The Council of Ministers, since recording its appreciation [of the revolution's martyrs], have achieved on the ground security, stability and the return of discipline to the Egyptian streets after the success of the Council of Ministers to persuade the powers of different national protest groups to end the sit-in Tahrir Square, which lasted for long days since the 8th of July, but emphasized the importance of upholding national unity and rallying together to achieve the economic and democratic development to achieve the goals of the glorious revolution. The Council of Ministers see that the time has come to leave all Egyptians to work freely in order to compensate for the lost country of production and rise to the aspirations of the people in the levels of quality of life.

Protests continue in Egypt as many believe the interim government is not progressing toward change quickly enough. In April, an Egyptian military court convicted blogger Maikel Nabil [JURIST report] and sentenced him to three years in prison for criticizing the army and raising questions over reform in the wake of revolution. He posted an article on his blog [text, in Arabic] on March 7 saying the army had beaten, tortured and killed protesters, including some who were cooperating with security forces. He was then sentenced without a formal hearing and without his lawyers present. In March, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces unveiled an interim constitution that allows the council to retain control over the country until an elected government is installed. The document vests the military council with presidential powers [Al-Ahram report], including the abilities to introduce legislation, veto existing laws and act as Egypt's representative to the international community.

Alabama lawmakers earlier this week filed a response [JURIST report] to groups seeking a preliminary injunction against the controversial immigration law. Attorneys for Alabama state officials, including Governor Robert Bentley [official website], argue that the state law is not preempted by federal immigration law and that the text reflects a "spirit of cooperation with the federal government." Lawsuits filed by the US Department of Justice [JURIST report], the Methodist, Episcopalian and Roman Catholic churches and three dozen plaintiffs represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and National Immigration Law Center (NILC) [advocacy websites], were consolidated last week. The Alabama immigration legislation, which was signed into law [JURIST report] by Governor Bentley in June, is one of the most rigid immigration reform laws passed recently. In addition to authorizing detention of individuals on reasonable suspicion they are illegal immigrants, the law provides harsh restrictions on employment for illegal immigrants. Businesses cited multiple times for hiring undocumented workers could lose their business licenses. Furthermore, undocumented immigrants are prohibited from applying for a job, and anyone transporting or harboring undocumented immigrants will be punished by a fine or jail time. Sixteen countries filed briefs [JURIST report] in the Alabama district court against the controversial Alabama immigration law last week, arguing that the recently enacted law unfairly treats citizens [Montgomery Advertiser report] of those countries currently residing in Alabama and sanctions discriminatory treatment based on ethnicity.

Earlier this month, Ouattara set up a commission of inquiry [JURIST report] to investigate crimes and human rights violations that took place during the violence following the presidential elections in which former president Gbagbo refused to leave office after losing the election. In April, Gbagbo was captured and forced from office [JURIST report] after refusing to leave despite losing last November's election to Ouattara, which resulted in months of fighting between Ouattara's and Gbagbo's forces. Also that month, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] urged Ouattara to conduct an investigation [JURIST report] into alleged atrocities carried out by his forces in its attempts to secure the presidency. According to the report, the FRCI killed more than 100 civilians, raped at least 20 supporters of Gbagbo and burned at least 10 villages in March. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) [official website] also reported the deaths of at least 800 civilians [JURIST report] in the Ivory Coast town of Duekoue as a result of intercommunal violence.

In the run up to Presidential and Legislative elections in DRC due to take place in November 2011, bringing perpetrators of crimes under international law to justice and ensuring reparations for victims must not just be an electoral priority; it must be translated into concrete measures...The neglected victims of these terrible crimes need justice - they must be able to contribute to the reform process in a meaningful way and have their voices heard by the government.

Last month, the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in DR Congo (MONUSCO) in conjunction with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official websites] released a report [text, PDF; JURIST report] accusing soldiers in the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FARDC) of committing mass rape. The report is the first to officially provide evidence that national forces perpetrated mass rape, as opposed to reports of opposition forces using it as a weapon [JURIST report]. In May, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and the UN Security Council [official websites] called for continued reforms [JURIST report] in the DRC in order to strengthen the country's rule of law. DRC has been struggling with a number of human rights issues. In June, a military court sentenced four policemen to death [JURIST report] for killing prominent human rights activist Floribert Chebeya last year. In early October, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] called for the DRC government [JURIST report] to arrest general Bosco Ntaganda pursuant to an outstanding warrant for war crimes issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website]. Earlier that same week French authorities arrested a leader [JURIST report] of the FDLR for crimes committed by that group in the DRC. In October, UN peacekeeping forces and the DRC government arrested Mai Mai Cheka [JURIST report] for allegedly leading a rebel group responsible for mass rapes in the country. In December 2009, HRW urged MONUC to stop funding military groups [JURIST report] in the country that are committing human rights abuses. MONUC has been operating in DRC since 1999. The conflict in the DRC has claimed more than four million lives and has been ongoing since 1983. MONUC has overseen elections and continues to provide armed protection for civilians in certain areas, particularly the North and South Kivus provinces.

Apple has been battling a number of lawsuits recently. In July, Apple prevailed in a complaint [JURIST report] against HTC [corporate website] when the US International Trade Commission (USITC) [official website] ruled against HTC [JURIST report] for infringement of patents related to cell phones that run the Android operating system (OS). Apple filed a complaint against Samsung [JURIST report] earlier that month in an effort to bar importation of Samsung's smartphones and tablets. Apple claimed Samsung's "Galaxy" line copies its iPhone and iPad technology. The complaint came just a week after Samsung filed a similar complaint [JURIST report] seeking to prevent Apple from importing iPads and iPhones. Samsung claimed that Apple violated five patents also related to smartphones and tablets. In addition, Samsung filed a patent infringement suit [Bloomberg report] against Apple in the High Court in London in June. Finnish telecommunications company Nokia [corporate website] announced in June that it had entered into an agreement [press release; JURIST report] with Apple, settling all patent disputes between the parties and directing Apple to pay royalties to Nokia for the term of the agreement.

JI claimed responsibility in the 2002 Bali nightclub bombings, which killed 202 people and injured 240 others. They were also implicated in the 2004 bombing of the US embassy in Jakarta and a series of further bombings in Bali during 2005. Last year, the Obama administration was considering bringing charges in a Washington, DC, federal court against Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Riduan Isamuddin [BBC profile], the suspected planner [JURIST report] of the 2002 Bali nightclub bombing. Isamuddin, also known as Hambali, is the former military commander of JI and was allegedly the main link between JI and al Qaeda [GlobalSecurity backgrounder] before his capture in 2003. A decision on how to try him has not been announced, although Indonesian police requested access to Hambali in 2009 [JURIST report]. In 2008, three JI members were executed [JURIST report] following convictions for their involvement in those bombings. Before their executions, the three men had called on Islamic militant groups to carry out retribution attacks, which resulted in stepped-up security in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta and a warning [text] issued by the US embassy in Indonesia.

Mark can never again be a judge or lawyer. His life as a public office holder is over. A lengthy prison sentence does no more for the public's protection than a shorter sentence, or no sentence at all. The offense for which Ciavarella stands convicted is unique in that as a practical matter the perpetrator must never be involved in public affairs.

Ciavarella's trial began [JURIST report] in early February. In July 2010, Judge Edwin Kosik accepted [JURIST report] a plea agreement [text, PDF] from former Pennsylvania judge Michael Conahan for his involvement in the juvenile sentencing scandal. Conahan now faces a 20-year prison sentence, a fine of up to $250,000 and disbarment. Kosik had previously rejected [JURIST report] joint plea agreements [text, PDF] from Conahan and Ciavarella, finding that plea bargaining to honest services fraud and tax evasion charges demonstrated that the men did not accept responsibility and that the disbarment and 87-month prison sentences were too lenient [JURIST op-ed]. In October 2009, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania [official website] overturned [opinion, PDF] 6,500 juvenile-offender convictions issued by Ciavarella [JURIST report]. Conahan and Ciavarella were indicted in September 2009, following a withdrawal of the guilty pleas they entered [JURIST reports] in February 2009.

The baseline assumptions of our federal system are that States have inherent, plenary police power and that cooperative law enforcement is the norm. States, unlike federal agencies, are not creatures of the federal Congress and do not depend on federal statutes for authorization. It is, moreover, commonplace for state and federal law to prohibit the same conduct, and this Court has repeatedly emphasized that state officials are primarily governed by state law even when they cooperate with federal law enforcement officials. Thus, a conclusion that States are completely foreclosed from enforcing federal law or from enacting state laws that prohibit conduct made unlawful by Congress could be supported only by the clearest of congressional statements. Here, far from foreclosing such cooperative law enforcement efforts, the federal immigration laws expressly contemplate such cooperation and go so far as to compel federal cooperation with state efforts.

In a preview of how it might rule should it decide to hear the case, the Supreme Court in May ruled [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting [Cornell LII backgrounder; JURIST report] that Arizona's controversial employment related immigration law [materials] is not preempted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) [text]. Last year, the DOJ sued [JURIST report] the state of Arizona and Governor Jan Brewer [official website] over SB 1070, arguing that both the Constitution and federal law "do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country." The agency also claimed that the federal government has preeminent authority to regulate immigration matters and that the enforcement of the Arizona law is counterproductive to the national immigration policy. SB 1070, which criminalizes illegal immigration and requires police officers to question an individual's immigration status if the officer has a "reasonable suspicion" to believe an individual is in the country illegally, was signed into law [JURIST report] in April of last year. The law faces several additional legal challenges including a class-action law suit [JURIST report] filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [official website] on behalf of a number of advocacy groups and several private individuals. A challenge brought by several Tucson police officers claiming the law could not be properly implemented without racially profiling was dismissed [JURIST reports] late last year.

[The] activities of Pham Minh Hoang were entirely the right thing to do. From signing petitions against China's bauxite mining in the Highlands and participating in seminars on national sovereignty in the South China Sea, to voicing criticism of the regime's mistakes and fighting for democracy, Pham Minh Hoang has the right to the conscience and duty of the people of Vietnam for the country. Even participation in a political party such as the Vietnam Reform Party (Viet Tan), peaceful activities to fight for his views is normal in any society that is truly free and includes democratic and human rights. Only in Vietnam, that did not stop them from conviction. The Communist Party wants to maintain a one-party dictatorship, not democracy and accept any difference any ideas.

Vietnam has acquired a troubling record of jailing peaceful opposition forces. Earlier this month, a Vietnamese appeals court upheld the seven-year sentence of prominent rights lawyer and dissident Cu Huy Ha Vu, convicted in April [JURIST report] of carrying out anti-state propaganda. The court dismissed the appeal [AP report] despite Vu's arguments that his advocating for a multi-party system did not mean he was against the Communist party. In January 2010, a Vietnamese court sentenced [JURIST report] writer and democracy activist Pham Thanh Nghien to four years in prison on charges of spreading anti-state propaganda. That same month, a Vietnamese court convicted four democracy activists [JURIST report] of subversion. Following the one-day trial, human rights lawyer Le Cong Dinh [JURIST news archive] was sentenced to five years in prison. The four defendants were accused of activities aimed at ending communist rule in Vietnam. Dinh admitted to advocating multi-party democracy in Vietnam and joining the banned Democracy Party. Prior to Dinh's conviction, a Vietnamese court sentenced [JURIST report] pro-democracy dissident Tran Anh Kim in December 2009 to five-and-a-half years in prison for subversion.