The COE report alleges that Thaci was the leader of the KLA Drenica Group, a criminal network that controlled the heroin trade and the black market trafficking of kidneys of executed Serbian and Albanian war prisoners. News of the report's accusations prompted the government to respond [press release], denying the allegations and calling them an attempt to harm Thaci's reputation following his party's victory in the nation's parliamentary elections last year. Claims of Kosovo's involvement in human organ trafficking originated in 2008 when former prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website] Carla Del Ponte [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] alleged in a book [JURIST report] about her time at the tribunal that roughly 300 Serbian and other non-Albanian prisoners were victims of organ trafficking during the war. That year, Serbian prosecutors condemned Albania's refusal to initiate [JURIST report] an investigation into allegations of organ trafficking in Kosovo. Albanian Prosecutor General Ina Rama refused to cooperate with Serbian war crimes prosecutor Vladimir Vukcevic [official website] and said that her country would only pursue the allegations if the ICTY decided to reopen its investigation.

Respondents are seeking damages from Samantar under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 [28 USC § 1350 text]. Samantar was minister of defense and later prime minister of Somalia from 1980 to 1990. Respondents claim that Samantar authorized torture and the extrajudicial killing of them and members of their family. The Isaaq clan, of which the respondents are members, was subjected to systematic persecution during Samantar's time in office before the collapse of the Somali government in 1991 [DOS backgrounder]. Samantar fled Somalia before the collapse of the government and now resides in Virginia.

Earlier this week the Supreme Council appointed a panel of judges [JURIST report] to amend Egypt's constitution [text] prior to public referendum. This decision was part of the transition plan put in place by ousted president Hosni Mubarak [Al Jazeera profile] before leaving office earlier this month. Last week the military pledged to lift the emergency laws [JURIST report] that have been in place since Mubarak assumed power. Prior to Mubarak's resignation, Egypt's government had reached out [JURIST report] to various opposition leaders in the wake of demonstrations that swept the country. Among those in the opposition that have been approached are the Muslim Brotherhood, the oldest and largest Islamic political group in the world. According to some commentators, the unrest in Egypt is closely related to the recent civil unrest in Tunisia [JURIST op-ed] that culminated last month with the resignation of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali [JURIST report].

Whether ... the official proponents of an initiative measure possess either a particularized interest in the initiative's validity or the authority to assert the State's interest in the initiative's validity, which would enable them to defend the constitutionality of the initiative upon its adoption or appeal a judgment invalidating the initiative, when the public officials charged with that duty refuse to do so.

When Judge Vaughn Walker of the Northern District of California struck down Proposition 8, then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and former attorney general and current Governor Jerry Brown [official website], who were originally defendants in the lawsuit, refused to continue defending the measure on appeal [JURIST report], leaving defendant-intervenors Project Marriage [advocacy website] and other groups to defend the law. In January, the Ninth Circuit also upheld [opinion, PDF] a lower court decision refusing to allow officials from Imperial County, California [JURIST report] to intervene, and Judge Stephen Reinhardt [FJC profile] issued a memorandum opinion [text, PDF] on his decision not to recuse himself [JURIST report]. The Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments [video; JURIST report] in the case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger [case materials] last December. The hearing was divided into two one-hour sessions, with the first section focusing on the issue of standing, and the second focusing on Proposition 8's constitutionality. In August, a three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit issued a stay [JURIST report] on Walker's ruling, pending appeal.

Earlier this month, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn (D) signed a bill [JURIST report] legalizing same-sex civil unions in the state. The "Illinois Religious Freedom and Civil Union Act," seeks to provide "adequate procedures for the certification and registration of a civil union" as well as to provide "persons entering into a civil union with the obligations, responsibilities, protections, and benefits afforded or recognized by the law of Illinois to spouses." Additionally, it would allow religious institutions within the state to choose whether to observe or officiate the union. Opponents fear that this bill will move Illinois closer to legalizing same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive] and threaten the sanctity of marriage. The new law is set to take effect on June 1. In contrast, last month the Wyoming Senate voted 20-10 in favor of a constitutional amendment [JURIST report] that would prevent the state from recognizing same-sex marriages from any jurisdiction. The decision, which was split down party lines, will advance to the state House of Representatives, where it needs a two-thirds vote to succeed. If approved there, it will need to be signed by Governor Matt Mead (R) and then appear as a referendum item on the 2012 ballot. The following day, the House Judiciary Committee also voted 5-4 [Star-Tribune report] to defeat House Bill 150, which would have recognized civil unions in the state.

The suggestion by the Prosecution that 32,000 pages of documents and 200 hours of video ... can be disclosed en masse to the Accused on a single day, with an expectation that he should be able to continuously review and incorporate this volume of material, if necessary, into the conduct of his defence is untenable. ... The Chamber is not satisfied that continuing with the trial proceedings, and allowing the Accused to later recall certain witnesses for further cross-examination following his review of the Disclosed Material, if necessary, is sufficient, in this instance, to ensure his fair trial rights. Moreover, it will not be, in practical terms, conducive to the smooth conduct of the trial. In reaching this conclusion the Chamber also notes that the pattern of disclosure violations in this case has continued and is mindful of the impact which this has had on the smooth and orderly conduct of the trial. ... The Chamber reiterates its deep concern about the volume of potentially exculpatory material which the Prosecution continues to disclose to the Accused, and the impact which this has had on the Accused's preparations and the smooth conduct of this trial.

Karadzic's trial was previously suspended [JURIST report] in November for a month to allow him to read 14,000 pages of evidence the prosecution sent to him in October. The court's decision to delay the trial was partially because of the prosecution's repeated violations of its obligation to disclose evidence to the accused. In September, the trial resumed [JURIST report] as Karadzic defended himself before the ICTY after repeated attempts to delay proceedings. The trial previously resumed in April [JURIST report], after the ICTY denied [judgment PDF, JURIST report] Karadzic's attempt [motion, PDF] to delay court proceedings, in which he argued a violation of his right to a fair hearing due to the court's rejection of evidentiary challenges. In March, Karadzic lost another motion to postpone his war crimes trial for charges committed during the Bosnia conflict. Following repeated delays in the proceedings, the ICTY judges warned in September that the trial might continue until 2014 [JURIST report], which is two years longer than expected.

In September 2007, a federal judge held that Tennessee's revised death penalty protocols [text, PDF; JURIST report], devised earlier that year by the Tennessee Department of Corrections at the request of then-governor Phil Bredesen, did not ensure that prisoners' are properly anesthetized before they receive a lethal injection and thus constitute "cruel and unusual" punishment. Bredesen ordered a moratorium on executions [executive order, PDF; JURIST report] earlier that year and directed the Tennessee Department of Corrections to review the manner in which death sentences are administered. Bredesen accepted new protocols and the state conducted its first execution [JURIST report] under the new rules in May 2007. The protocol included more detailed guidelines for administering lethal injections but still includes a controversial three-drug "cocktail" which some said may be ineffective in preventing inmates from suffering a painful death [JURIST report]. The number of executions that took place in the US in 2010 was down 12 percent from 2009, according to the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) [advocacy website] annual report [text, PDF; JURIST report]. DPIC attributes the decrease in executions to several factors, including controversy over lethal injections [JURIST news archive]. The report also states that a recent poll shows 61 percent of Americans would choose various alternative sentences over the death penalty as the proper punishment for murder. Executions resumed in the US in April 2008 after the Supreme Court lifted an effective ban on the death penalty by upholding the constitutionality of lethal injection [JURIST report].