JURIST - Paper Chase: Sunday, January 20, 2013

[JURIST] The US Department of Defense (DOD) [official website] announced [press release] Friday that it will not withdraw charges of conspiracy against five accused plotters of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed [JURIST news archive]. Chief Guantanamo prosecutor, Brigadier General Mark Martins asked the DOD's appointee, Retired Admiral Bruce MacDonald [DOD backgrounders] to dismiss the prosecution charge in order to avoid uncertainty that could delay the case [Reuters report]. In the press release, the DOD declared that it would refuse to drop the conspiracy charge because it was waiting for appellate courts to determine whether military commissions can recognize conspiracy as valid charge:

[D]ismissal at this time would be premature, as the viability of conspiracy as a chargeable offense in trials by military commission is still pending appellate review. ... Congress included conspiracy as a chargeable offense in the Military Commissions Acts of 2006 and 2009, and that two Presidents had signed those Acts into law.

In addition to conspiracy, the DOD has charged the five accused plotters with terrorism, murder, attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, destruction of property, hijacking aircraft and intentionally causing serious bodily injury.

Earlier this week the chief US military judge at Guantanamo denied defense motions [JURIST report] filed in both the 9/11 military commission trial and the 2000 USS Cole [Navy backgrounder] bombing trial. Last month a US military judge upheld [JURIST report] a request to censor 9/11 conspirators' testimony. The DOD announced in 2011 that it had sworn charges against five men [JURIST report] accused in the 9/11 attacks. In April 2011 US Attorney General Eric Holder announced that Mohammed and the four others would be tried by a military commission [JURIST report] after the Obama administration abandoned attempts to have the 9/11 suspects tried in civilian courts.

[JURIST] Malian security forces have killed civilians in the town of Niono in central Mali, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] reported on Saturday. HRW said that Mali's army has been targeting ethnic groups [Reuters report] associated with rebels in the north, particularly Tuaregs and Arabs. HRW called on Mali's government, as well as France and West African nations to ensure that civilians are protected from violence. During the ongoing fighting between the Malian government and Islamist rebels, HRW has accused both sides of committing human rights violations, and urged rebel groups earlier this week to release all child soldiers [press release].

Mali has drawn increased international scrutiny recently regarding political violence and alleged human rights abuses. On Friday the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] issued a report saying that the tumultuous situation in Mali has led to human rights violations [JURIST report]. International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced earlier this week that her office has officially launched an investigation [JURIST report] into possible war crimes committed in Mali. Last week the interim president declared a state of emergency [JURIST report]. The prime minister of Mali, Cheick Modibo Diarra, was forced to resign [JURIST report] in December on state television after junta soldiers arrested him for attempting to leave the country in light of the ongoing humanitarian crisis threatening the nation. In September HRW reported that three armed Islamist groups in northern Mali are abusing the local population and recruiting child soldiers [JURIST report]. Earlier that month UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] condemned [JURIST report] human rights violations in Mali and called for international action to address the problems. In August officials from the ICC were in Mali investigating [JURIST report] whether the same two Islamic groups had committed war crimes in Mali.

[JURIST] More than 140 nations gathered in Geneva for a UN forum agreed [press release] on Saturday to a legally binding treaty addressing the use of mercury, a metal that is infamous for its detrimental effects on health and the environment. The treaty, named the Minamata Convention on Mercury for a city in Japan that has incurred serious damage as a result of mercury, will regulate and control any products and processes that involve the use of mercury. Examples of products and processes that will be regulated are medical equipment, light bulbs, mining, cement and coal-powered sectors. Some products, such as thermometers and blood pressure devices containing mercury, are scheduled to be phased out by 2020. UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) [official website] Executive Director Achim Steiner was pleased with the agreement, saying

Everyone in the world stands to benefit from the decisions taken this week in Geneva, in particular the workers and families of small-scale gold miners, the peoples of the Arctic and this generation of mothers and babies and the generations to come. I look forward to swift ratification of the Minamata Convention so that it comes into force as soon as possible.

The treaty has been in the works for four years and will be available for signature in October at a special UN meeting in Japan.

The adverse effects of mercury on health and the environment have been a growing concern in recent years. Earlier this month, UNEP released its annual Global Mercury Assessment [text, PDF], which gave the most recent information on global mercury emissions and its effects on health and the environment. The report showed an increase in emissions in the industrial sector since 2005. Last year Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] released a report showing that children working in Mali mines were suffering from severe health issues [JURIST report] due to inhalation of mercury. In 2008 two US federal courts ruled on issues involving mercury and its health effects on consumers and the environment. In one, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [official website] ruled that US Food and Drug Association [official website] regulations did not preempt a woman from suing a tuna company for injuries sustained from mercury that was in a can of tuna she ate. In the other case, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that a "cap-and-trade" policy that would have allowed power plants to trade "credits" for mercury emission was invalid.

[JURIST] Federal prosecutors on Friday filed charges against Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway [official profile] in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan [official website] for alleged real estate fraud involving a short sale of her home in Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan, and sale of a house in Florida. Hathaway was already set to resign on Monday, and she has been off the bench since she announced her decision to resign [Detroit Free Press report] on January 7 following a complaint filed by the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission [official website] for violation of judicial conduct rules. The charges filed on Friday were filed as a criminal "information" [AP report], and a guilty plea is expected. Hathaway and her husband are accused of deeding their home in Florida to a relative while negotiating a short sale on the Grosse Pointe home they could not afford, resulting in a $600,000 debt they owed to their bank being erased. Once this happened, their names went back on the house in Florida. The bank fraud charge against Hathaway alleges that she made false statements to the bank, fraudulently transferred property to others and failed to disclose available cash. The allegations stem from an investigative news report [WXYZ report] by Detroit's WXYZ Channel 7 Action News [official website] in May which revealed evidence of the transaction to the public.

Judicial corruption has been an important and controversial issue world-wide in recent years. In October the UN called on nations around the world to do more to combat judicial corruption [JURIST report], stating that it is a human rights issue because it can deprive people of their due process rights. It also said keeping the judiciary free from corruption is critical to "strengthen judicial credibility and independence." In 2010 the World Justice Project [advocacy website] released a report [JURIST report] ranking countries by their adherence to rule of law, which used factors such as level of corruption, rights and access to judicial remedies. The results of the report showed a trend that rule of law was lacking more in poorer countries than it was in countries with stronger economies.