forum contributing editor L Ali Khan [academic profile], professor of law at Washburn University in the op-ed Constitutional Enforcement in Tunisia, Yemen, and Egypt [JURIST op-ed].




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


Federal judge dismisses government surveillance suit for lack of standing
Matt Glenn on February 2, 2011 8:45 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of California [official website] granted summary judgment [opinion, PDF] Monday in favor of the government in CCR v. Obama [case materials], ruling that the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) [advocacy website] lacked standing to challenge the legality of information obtained by Bush-era warrantless surveillance programs [JURIST news archive]. CCR argued that the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) and Protect America Act (POA) [S 1927 materials], which allowed the National Security Agency (NSA) [official website] to wiretap suspected terrorists without a warrant, chilled the CCR's ability to speak freely with its clients and probably intercepted communications that were subject to the attorney-client privilege. Judge Vaughn Walker, noting that the TSP was discontinued in 2007 and the POA expired in 2008 [JURIST report], ruled that CCR lacked standing to challenge the programs since it could not show its communications had actually been intercepted as required to state a claim under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) [text] or that it had suffered any harm. Walker explained: "In short, plaintiffs have not shown that they personally have suffered some actual or threatened injury as a result of the putatively illegal conduct, especially in light of the clear precedent requiring that the allegations of future injury be particular and concrete. Plaintiffs have therefore failed to establish standing for their First Amendment claim" [citations omitted]. CCR Senior Attorney Shayan Kadidal expressed displeasure with the ruling, saying [press release], "It is astonishing that President Obama's administration continues to fight to hold on to the fruits of a patently illegal surveillance program, even where that surveillance was directed at attorneys engaged in suing the government."

In October, the Supreme Court denied certiorari [JURIST report] in a case brought on behalf of CCR lawyers who sought to learn under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) whether the NSA had recorded their conversations with clients detained at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive]. The petition for certiorari followed a 2009 decision [JURIST report] by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit [official website] that a FOIA exception allows the NSA and Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] to withhold information or confirmation of the existence of information obtained by an intelligence program. In 2009, former DOJ attorney John Yoo defended the use of warrantless wiretaps, saying laws preventing them were outdated and contributed to the government's inability to prevent the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In April 2009, the DOJ announced that it had limited [JURIST report] the NSA's electronic surveillance after finding the NSA had committed privacy violations, but maintained that the information being received was still important.




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


HRW calls for end to police violence in Tunisia protests
Zach Zagger on February 2, 2011 7:15 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] has called for an end to police attacks and an investigation into the deaths of protesters in Tunisia. The protest movement in Tunisia ousted former president Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali [BBC profile], sending him into exile, and the UN reported this week that at least 219 have died as a result of the protests, including 72 killed in prison riots. In two reports this week, HRW is calling on the transitional government to investigate incidents of police violence against protesters and end police brutality [HRW reports]. It claims that a vast majority of protester deaths are due to police gunfire on crowds. They are urging the government to punish police action that goes beyond what is necessary to perform their duty. Eric Goldstein, deputy Middle East and North Africa director, issued a statement:
Things are moving fast in Tunisia, but finding out who opened fire on demonstrators and why can't wait. The units and commanders responsible for these apparently unlawful killings should be identified and held accountable.
A unity government has taken control and the new Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi has promised that there will be elections within six months.

Last week, Tunisia's Justice Minister Lazhar Karoui Chebbi announced that the country has issued an international arrest warrant [JURIST report] for ousted president Ben Ali. He, his wife and other family members face allegations that they illegally transferred money [AFP report] out of the country, possessed unlicensed weapons [CNN report] and incited armed violence. Earlier this month, UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Navi Pillay [official website] announced that UN experts would be sent to Tunisia [JURIST report] to assess the human rights situation and meet with the country's interim leaders. Also, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official website] has urged government leaders in Tunisia to initiate dialogue between all sides in an attempt to restore the rule of law [JURIST report]. The Tunisia Constitutional Council officially announced earlier this month that Ben Ali had permanently left the office of the presidency after he declared a state of emergency [JURIST reports] and left the country.




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