 |
|

Legal news from Monday, March 26, 2012 |
 |
|


Please support JURIST - spring fund drive ends March 31
Matthew Shames on March 26, 2012 11:29 PM ET

[JURIST announcement] WE NEED YOUR HELP. Our spring fund drive ends in just a few days, and we still have a lot of work to do. As previously mentioned, due to general economic circumstances completely outside of our control, we are anticipating a significant reduction in funding (meaning several tens of thousands of dollars) from our primary benefactors for our next fiscal year. If not offset, this reduction has the potential to directly affect JURIST's ability to maintain its current operations. This fund drive is one of the efforts that we've recently launched to try to make up the shortfall.
Please consider donating to JURIST. Even if you are not in a position to give much, please keep in mind that small donations - $25, or even $10 - can go a long way. One of JURIST's strengths is in the number of people it touches every day, from readers to staff to alumni. If everyone of those people could give just a small amount, JURIST would never have to worry about funding again. We know that not everyone is in a position to give, but if you can, even a small amount can make a big difference. For those of you that are able to give more, please know that JURIST will recognize all donors that give $100 or more on its website at jurist.org/supportjurist/honorroll.php.
Thank you - we greatly appreciate your support!


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

|

Ontario court rules on anti-prostitution laws
Jamie Reese on March 26, 2012 1:57 PM ET

[JURIST] The Ontario Court of Appeal [official website] ruled [judgment, PDF] Monday that provisions of the Canadian Criminal Code [text] place unconstitutional restrictions on prostitutes' ability to protect themselves while others are not a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [text]. The specific provisions involved, § 210, § 212 and § 213, prohibit the keeping of a "common bawdy house," engaging in communications for the purpose of soliciting sex and living "on the avails" of the sex trade. The decision will allow individuals to hire others to work as bodyguards, support staff, etc. to work indoor in "bawdy houses." However, the court maintained that openly soliciting customers remains a permissible restriction. The majority ruling states:The case law recognizes that the right to liberty extends beyond physical liberty to the right to make individual choices that go to the core of personal autonomy. At some point, this concept of liberty must meld with the concept of security of the person, which also rests on the principle of personal autonomy. ... The decision to engage in a particular commercial activity is not akin to the kind of decisions that have been characterized as so fundamentally and inherently personal and private as to fall under the right to liberty. To accept such a submission [that personal life choices include the decision to engage in prostitution] would be to read into a constitutional protection what are economic or commercial decisions. The decision is only binding in Ontario, but the court suggested that Parliament [official website] look to amend the law and a possible appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada [official website] would make a ruling binding on the entire country.
In June the Ontario Court of Appeal extended a stay previously extended in December 2010 of a lower court decision [JURIST reports] striking down laws banning prostitution-related activities. In March 2011 the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to review a BC Court of Appeal [official website] decision allowing a challenge to the country's anti-prostitution laws. In 2007 the Sex Professional of Canada [advocacy website] initiated an application [JURIST report] with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice [official website] challenging the three provisions on the grounds that they are inconsistent with the Charter. The challenge came on the heels of the trial of Robert Pickton [CBC case backgrounder], who was accused of murdering 26 women [indictment text], mostly prostitutes, in the Vancouver area in the 1990s. Pickton was convicted of six counts of murder [Globe and Mail report] in late 2007.


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

|

Slovenia referendum rejects law granting same-sex rights
Andrea Bottorff on March 26, 2012 10:55 AM ET

[JURIST] Slovenians voted in a national referendum on Sunday against amendments to the country's family law that would have increased the rights granted to same-sex couples. The proposed Family Code [text, DOC, in Slovenian] passed the Slovenian Parliament [official website, in Slovenian] last year under former prime minister Borut Pahor [EP profile] and would have given registered same-sex partnerships the same legal rights as marriages and allowed individuals to adopt their same-sex partners' biological children. The proposed law did not permit same-sex couples to adopt children from third parties. Unofficial reports announced that about 54 percent of voters opposed the law [AFP report], while 44-percent favored it. Last month, conservative advocacy group Civil Initiative for the Family and the Rights of Children, with the help of Catholic supporters, collected and filed the required 40,000 signatures [STA report] to challenge the law to a referendum vote. Labor, Family and Social Affairs Minister Andrej Vizjak [official profile, in Slovenian] responded to the referendum results, saying that the government would respect the will of the people [statement audio, in Slovenian] and would draft a new proposal.
The rights of same-sex couples have been an ongoing issue across Europe. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] ruled this month that the right of a person in a same-sex partnership to adopt his or her partner's child is not protected [JURIST report] by the European Convention on Human Rights [text, PDF]. The case involved a French woman who was denied her request to adopt her civil partner's child, who was conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF). She argued the adoption denial violated articles 8 and 14 of the Convention on Human Rights, which protect against invasion of family privacy and discrimination, respectively. In its decision, the court found that the denial did not discriminate against same-sex couples, because opposite sex couples in civil partnerships are equally denied a right to adoption.


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

|

Supreme Court to rule on drug sniffing dogs
Jaclyn Belczyk on March 26, 2012 10:28 AM ET

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] granted certiorari [order list, PDF] Monday in Florida v. Harris [docket; cert. petition, PDF] to determine whether an alert by a well-trained narcotics detection dog certified to detect illegal contraband is sufficient to establish probable cause for the search of a vehicle. The Florida Supreme Court held [opinion, PDF], "the fact that a drug-detection dog has been trained and certified to detect narcotics, standing alone, is not sufficient to demonstrate the reliability of the dog." The court found that, in order to establish probable cause under the Fourth Amendment [text], the officer must have "a reasonable basis for believing the dog to be reliable based on the totality of the circumstances." The court concluded, "in this case the totality of the circumstances does not support a probable cause determination."
In January, the court granted certiorari [JURIST report] in Florida v. Jardines [docket, cert. petition, PDF] to determine whether the use of a drug-sniffing dog at the front door of a house is a search under the Fourth Amendment requiring probable cause. The Supreme Court of Florida ruled [opinion, PDF] in April that the "sniff test" was a search under the Fourth Amendment and required probable cause, not reasonable suspicion.


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

|

Israel cuts ties with UN rights council over West Bank settlements investigation
Sarah Posner on March 26, 2012 10:15 AM ET

[JURIST] Israel announced Monday that the country will sever ties to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] after it commenced an international investigation [press release] into Israeli settlements in the West Bank. A spokesperson for the Israeli Foreign Ministry announced [Reuters report] this decision on Monday, adding that Israel will continue to work with other UN bodies. The UNHRC launched an independent investigation last Thursday to determine the effect that Israeli settlements have had on the civil, political, economic and cultural rights of the Palestinian people. The US was the only country to vote against the investigation, called for by the Palestinian Authority. The UNHRC stated:Concerning the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and in the Occupied Syrian Golan, the Council demanded that Israel cease all of its settlement activities, condemned the firing of rockets against Israeli civilian areas and called upon Israel to cease prolonged closures and economic and movement restrictions, including those amounting to a blockade on the Gaza Strip. Israeli leaders have condemned the UNHRC investigation claiming that it is biased against Israel.
Israel has faced criticism for its treatment of the Palestinian people. Last month, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] urged Israel [JURIST report] to change its policies that forbid Palestinians from traveling through and living in Gaza and the West Bank. The report describes the policy that causes separation within Palestinian families since some are trapped inside Israel while their family members are forbidden from entering. In January, the Israeli Supreme Court [official website] upheld [JURIST report] a law that prevents Palestinians who marry Israelis from obtaining Israeli citizenship.


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

|

Turkish retired general on trial for terrorism
Andrea Bottorff on March 26, 2012 9:46 AM ET

[JURIST] Retired Turkish General Ilker Basbug [official website, in Turkish] appeared in an Istanbul court on Monday for the beginning of his trial on terrorism charges. The hearing before the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court occurred in a courtroom at the Silivri prison, where Basbug has been held [Reuters report] since January. Basbug, formerly the leader of all of Turkey's armed forces, was arrested [JURIST report] in January for his alleged involvement with the Ergenekon [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive] network, a secular group suspected of planning to overthrow [JURIST report] the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) [party website, in Turkish]. Last month, the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court accepted the indictment [JURIST report] against Basbug after his request to have his case heard by the Supreme State Council, a faction of the Constitutional Court [official website, in Turkish], was denied. The request was denied because the charges faced by the general are related to terrorism, and not the result of his official professional conduct. Basbug is the highest ranking military officer to be indicted in connection with Ergenekon. He has maintained his innocence and has characterized the accusations against him as an attack on the Turkish armed forces [Hurriyet Daily News report]. Basbug will continue to pursue his case's appearance before Turkey's high court.
Approximately 400 individuals are currently on trial in connection with the alleged 2009 Ergenekon plot. The group allegedly planned to assassinate prominent members of Turkey's Christian and Jewish minority groups, blame Islamic terrorists for the deaths and use this to delegitimize the ruling AKP. Earlier this month, an Istanbul court ordered four Turkish journalists to be released [JURIST report] from prison while they wait for their trial to resume. Journalists Ahmet Sik, Nedim Sener, Coskun Musluk and Sait Cakir were arrested in March 2011 and accused of involvement in Ergenekon. Critics of the Islam-rooted AKP ruling party contend that the Ergenekon investigation is intended to silence the party's opponents and impose Islamic principles [JURIST report], but the government denies any such charges.


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

|

Rights groups urge South Africa to prosecute Zimbabwe crimes against humanity
Sarah Posner on March 26, 2012 9:19 AM ET

[JURIST] Human rights groups commenced legal action on Monday urging South African courts to prosecute citizens of Zimbabwe for crimes against humanity. Rights group claim that South Africa has an obligation under international law [Reuters report] to bring justice to those who commit human rights violations. If South African courts allow claims against Zimbabwe citizens to proceed, the courts could be flooded with litigation against Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] and other top members of the ZANU-PF party, causing diplomatic tension between the two countries. Mugabe has been the president of Zimbabwe for over 30 years, during which he has faced multiple accusations of human rights violations. It is uncertain whether South Africa can legally be permitted to open their courts to crimes that were committed in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe has faced criticism from the international community for human rights violations, particularly within the diamond industry. In August the BBC reported that Zimbabwe security forces are running illegal mining camps [JURIST report] in the country's Marange area where recruited civilian workers are regularly tortured and forced into labor. According to the report, workers are subject to mauling by dogs, multiple beatings and rape. The camps, one of which allegedly has ties to a personal friend of Zimbabwean Mugabe, were reported to have been operating for three years. In May 2011 Zimbabwe's High Court in Harare ordered the release of six prisoners [JURIST report] accused of plotting to overthrow Zimbabwe's president. The former army officers have been in prison since 2007 after being accused of planning to violently topple Mugabe and replace him with the country's defense minister, Emerson Mnangagwa.


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

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