Illinois campaign contribution restrictions were passed in 2009 as part of election reform efforts following the indictment of former governor Rod Blagojevich [personal website; JURIST news archive], who was arrested [JURIST report] in December 2008 on corruption charges including allegations that he conspired to sell the Senate seat left vacant by US President Barack Obama. Blagojevich was convicted in June on 18 counts of corruption. He was previously found guilty of making false statements to the FBI [JURIST report], but the jury in that trial remained deadlocked on the 23 other charges. The prosecutors dropped some of the charges [JURIST report] to simplify the case for retrial, including some for racketeering. The Illinois State Senate voted unanimously [JURIST report] to convict Blagojevich of abuse of power and remove him from office in January 2009.

Recently, activists have called for the reformation of laws involving reproductive rights in Argentina. In 2010 Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] published a report [text; press release] on the state of reproductive rights in Argentina. The report criticized, among other things, the lack of access to safe abortions, indicating that over 20 percent of obstetric deaths are attributable to unsafe abortions, making them the leading cause of maternal mortality in the country. Abortion is a controversial issue in Latin America. Abortion remains controversial in predominately Catholic Latin America. Last year the Supreme Court of Mexico upheld [JURIST report] a state right-to-life constitutional amendment that says life begins at conception. The amendment effectively bans abortions in Mexico's northern Baja California state. In 2008 Uruguayan President Tabare Vazquez vetoed [JURIST report] legislation that would have partially decriminalized abortion in the country. In countries such as Colombia [JURIST report] and Argentina [HRW report], criminal penalties may be decreased when the mother's life is at risk.

According to the many testimonies gathered and received by Amnesty International over the past year, people are almost invariably beaten and otherwise tortured and ill-treated during arrest, often during the subsequent transportation to detention centres, and routinely upon arrival at the detention centres and afterwards. Among the victims are children aged under 18. The torture and other ill-treatment appear intended to punish, to intimidate, to coerce "confessions" and perhaps to send a warning to others as to what they may expect should they also be arrested. In almost all cases the detainees are held in incommunicado detention, often for lengthy periods, with no access to visits from their families or lawyers in conditions which all too often amount to enforced disappearance.

Human rights groups have harshly criticized the Syrian government since crackdowns against protesters began last year. On Tuesday a UN expert on Syria declared that the human rights situation in Syria is worsening [JURIST report]. Earlier in March the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] passed a resolution [JURIST report] denouncing Syrian officials' crackdown on human rights. The resolution came on the heels of a demand for a cease-fire [JURIST report] by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official website] in late February. Earlier in February, the UN-appointed Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria accused the government of violating international human rights law [JURIST report] after finding that Syrian forces are engaging in torture and killings under orders from high level government officials. Also in February, Pillay and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [official profile] called for an end to the violence in Syria, with Pillay asking the UN Security Council to refer the situation in Syria [JURIST reports] to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff [BBC profile] in November signed a law [JURIST report] establishing a truth commission to investigate human rights abuses perpetrated by the military from 1946 to 1988. In August 2011 Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] urged Brazil to repeal its amnesty law [JURIST report]. Other Latin American countries have recently taken steps to end amnesties for their military dictatorships. In March, AI urged government officials in El Salvador [JURIST report] to repeal [press release] a 1993 amnesty law that prevents any investigation [JURIST report] into killings committed during the country's 12-year civil war [PBS backgrounder], including the killing of respected Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. Last year, the Uruguayan Supreme Court struck down [JURIST report] the country’s Expiry Law, which granted amnesty to military officials accused of human rights violations during the country's 1973-1985 dictatorship. In 2005, Argentina's Supreme Court struck down similar amnesty laws [JURIST report] adopted in the 1980s to protect potential defendants, prompting the government to reopen hundreds of human rights cases.

Allegations of war crimes and human rights violations have been widespread during the Libya conflict [JURIST backgrounder]. Last month Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] released a report [JURIST report] accused the ruling NTC of allowing the abuse and torture of supporters of the former leader by unofficial militias. In January the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official website] addressed [JURIST report] the UN Security Council [official website] expressing concern over alleged current human rights violations in Libya. Earlier that month Middle East rights groups alleged human rights violations [JURIST report] and that all parties involved, including NATO, committed acts ranging from use of excessive force against protesters to cruel and inhuman treatment of prisoners during detention. In October of last year AI alleged that Libyan forces arrested nearly 2,500 people who face ongoing torture and detainment [JURIST report] without formal charges. In September the NTC vowed to investigate allegations of human rights abuses after AI published a report [JURIST report] alleging that both sides of the Libya conflict are responsible for human rights abuses and warning the NTC to act quickly to investigate these allegations.

The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo [ICC information sheet] is a landmark case for the ICC. Not only is the trial verdict the first issued by the court since its inception 10 years ago, but Lubanga was the first suspect taken into its custody [JURIST report]. Furthermore, the case represents the first international trial focusing on the use of child soldiers. While other international criminal courts such as the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) [official website; JURIST news archive] and International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website; JURIST news archive] have limited territorial jurisdiction over a set period and will be wound up upon completion of their mandates, the ICC is a permanent body and its decision in the case could for the first time set international legal precedent for others accused of similar crimes. Lubanga was taken into ICC custody [JURIST report] in March 2006, becoming the first DRC war crimes defendant to appear before the ICC. Lubanga was charged with enlisting child soldiers in his militia, and his trial began in January 2009 after being delayed for evidentiary reasons and was then halted soon afterward when one of the child witnesses recanted his testimony [JURIST reports] that Lubanga had recruited him for the militia. The prosecution concluded its case [JURIST report] in July 2009 after presenting 22 weeks of testimony. Lubanga has maintained his innocence [JURIST report] regarding the charges against him.

The passage of the law comes only days after the United Nations Special Rapporteur Margaret Sekaggya [official website] outlined the risks and challenges faced by human rights journalists and media workers [press release], and called for additional protection [JURIST report] of those workers. The UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] voiced concerns in October regarding the growing number of journalists killed in Mexico [JURIST report] and called for Mexican authorities to investigate these crimes and bring those responsible to justice. In May, RSF released its annual list of predators of press freedom [JURIST report], which included the heads of state of several countries in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as Mexican drug cartels.

China's detention policies for those suspected of subversion have long been criticized, particularly in regard to the arrest and detention of political dissidents. In January Chinese authorities on sentenced prominent rights activist Li Tie [JURIST report] to 10 years in prison for subversion, marking the third such sentence in a month. Chinese Human Rights Defenders [advocacy website] rejected the decision and said that such harsh sentences would do nothing to prevent or curb the social unrest. Another activist, Chen Xi was sentenced to 10 years [JURIST report] in late December 2011 for publishing political essays online. In that same month a court sentenced Chen Wei to nine years in prison [JURIST report]. In early January dissident Zhu Yufu was charged with subversion for writing and publishing a poem on the Internet that urged people to act in support of freedom [BBC report]. Two longer sentences for subversion convictions belong to Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], who has been serving an 11-year sentence [JURIST report] since 2009, and Liu Xianbin, who was jailed for 10 years in March 2011.

For three decades, agencies had protected under "High 2" homeland-security and critical infrastructure information, law enforcement procedures, audit criteria, and other information that, if disclosed, would risk circumvention of the law. Although it limited the scope of Exemption 2 to matters related solely to internal personnel rules and practices, the Supreme Court was sympathetic to the policy concerns raised by the government concerning the need to protect information when its disclosure risked harm. ... The Court acknowledged that it might be necessary for the Government to "seek relief from Congress."