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 Tuesday, November 22, 2011




Malaysia introduces stricter regulations on protests
Brandon Gatto on November 22, 2011 2:11 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Malaysia's government on Tuesday introduced legislation that will enforce new restrictions on public demonstrations, including a ban on street protests and other rules that opposition leaders believe are too repressive. Proposed by the National Front [party website], Malaysia's ruling party, and supported by Prime Minister Najib Razak [official profile], the bill, known as the Peaceful Assembly Bill [AP report], is expected to pass through Parliament quickly, and will require demonstrators to give police a 30-day notice of any protest. The police may then impose restrictions on the protest at their discretion, and even reject the proposed time and place for the demonstration. Additionally, street demonstrations are prohibited, as are protests near schools, hospitals, or places of worship. Statements made during protests cannot "promote ill will," and protesters can be fined up to 20,000 ringgit, or $6,200, if they break any of the rules. Although the ruling government party believes that the bill allows Malaysians to express concerns without putting public safety at risk, opposition leaders have accused Razak of reneging on his promise to make Malaysia a freer and more liberal society. Though he did not echo this opinion, Lim Chee Wee, President of the Malaysian Bar [advocacy website], stated that "[i]n its present form, the Bill is more restrictive than present law, and must be improved." Wee then recommended several amendments [press release] that could potentially make the bill more conforming to the Malayasian constitution [text, PDF].

The introduction of the Peaceful Assembly Bill comes just after Razak repealed Malaysia's widely criticized internal security laws [JURIST report], which allowed the imprisonment of individuals deemed to be national security threats for up to two years without trial. Although the prime minister has pledged that his administration will protect civil liberties, the Malaysian government has previously been criticized in response to its handling of protesters. In July, UN Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression Frank La Rue asserted [press release] that Malaysia's response to protests on July 9 [JURIST report] was too strong, and that such actions restrict the freedom of association while hindering the democratic process. In support of his claim, La Rue pointed to reports that the harsh reaction from Malaysian authorities resulted in injuries, at least one death, and more than 1,600 arrests in the nation's capital of Kuala Lumpur.




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


US trade commission clears Apple in HTC patent case
Jamie Reese on November 22, 2011 1:54 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US International Trade Commission (USITC) [official website] ruled [text, PDF] Monday for Apple [corporate website; Bloomberg backgrounder] on a patent complaint [JURIST report] brought by HTC [corporate website; Bloomberg backgrounder]. The USITC found that Apple had not violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 [PDF] by reasons of infringement of Patent Nos. 6,658,146, 6,683,978, 6,775,417 and 7,043,087 [texts]. These patents relate to HTC's recently acquired subsidiary S3 Graphics Co. The USITC ruling rejects the request to limit imports of MAC computers, the iPhone and the iPad. The decision also calls into question the rationale of the S3 acquisition [Bloomberg report] and could put pressure on HTC stock shares. HTC said it may challenge the ruling in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [official website], which specializes in patent law.

In July, USITC ruled that HTC infringed two Apple patents [JURIST report] relating to the Android operating system. This ruling came days after Apple filed a complaint against Samsung [JURIST report] in an effort to bar importation of Samsung's smartphones and tablets. Apple claimed Samsung's "Galaxy" line copies its iPhone and iPad technology. This complaint came just weeks after Samsung filed a similar complaint [JURIST report] seeking to prevent Apple from importing iPads and iPhones. Samsung claimed Apple violated five patents also related to smartphones and tablets. In March 2010, Apple also filed suit against HTC [JURIST report] in the US District Court for the District of Delaware [official website] for 10 patents involving various areas of technology.




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


Philippines ex-president sued by relatives of massacre victims
Sarah Posner on November 22, 2011 12:10 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The relatives of 57 people killed in a 2009 Philippines massacre on Tuesday sued former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] for allegedly assisting the perpetrators. The families seek five million pesos (USD $345,000) from Arroyo for damages caused by her alleged support of the Ampatuan family [AFP report], whom government prosecutors claim were behind the November 2009 Maguindanao Massacre [CSM backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. Arroyo has denied any wrongdoing. The lawsuit comes at a particularly difficult time for Arroyo after Philippine authorities formally charged [JURIST report] her on Saturday with electoral sabotage, a day after she was arrested on a warrant [text] issued for charges of corruption and election fraud that occurred during her time as president.

Last week, Arroyo and her husband attempted to leave the country after posting bond in order to seek medical treatment for Arroyo, but the government refused to allow them transit. In June, the Philippines Supreme Court [official website] said that it would allow the live broadcast [JURIST report] of the November 2009 Maguindanao Massacre trial subject to guidelines set by the court. The court decided to allow broadcast coverage in this particular situation involving the trial of several members of a clan accused of killing 57 people, including 31 journalists, supporting a rival political candidate. Earlier in June, a Philippine court froze USD $23 million worth of assets [JURIST report] owned by the Ampatuan family, who are accused of ordering the 2009 slayings, while investigators determine how the Ampatuans accumulated accumulated the assets.




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


Connecticut high court upholds state's death penalty law
Max Slater on November 22, 2011 11:48 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Connecticut Supreme Court [official website] on Monday upheld [opinion, PDF] the state's death penalty [JURIST news archive] law. The court's ruling affirmed the death sentence of a man convicted of murdering a 13-year old boy with a sledgehammer in 1997. In its defense of the death penalty, the court invoked provisions of the Connecticut Constitution [text] that permit capital punishment, declaring, "In article first, § 8, and article first, § 19, our state constitution makes repeated textual references to capital offenses and thus expressly sustains the constitutional validity of such a penalty in appropriate circumstances." The majority opinion claimed that these state constitutional provisions, which closely mirror the Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments [text] to the US constitution imply that the death penalty does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, nor does it violate persons' due process rights. The dissenting judge [text, PDF] disagreed with the majority's reasoning, posing the rhetorical question, "[has] our thirst for this ultimate penalty now been slaked, or do we, the people of Connecticut, continue down this increasingly lonesome road?" The court's decision could have a ripple effect on future death penalty jurisprudence in Connecticut.

The death penalty continues to arouse legal, political and moral controversy nationwide. Two weeks ago, the US Supreme Court [official website] declined [JURIST report] to hear the case of a Texas death row inmate who was allegedly convicted partially on the basis of race. Earlier in November, the Ohio Supreme Court [official website] announced [JURIST report] that it was forming a committee to ensure that the death penalty was not administered arbitrarily. In March, Illinois abolished capital punishment [JURIST report], concluding [press release] that there was no way to rid the capital punishment system of its discriminatory flaws. In 2009, New Mexico repealed its death penalty [JURIST report] on similar grounds to Illinois, asserting that the state could not possibly administer the death penalty impartially. In 2005, the Connecticut House of Representatives [official website] voted down legislation[JURIST report] that would have eliminated the state's death penalty.




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


UK appeals court rules Iraq abuse probe lacks independence
Jennie Ryan on November 22, 2011 11:20 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A UK appeals court on Tuesday ruled [judgment text] that a special commission charged with investigating the alleged abuse of Iraqi civilians in British-controlled detention facilities between March 2003 and December 2008 lacks independence. The Court of Appeals ordered Defence Secretary Liam Fox [official website] to reconsider his refusal to open a single public inquiry into allegations of UK military abuse. The Court of Appeals also found that the existing inquiries into the abuse allegations fail to meet the requirements of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights [text] which protects against inhumane treatment. This decision reverses a UK High Court decision from December 2010 denying the appeal [JURIST report] of more than 100 Iraqi citizens to open a single public inquiry into allegations of abuse by members of the British Armed Forces. The High Court previously held that the inquiries initiated by the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) were sufficient and that further public inquiry would be unnecessary in this case. Lead claimant Ali Zaki Mousa said [press release] that the decision "has restored our confidence in the British people."

The hearings into Fox's refusal to open public inquiries began in November 2010 [JURIST report]. The Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) [law firm website], the group representing the Iraqi civilians, submitted videos to support claims that UK soldiers and interrogators abused Iraqi detainees in British internment facilities. In September 2010, a Ministry of Defence (MOD) [official website] report found that the UK's treatment of detainees complies with domestic and international law [JURIST report]. In July 2010, UK Prime Minister David Cameron [official website] announced that he would create a panel [JURIST report] to investigate claims that British government agents were complicit in the torture of terrorism suspects held overseas. The investigation stems from a civil action, brought by 12 ex-detainees who allege that British agents participated in their abuse while they were held in prisons in Pakistan, Morocco and other countries. The UK will ask them to drop their lawsuits in exchange for possible compensation and a promise that the impending inquiry will fully investigate their claims. In June, the UK government indicated that it will issue a new set of regulations regarding the use of information obtained via torture [JURIST report] as claims of complicity in torture were made against the government in a Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] report [materials] released the same day.




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


Amnesty report: Egypt military rulers abused protesters, violated human rights
Rebecca DiLeonardo on November 22, 2011 11:04 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The ruling military council in Egypt has committed numerous human rights violations, including abuse of protesters and journalists who voice their dissatisfaction with the government, according to an Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] report [text, PDF; press release] released Tuesday. The report alleges that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) [NYT backgrounder] has used violence and torture to put down government protests and discourage political dissent. The report criticizes SCAF for its conduct despite its repeated promises to protect free expression and encourage political openness. AI expressed concern that the human rights violations may be equal to those committed under former president Hosni Mubarak [JURIST news archive]:
In the name of ensuring security and stability, the authorities have committed numerous human rights violations, ignoring the very demands for social justice and fundamental freedoms that triggered the uprising. Indeed, 10 months later, the SCAF has been moving further and further from meeting the human rights demands voiced by millions of Egyptians during the "25 January Revolution" and the promises that ensued from it. Since February, the SCAF have issued a number of laws that have been detrimental to the protection of human rights. Some were meant to appease sentiments of insecurity ... others appear aimed at discouraging criticism of the authorities and protest. The recent endorsement in full of the Emergency Law and its expansion ... has been considered the greatest erosion of rights since the January uprising.
AI has called for SCAF to end impunity for military officials who abuse Egyptians and to allow an independent agency to investigate alleged human rights violations. Also Tuesday, the Egyptian military announced its intention to turn over governing power by July 1, 2012 [AP report].

On Monday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [official profile] and a group of independent human rights experts issued a joint statement [JURIST report] "express[ing] alarm at the degree of violence and deterioration of the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association which have led to loss of life in Egypt." Last Friday, as many as 50,000 protesters took to Tahrir Square in Egypt [JURIST report], decrying the military's continued rule over the nation since this year's revolution, and on Saturday were reportedly met with a violent reprisal from police forces. The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) [party website] organized the protests earlier this week [press release] in an attempt to force the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to "intervene and withdraw the supra-constitutional principles proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Ali Elselmy." The MB believes the proposed law [text] would integrate the military into the political system in violation of the constitution [text]. Since the protests began, reportedly more than 500 people have been injured and 18 arrested [Al Ahram report]. Struggles began when riot police attempted to dismantle a tent camp [Al Jazeera report] memorializing activists killed in the revolution. Latest reports reveal that protesters were attempting to storm the Ministry of the Interior [official website] and were deterred by police firing rubber bullets. Many fear the recent protests will impede upcoming elections. The November 28 election is considered the first free election following the overthrow [JURIST report] of Mubarak in February.




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


Turkish journalists on trial for alleged coup plot
Sarah Posner on November 22, 2011 11:03 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Trial began Tuesday for 13 journalists accused of plotting to overthrow the Islamic government in Turkey. The trial lasted only four hours before being adjourned to await a decision from Turkey's high court about whether the presiding judge can hear the case amid allegations by the defense counsel that the judge lacks impartiality [AP report]. After re-convening December 26, the court will decide whether the journalists, who have been in jail for nine months, will be released. Two of the defendants are accused of being part of Ergenekon [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive], a secular group suspected of planning to overthrow [JURIST report] the ruling Justice Development Party (AKP) [party website, in Turkish]. The 13 journalists claim that the charges are no more than an attempt to silence opposition based on allegedly fabricated evidence [BBC report]. However, the government maintains that the charges are based solely on the defendants' criminal activities and not the writings or words of the journalists. The case has sparked division in Turkey over media rights in the country.

In August, a Turkish court issued arrest warrants [JURIST report] for seven generals and admirals accused of creating anti-government websites in 2009. A number of other senior military officials are in detention for a separate investigation of the Balyoz Security Operation Plan (also known as "Operation Sledgehammer") [Taraf report, in Turkish; JURIST news archive], a military plot to overthrow the Islamic-rooted government. The "Sledgehammer" plot is similar to the Ergenekon conspiracy. The Ergenekon group is alleged to be involved in bombings, political assassination plots and the death of journalist Hrant Dink. The probe into the Ergenekon conspiracy has been criticized as an attempt by the AKP to silence opposition and further its imposition of Islamic principles [JURIST report] in violation of Turkey's secular constitution. Trials against the Ergenekon group [JURIST report] opened over two years ago with more than 200 suspects in custody.




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


Bahrain admits use of excessive force against pro-democracy protesters
Jennie Ryan on November 22, 2011 10:08 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Bahrain [JURIST news archive] government on Monday admitted to the use of excessive force against pro-democracy protesters in the region early this year. The admission is a reversal of the country's previous characterization of its crackdown on protesters. Prior to this admission, the Bahraini government defended its actions [CNN report], which allegedly resulted in the deaths of more than 30 protesters, as necessary to maintain public safety. The government's statement comes just days before a report is expected on the findings of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) [official website] is set to be released. The BICI, assembled by King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa [official proflie], is tasked with conducting an investigation into the treatment of protesters by government officials. The BICI report is expected to be released Wednesday.

Bahrain continues to deal with the fallout from the pro-democracy protests earlier this year. Last month, a Bahrain court began hearing the appeals of 20 medical staff members [JURIST report] who were convicted in September of participating in the protests against the ruling regime. Earlier in October, Bahrain granted retrials for the medics who were convicted and sentenced [JURIST reports] by the National Safety Court of Appeal to terms ranging from five to 10 years imprisonment. In June, Khalifa announced that an independent commission will investigate human rights violations [JURIST report] related to the country's pro-democracy protests. Earlier that month, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official websites] announced that Bahrain agreed to permit a UN commission [JURIST report] to investigate human rights violations related to protests. In April, human rights organizations including Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Doctors Without Borders (DWB) [advocacy websites] criticized Bahrain for rampant human rights abuses [JURIST report] related to anti-government protests.




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


South Africa lawmakers approve controversial secrecy bill
Alexandra Malatesta on November 22, 2011 9:50 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The South African National Assembly (NA) [official website] passed a controversial state secrets [JURIST news archive] bill on Tuesday designed to protect state secrets related to national security. The African National Congress (ANC) [party website], which holds a majority in the NA, was responsible for pushing the legislation through by a vote of 229-107. The bill would criminalize the possession and distribution [Reuters report] of information valuable to the state and could impose imprisonment of up to 25 years. The bill has received extensive criticism for being reminiscent of Apartheid [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive] legislation and exposing the country to potential corruption. Nobel Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu [BBC profile] has publicly criticized the bill by labeling it insulting to the field of journalism [BBC report] and a step backwards from achieving democracy. The bill must pass through the National Council of Provinces for further consideration [All Africa report] and obtain the signature of the president.

Other nations have also struggled with balancing citizens' rights with the need to protect state secrets. In August, US Attorney General Eric Holder [official profile] invoked the state secrets privilege to block evidence [JURIST report] in a lawsuit against the FBI over its investigation into Muslim mosques. Holder had ordered a review [JURIST report] of all government claims invoking the state secrets privilege in 2009. Last year, the Chinese government revised [JURIST report] its often-criticized state secrets law to require Internet and telecommunications companies to inform on customers who share state secrets.




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


Egypt military council issues anti-corruption law
Alexandra Malatesta on November 22, 2011 9:17 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Egypt's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) [NYT backgrounder] on Tuesday announced an amendment to a criminal law that would punish those who have contributed to the corruption of politics and damaged the interests of the nation. If convicted, repercussions would include a five-year bar from joining political life [Reuters report], removal from any positions of leadership and the loss of one's membership in parliament and local counsel. Protesters criticized the military's announcement for being "too little, too late" and expressed fear that criminal action would be too slow to prevent former members of Hosni Mubarak's party, the National Democratic Party (NDP), from running in and impeding the upcoming election. Egypt's deputy prime minister for political development Ali al-Selmi said that the law would apply to officials [JURIST report] who are found guilty of financial crimes and abuse of power including officials elected to parliament. However, there is still concern that without an official ban on former NDP members, who have used wealth and connections to secure parliamentary seats in the past to advance personal interests, they may once again regain power. Elections for the lower house of parliament are set to begin on November 28.

Proposals for this amendment to the Egyptian political corruption law were criticized by Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] in October for their potential for abuse [JURIST report]. HRW reported that the amendments, proposed by the Egyptian Cabinet of Ministers [official website], would allow authorities to imprison anyone convicted of crimes involving "political corruption," which the organization alleges are vaguely defined, as well as deprive convicted persons of their rights to vote and run for office. As a result of this vague definition, HRW feared individuals will be convicted simply for association with certain political groups and not on the basis of actual criminal activity. While HRW recognized the interest the new government has in keeping corrupt former officials from affecting the direction the country's government takes into the future, it maintained that these amendments are too arbitrary to be effective in this way. Instead, HRW recommends that Egypt refrain from basing judgments on the ability to hold political authority on past or present associations and require clear and convincing evidence that the "individual in question knowingly and actively furthered criminal practices of the organization." The proposals at issue seek to amend the country's 1952 "Law on Political Treachery," which would be renamed "The Political Corruption Law."




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


ICC prosecutor in Libya to discuss trials of Gaddafi's son, intelligence chief
Jaimie Cremeans on November 22, 2011 9:04 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo [official profile] arrived in Libya [press release] Tuesday to discuss plans for the trials of recently arrested Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, son of late former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi [BBC profile], and Abdullah al-Senussi, former Libyan chief of intelligence, for crimes against humanity. Ocampo will meet with Libyan officials to find out what their national plan for trials and proceedings are, as well as discuss where the two men will be tried for international crimes. Ocampo said:
Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi must face justice. ... Their arrest is a crucial step in bringing to justice those most responsible for crimes committed in Libya. This is not a military or political issue, it is a legal requirement.
Ocampo also said that it will ultimately be up to ICC judges to decide where the trials will be held.

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi was arrested [JURIST report] by Libyan opposition forces Friday, and the arrest of al-Senussi was confirmed [Channels report] by the Libyan National Transitional Council [official website] Monday. The ICC issued arrest warrants for Muammar Gaddafi, his son and al-Senussi in June, after Ocampo requested the warrants [JURIST reports] in May. The warrants were issued for crimes against the Libyan people, including shooting, torture, unlawful arrests and forced disappearances of civilians. Muammar Gaddafi was killed [JURIST report] by opposition forces in October.




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


UN rights experts urge restraint in Egypt
Drew Singer on November 22, 2011 8:42 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [official profile] and a group of independent human rights experts on Monday called on Egyptian authorities to guarantee the protection of human rights and civil liberties during the country's most recent incidents of civilian-police clashes [JURIST report]. The rights experts, including the UN special rapporteurs on summary executions, freedom of expression, human rights defenders and freedom of peaceful assembly issued a joint statement [text] "express[ing] alarm at the degree of violence and deterioration of the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association which have led to loss of life in Egypt." The secretary-general's statement [text] reads in its entirety:
The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about the violence in Egypt during the last few days, particularly in Cairo. He deplores the loss of life and the many injuries. The Secretary-General calls on the transitional authorities to guarantee the protection of human rights and civil liberties for all Egyptians, including the right to peaceful protest. He urges restraint and calm by all parties to enable a peaceful and inclusive electoral process as part of Egypt's transition to democracy and the early establishment of civilian rule."
Many fear the recent protests will impede upcoming elections. The November 28 election is considered the first free election following the overthrow [JURIST report] of Hosni Mubarak [JURIST news archive] in February.

As many as 50,000 protesters took to Tahrir Square in Egypt on Friday, decrying the military's continued rule over the nation since this year's revolution, and on Saturday were reportedly met with a violent reprisal from police forces. The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) [party website] organized the protests earlier this week [press release] in an attempt to force the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) [NYT backgrounder] to "intervene and withdraw the supra-constitutional principles proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Ali Elselmy." The MB believes the proposed law [text] would integrate the military into the political system in violation of the constitution [text]. Since the protests began, reportedly more than 500 people have been injured and 18 arrested [Al Ahram report]. Struggles began when riot police attempted to dismantle a tent camp [Al Jazeera report] memorializing activists killed in the revolution. Latest reports reveal that protesters were attempting to storm the Ministry of the Interior [official website] and were deterred by police firing rubber bullets.




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


US Army sergeant sentenced to 5 years in Afghan civilian killings
Drew Singer on November 22, 2011 7:27 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A five-soldier jury on Friday convicted Army Staff Sgt. David Bram, 27, for a list of charges stemming from his attempt to cover up drug use in his platoon and also to kill Afghan civilians. Bram was sentenced to five years in prison [News Tribune report] for solicitation to commit premeditated murder and failure to report crimes including murder. He was found not guilty on charges relating to an alleged incident where he planted an AK-47 magazine near an Afghan civilian after he shot and killed him in January 2010. Bram is the sixth soldier from the 5th Stryker Brigade to be charged in connection with the three Afghan deaths, which took place between January and May of last year in Afghanistan's Kandahar province. A military investigation revealed that soldiers from the brigade had been plotting since 2009 to kill unarmed Afghans and stage them to look like casualties of combat. Another soldier, Specialist Jeremy Morlock pleaded guilty [JURIST report] in March to three counts of murder as well as single counts of assault, conspiracy, obstructing justice and illegal drug use in exchange for a maximum sentence of 24 years in prison. Morlock described Bram's involvement in his plea agreement, claiming that Bram overhead other soldiers planning civilian deaths and told Morlock that it was clear to go ahead with one of the killings in January 2010. Bram faced up to 21 years in prison if convicted of all charges against him.

This does not mark the first time Bram will face charges before a military tribunal for misconduct. Bram was court-martialed last year [JURIST report] for charges unrelated to the murders. He was accused of severely beating an Army private in his unit to keep the soldier from informing superiors about alleged drug abuse within the unit. The charges included conspiracy to commit assault and battery, unlawfully striking another soldier, violating a lawful order, dereliction of duty, cruelty, maltreatment and endeavoring to impede an investigation. The probe into 12 members of the 5th Stryker Brigade regarding the civilian deaths began in May 2010 [JURIST report]. Staff Sgt. Robert Stevens, another member of the brigade, pleaded guilty in December [JURIST report] to shooting two unarmed Afghan farmers following a plea agreement that will allow him to remain in the military after serving a nine month sentence and testifying against other soldiers accused of terrorizing civilians.




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

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


LATEST OP-ED

In Alabama, "Back Door" Restrictions on Abortion and Roe
DOMESTIC
LaJuana Davis
Cumberland School of Law

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