 |
|

Legal news from Tuesday, March 12, 2013 |
 |
|


Hungary lawmakers approve controversial constitutional amendments
Jaclyn Belczyk on March 12, 2013 3:11 PM ET

[JURIST] The Hungarian Parliament [official website, in Hungarian] on Monday approved controversial amendments [BBC backgrounder] to the country's constitution. The amendments, approved by a vote of 265-11, with 33 abstentions, include several provisions previously struck down by the country's Constitutional Court. The amendments limit that court's powers, define family relationships based on marriage between one man and woman, allow laws criminalizing homelessness, and give Parliament the power to decide what religious organizations constitute churches. European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjorn Jagland said the amendments [press release] "raise the concerns of the Council of Europe (Venice Commission) and of the European Commission with respect to the principle of the rule of law, EU law and Council of Europe standards. Experts from both institutions will now make a detailed assessment of these new changes to the Constitution." Rights groups such as Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] have also criticized the amendments and called for EU action [press release].
Just last month, Hungary's Constitutional Court struck down [JURIST report] a law that outlines how churches are given official designation, finding that it was too political. In January the court struck down an electoral law [JURIST report] requiring voters to register to vote at least two weeks before elections in 2014. The new rules had been proposed by the conservative Fidesz [party website, in Hungarian] party of Prime Minister Viktor Orban [official website]. In November the European Court of Justice struck down [JURIST report] a Hungarian law that lowered the mandatory retirement age for judges.


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

|

Colorado lawmakers approve civil unions for same-sex couples
Jaclyn Belczyk on March 12, 2013 2:32 PM ET

[JURIST] The Colorado House of Representatives [official website] voted 39-26 Tuesday in favor of a bill to legalize civil unions [SB13-011, PDF] for same-sex couples. The legislation explicitly provides same-sex couples with many of the benefits held by married couples, including dependent insurance coverage and the ability to adopt a partner's child. It goes on to provide that "all legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities of spouses ... apply in like manner to parties in a civil union." Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper [official website] is expected to sign the bill into law. A similar bill passed in the Colorado Senate [JURIST report] in 2011 but was ultimately defeated in the House [Reuters report].
Issues surrounding same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder] remain controversial throughout the US. Later this month, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases related to same-sex marriage. In Hollingsworth v. Perry [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will examine the validity of Proposition 8 [JURIST news archive], a California referendum that revoked same-sex marriage rights. In United States v. Windsor [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will examine the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) [text; JURIST news archive]. Same-sex marriage is currently legal in nine US states, as well as the District of Columbia. Last month the Illinois senate approved [JURIST report] same-sex marriage legislation. In January the Rhode Island House of Representatives approved a similar bill [JURIST report].


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

|

New York judge blocks sugary drink ban
Benjamin Minegar on March 12, 2013 11:08 AM ET

[JURIST] A judge for the New York Supreme Court [official website] on Tuesday permanently enjoined [order, PDF] enforcement of amendments to a New York state regulation [NYC Health Code 81.53, PDF] prohibiting the sale or provision of "sugary" beverages in large cups or containers by food service establishments. In October groups representing restaurants, beverage makers and movie theaters challenged the link between regulation-defined "sugary" drinks and obesity, and asserted that "food service establishments" were arbitrarily defined such that a New York City resident could purchase a large sugary beverage from one server after denial from another next door. Judge Milton Tingling agreed and found Monday that New York's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYDOH) [official website] impermissibly trespassed into legislative jurisdiction and overstepped its chartered authority by promulgating a rule that "limits or bans a legal item under the guise of 'controlling chronic disease.'" In addition, the court found that the definitions of beverage types and service establishments would lead to "arbitrary and capricious consequences" and thus permanently enjoined enforcement. The NYDOH and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg [official website] have expressed intent [press release] to appeal the decision to the New York Court of Appeals:We have a responsibility as human beings to do something, to save each other, to save the lives of ourselves, our families, our friends, and all of the rest of the people that live on God's planet. And so while other people will wring their hands over the problem of sugary drinks, in New York City, we're doing something about it. Bloomberg said that he remained confident that the regulation will be upheld on appeal.
The NYDOH and the Board of Health approved Bloomberg's plan to promulgate the amended regulation in September, pursuant to which any establishment receiving a New York Health Department letter grade would be subject to a USD $200 fine for the sale of any sugary beverage in a container over 16 ounces. The NYDOH cited statistics connecting growing obesity and disease rates among NYC adults and children to increased portion sizes and the psychology of "thirst." Litigation over food health and safety has arisen in the past. In February 2009 the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld [JURIST report] a New York City law that requires chain restaurants to post caloric content information on their menus and menu boards in an effort to address obesity rates. In August 2005 California Attorney General Bill Lockyer sought a court order requiring warning labels on foods [JURIST report] that contain acrylamide, a chemical found in potato chips and french fries that the state believes may cause cancer. In February 2005, McDonald's agreed to pay [JURIST report] USD $8.5 million to settle a lawsuit over unhealthy trans fats in cooking oils used to make french fries and other foods.


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

|

UN rights expert urges international inquiry into North Korea violations
Benjamin Minegar on March 12, 2013 9:46 AM ET

[JURIST] The UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in North Korea [official website] Marzuki Darusman on Monday urged [press release] the international community to establish comprehensive investigative mechanisms to probe and document human rights abuses in North Korea. The report [report, PDF], presented to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website], stems from research into more than 60 international documents categorizing nine interlinked trends of "grave" human rights abuses occurring in North Korea since 2004. The recurring trends, or "underlying patterns," include violations of the right to food, pervasive impunity, torture, circumscription of due process, public executions, and enforced disappearances. Darusman asserted that research has uncovered large disparities in categorical documentation resulting from North Korea's refusal to allow independent media into the country, restrictions on citizen's ability to travel abroad and the government's refusal to cooperate with UN human rights mechanisms. However, Darusman asserted that the "credible and consistent" information already collected demonstrates the pressing need for systematic and "well-resourced" investigative measures to examine and document human rights abuses. In addition, Darusman urged focused inquiry into issues of institutional and personal accountability for human rights violations, including assessment of when such violations constitute crimes against humanity. The report includes analysis from 16 resolutions from the UN General Assembly [official website] and the UNHRC and 22 reports by Darusman's office.
The UN has sought to investigate and counter human rights abuses in North Korea in the past. In February Darusman and a group of independent human rights experts announced [JURIST report] their support for an international inquiry into human rights violations in North Korea to bring awareness to the country's system of political prison camps. Also in February Darusman urged [JURIST report] the UNHRC and the General Assembly to investigate human rights violations in North Korea. In November he expressed concern [JURIST report] over the country's lack of development in human rights, and called on its new leader, Kim Jong-un [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], to remedy the matter. In January UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay condemned North Korea's human rights record [JURIST report] and urged the international community to make efforts to improve the situation. Pillay's plea came only days after Human Rights Watch called on the UN [JURIST report] to examine human rights abuses, particularly in light of the drop in individuals escaping into China and reports by successful escapees of increasing crackdown on escape attempts.


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

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