Author: JURIST – Paper Chase

[JURIST] The number of inmates in US state prisons has dropped for the first time in 40 years, according to a report released Wednesday by the Pew Center on the States. Led by California and Michigan, the state prison population decreased by 0.4 percent during 2009. Because of a slight increase in the federal system, the total number of prisoners in US prisons increased slightly between in 2009. According to the report, the decline is due to fewer prisoners entering the prison system, while the number of people leaving state prison in 2008 was an all-time high. The report said that even before facing financial difficulties, many states had already started reducing total admissions in 2007, and others had cut back on parole revocations. Director of the Pew Center’s Public Safety Performance Project Adam Gelb said that another important reason for the decline “is that states began to realize there are research-based ways they can cut their prison populations while continuing to protect public safety.”
Last year, the Pew center reported that one in 31 US adults is in prison, or on parole. The report found that men are five times as likely as women to be in prison and that black adults are four times as more likely as white adults. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 7.3 million people were under some form of correctional supervision in 2008. According to the International Center for Prison Studies, the US has the most prisoners per capita in the world.

[JURIST] The US Senate unanimously passed legislation Wednesday to reduce sentencing disparities for powder and crack cocaine offenses. The Fair Sentencing Act, introduced by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), would amend existing law to reduce the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine convictions from 100:1 to 18:1. Durbin, who originally voted for the sentencing disparity, said that he would have preferred a 1:1 sentencing ratio but was happy with the compromise. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the bill but said it does not go far enough and that the proposed sentencing disparities would still disproportionately affect African-Americans. Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office Laura Murphy said:The Fair Sentencing Act is an encouraging step toward eliminating the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine but still allows for a needlessly unfair sentencing framework. The unanimous passage of this bill speaks to the understanding across the political spectrum that this disparity is unjust and in need of reform. Years of research has yielded no evidence of any appreciable difference between crack and powder cocaine and yet we continue to inflict this disparity on Americans.
“For over two decades, this sentencing disparity has been a stain on our justice system. Though this bill’s passage is long overdue, it does not go far enough. Without a simple and fair 1-1 sentencing ratio for crack and powder cocaine, we cannot say that these sentencing laws meet constitutional muster.The proposed law would also eliminate the five-year mandatory sentence for first-time possession of crack cocaine and would increase monetary penalties for drug trafficking. An identical version of the bill is expected to be passed by the House and signed into law by President Barack Obama.The bill was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month. In July, the House Judiciary Committee voted to completely eliminate the sentencing disparity. US Attorney General Eric Holder and other officials have also spoken publicly in favor of sentencing reform. In 2008, more than 3000 inmates convicted of crack cocaine offenses had their sentences reduced under an amendment to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

[JURIST] Idaho Governor CL “Butch” Otter (R) on Wednesday became the first governor to sign a bill into state law banning any federal mandate for individuals to have health insurance. The Idaho Health Freedom Act orders the state attorney general to file a lawsuit against the national government over any law making health insurance mandatory. The bill highlights efforts the state has made in local health care reform and stresses the state government’s determination to oppose federal health care legislation. State Senate minority leader Kate Kelly (D) criticized the price tag on the new bill and accused Otter of fiscal irresponsibility. The legislation will face legal challenges under the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, which gives federal law precedence over state law.
Last week, the Virginia legislature passed a similar bill that would ban federal mandates on health insurance, which the state’s governor has pledged to sign. At least 37 other states have plans to introduce similar legislation, according to the American Legislative Council (ALEC), which published a model bill on which the initiatives are based. Last month, President Barack Obama released his own health care proposal that seeks to reconcile versions of the bill passed by the House and Senate last year. Obama has argued that the legislation would overhaul private health insurance and provide affordable care for millions of Americans while Republicans have said they would block the bill because it was too expensive and would compel people to buy health insurance.

[JURIST] The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) released its Annual Report on Human Rights 2009 Wednesday, noting the increasing demand for human rights by citizens throughout the world. The report also cited the contrasting argument by some governments that human rights are merely a Western construct that are unnecessary or inappropriate in certain countries. Introducing the report, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband said that several steps must be taken to uphold human rights around the world:First, we must support the struggle for civil rights. When courageous protestors make their voices heard on the streets of Iran for example, we, making clear their desire for democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms; and when their Government responds with brutality, then we’re right to speak up.
Second, we should provide practical help that meets individual countries’ specific needs, working with civil society rather than lecturing Government. …Thirdly, we need to recognise that new technologies transform the ability of individuals to organise in the face of authoritarianism.The report mentioned 22 countries of concern, including Myanmar for its detention of political prisoners including opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Despite improved commitments to human rights in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the report expressed concerns with Israeli actions in East Jerusalem and restrictions on the Gaza Strip as well as the Palestinian Authority’s failure to condemn violence. The report indicated that human rights have decreased in Iran and Pakistan since 2008. Sri Lanka was the only new country added to the list.Last week, the US State Department released its annual reports on human rights conditions in almost 200 countries. Last year’s FCO report focused on terrorism and global warming as key issues. The UK also voiced concern over the rights situations in many of the same countries in its 2007 report.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled Wednesday that a Pennsylvania prosecutor cannot file child pornography charges against a teenage girl whose topless photo was found on a number of her schoolmates’ cell phones, upholding a preliminary injunction. Wyoming County prosecutor George Skumanick threatened to bring felony charges against several students who possessed or appeared in nude and semi-nude pictures of underage girls found on cell phones of students in the Tunkahannock, Pennsylvania, School District if the students did not attend a program on sexual violence and gender identity. Three girls refused to attend the class and sought a temporary injunction prohibiting prosecution, which the US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued last March. Skumanick’s successor promised not to prosecute two of the girls, leaving only one plaintiff on appeal. The appellate court held that the district court properly issued the injunction since it appeared that the state threatened to prosecute the girl in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment right not to write certain essays that would have been part of the program and for her parents exercising their Fourteenth Amendment right to control their child’s education. The court also found that it was unlikely that the prosecution could be successful since there was no evidence that the girl manufactured or distributed the photo. The court stated:
At this preliminary stage we conclude that plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on their claims that any prosecution would not be based on probable cause that Doe committed a crime, but instead in retaliation for Doe’s exercise of her constitutional rights not to attend the education program. Therefore, we affirm the grant of a preliminary injunction and remand for further proceedings.The lawyer for Skumanick said that while he was disappointed with the ruling, he was pleased that the court declined to rule that the photos themselves were protected by the First Amendment.The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania (ACLUPA) and filed suit against Skumanick last year. ACLUPA lawyer Witold Walczak contends that the photos are protected by the First Amendment and that requiring the girls to attend a re-education program interferes with the parents’ rights to raise their daughters as they wish. According to the complaint, 20 percent of teens nationwide have participated in the distribution of similar pictures, a phenomenon known as “sexting.” This is the first circuit court ruling on the issue.

[JURIST] Human rights group Amnesty International (AI) on Wednesday urged Cuban authorities to “revoke laws that restrict freedom of expression, assembly and association and to release all dissidents unfairly detained by the authorities.” AI called on President Raul Castro to invite UN experts and human rights organizations into the country to independently monitor the human rights situation. Currently, international independent human rights organizations are not permitted in the country. AI’s statement also condemned vague legislation because it is “currently being interpreted in a way that infringes fundamental freedoms.” For example, Article 72 of the Cuban Criminal Code makes “dangerousness” a jailable offense. The statement was released as the 7th anniversary of the arrest of 75 Cuban dissidents nears, with 53 of those arrested remaining in jail today.
Last week, the US State Department criticized Cuba for interfering with the right to privacy in its 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. In November, Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report claiming that the Cuban government continued to repress dissidents and violate fundamental civil liberties of Cubans, and resorted to imposing short-term imprisonment measures to elude international critique. According to a February 2009 report by the Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation (CCDHRN), the number of political prisoners in Cuba had declined from 234 in January 2008 to 205, while the number of brief detentions had increased. In January, HRW acknowledged some attempts in 2008 by the Cuban government to improve its position on human rights in its World Report 2009. HRW decried that overall the Cuban government continues to deny its citizens their fundamental rights. In 2008, Cuba was ranked 170th in the eighth annual Worldwide Index of Press Freedom issued by Reporters Without Borders (RWB).

[JURIST] The State of Law Coalition led by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Wednesday asked the Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) to recount ballots cast in the March 7 parliamentary election, alleging fraud. State of Law spokesperson Ali Al Adib claimed that the ballots were manipulated by the manager of an electronic counting center who is allegedly linked to the rival Iraqiya bloc, led by former prime minister Iyad Allawi. The allegations of fraud come after Iraqiya showed a slight lead in a partial vote count released earlier this week. Allawi’s coalition leads the race with seven out of 18 provinces, but the Iraqiya bloc is close behind, leading in five provinces. The IHEC said that there was no evidence to back up the allegations. The election determines the 325 members of the Iraqi Council of Representatives who will then elect the prime minister and president.
The fraud allegations are the latest in a series of problems plaguing the parliamentary elections. Last month, an Iraqi appeals panel ruled that 28 previously banned candidates could stand for election. The Responsibility and Justice Committee had initially ruled that some 500 banned candidates could stand for election despite allegations of ties to Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. The decision was characterized by the Iraqi government as illegal, and was reversed when the panel acknowledged that it did not have to rule on all 500 candidates at once. Last year, the Iraqi parliament approved an amended version of a controversial election law after numerous delays. The new version of the law increased the number of seats in parliament from 275 to 325, with 310 of those seats allotted to Iraq’s 18 provinces and the remainder reserved for Iraqis living outside the country.

[JURIST] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit Tuesday seeking information related to the US government’s use of unmanned Predator drones. The suit, filed in the US district court for the District of Columbia, seeks to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made in January. The ACLU alleges that the unmanned warplanes have been used by the military and CIA for killings in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. The ACLU also cites troubling reports indicating that US citizens may be targeted and killed by Predator drones. The FOIA request asks “when, where and against whom drone strikes can be authorized,” as well as for information related to civilian casualties. Director of the ACLU National Security Project Jameel Jaffer emphasized the importance of the information requested:
The government’s use of drones to conduct targeted killings raises complicated questions – not only legal questions, but policy and moral questions as well. … These kinds of questions ought to be discussed and debated publicly, not resolved secretly behind closed doors. While the Obama administration may legitimately withhold intelligence information as well as sensitive information about military strategy, it should disclose basic information about the scope of the drone program, the legal basis for the program and the civilian casualties that have resulted from the program.The Air Force has more than 20 Predator drones operating in Afghanistan, and the role of the unmanned drones has increased in recent years.In October, UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Philip Alston noted that the use of unmanned warplanes by the US to carry out attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan may be illegal. Alston said, “he onus is really on the government of the United States to reveal more about the ways in which it makes sure that arbitrary executions, extrajudicial executions, are not in fact being carried out through the use of these weapons.” Alston criticized the US policy in a report to the UN General Assembly’s human rights committee that was presented as part of a larger demand that no state be free from accountability.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled Wednesday that the constitution does not prevent President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from replacing retiring Chief Justice Reynato Puno prior to the May presidential elections. The court found that the constitutional provisions that prevent the president from appointing officials immediately before or after elections do not apply to the Supreme Court or to the judiciary in general. The court found:
The lack of any appointed occupant of the office of Chief Justice harms the independence of the Judiciary, because the Chief Justice is the head of the entire Judiciary. The Chief Justice performs functions absolutely significant to the life of the nation. With the entire Supreme Court being the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, the Chief Justice is the Chairman of the Tribunal. There being no obstacle to the appointment of the next Chief Justice, aside from its being mandatory for the incumbent President to make within the 90-day period from May 17, 2010, there is no justification to insist that the successor of Chief Justice Puno be appointed by the next President.Individuals running to replace Arroyo as president expressed displeasure with the court’s decision, suggesting that the ruling gives the current president too much influence.The Supreme Court has previously sided with Arroyo, ruling last month that she is eligible to run for senate after her presidential term expires. The court found the law requiring appointed officials to resign when they declare their candidacy for elected office is constitutional, but that the ruling does not affect elected officials. Also last month, the Philippine Department of Justice (PDOJ) charged 197 people with murder in connection with the November massacre in the semi-autonomous Maguindanao province that left 57 dead. Among those charged is Andal Ampatuan Sr., a former political ally to Arroyo, head of a Muslim clan, and former governor of Maguindanao province. Following the killings, Arroyo imposed martial law and suspended habeas corpus in the province. She later lifted the conditions, following international pressure and domestic legal challenges.

[JURIST] The UK High Court ruled Wednesday that the Catholic social services agency Catholic Care may refuse to consider same-sex couples as candidates for adoption, pending a review of their policy by the UK Charity Commission. The case revolved around interpretation of Regulation 18 of The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations of 2007. That legislation forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation, except for charities, which, under Regulation 18, can refuse to assist individuals as long as they are acting as a “charitable instrument” and the restriction, “is imposed by reason of or on the grounds of the provisions of the charitable instrument.” Based on the Chancery Division’s reading of that regulation, Catholic Care will be permitted to continue its adoption practices until the Charity Commission makes a ruling based on the court’s interpretation of Regulation 18. In remitting the case for that ruling, Justice Briggs wrote:
On my interpretation of Regulation 18, the Commission is the body charged by Parliament with the task of carrying out that analysis. … I have no reason to suppose that, directed as to the true interpretation of Regulation 18, the Charity Commission will not properly be able to carry out that analysis, either on the facts thus far proved, or upon the basis of such further evidence as it may consider necessary and appropriate to take into account.The Bishop of Leeds issued a statement through Catholic Care calling the decision a victory and saying it, “will help in our determination to continue to provide this invaluable service to benefit children, families and communities.” The gay rights charity Stonewall condemned the ruling, saying, “t’s clearly in the best interests of children in care to encourage as wide a pool of potential adopters as possible.” Other Catholic agencies in the UK had either broken their ties to the Roman Catholic Church to comply with the new regulations, or had ceased their adoption operations. With the victory for Catholic Care, it is unclear whether those UK charities that had abandoned their adoption services will now begin providing those services again.Same-sex adoption has been an issue not only in the UK, but also in other countries. In February, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ordered the state of Louisiana to place the names of two fathers on the birth certificate of a boy born in that state but adopted by a same-sex couple in New York. In November, a French court ruled that a law prohibiting same-sex couples from adopting children in France is discriminatory and ordered that a single woman be allowed to adopt. In September, Uruguay’s Senate approved a bill legalizing same-sex adoption in that country. In November 2008, the same month that a Florida judge ruled that state’s ban on same-sex adoption was unconstitutional, voters in Arkansas approved a ballot measure prohibiting all unmarried couples from adopting a child. Arkansas does not recognize same-sex marriage, and proponents of the act claimed it was aimed at same-sex couples.

[JURIST] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) will continue to operate beyond its originally planned end date at the end of this year. Ban estimated that it will be necessary for the court to remain open until 2013. Part of the reason for the extension is that two of the primary suspects remain at large. Bosnian Serb commander Ratko Mladic and political leader Goran Hadzic both face a significant number of charges. Ban said:
When these Special Tribunals were established, they were established for a temporary purpose with a certain date fixed. … There is some broad agreement now that ICTY may need at least a few more years, to 2013 or so. Our hope is that all these pending cases should be expedited. If and when these two fugitives are arrested, then we will have to discuss again how we can adjust, or we can leave it to other mechanisms – this was discussed already between the ICTY and the Security Council. At this time, since we do not have any clear idea when these two fugitives would be arrested, with the help of those countries concerned, then they should live up to their schedules according to exit strategies.Mladic faces charges of genocide and crimes against humanity for overseeing the Srebrenica prison massacre and other killings of Bosnian Muslims and Croats, while Hadzic faces crimes against humanity charges for killings of non-Serbs and for abuses in Croatian prison camps. Despite two of the highest-level targets remaining fugitives, the ICTY continues to actively prosecute other criminals. Last week, the court heard opening statements in the trial of Radovan Karadzic. Karadzic claims that attacks against Bosnian Muslims were “staged,” denying any involvement in war crimes allegedly committed during the 1992-1995 Bosnian conflict. Last month, Karadzic appeared before the ICTY seeking access to documents he claimed showed evidence of weapons smuggling to Bosnian Muslims. Also last month, the ICTY opened the trial of former Bosnian Serb leader Zdravko Tolimir. Tolimir is charged with genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, and murder against Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica. The ICTY has indicted 161 political and military officials since its creation in 1993.

[JURIST] US Attorney General Eric Holder on Tuesday defended his intention to try suspected terrorists, including accused 9/11 conspirator Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian criminal court. Holder faced numerous questions on the issue while testifying before a House Appropriations subcommittee, repeatedly defending the decision to use federal courts, as opposed to military commissions. Holder drew distinctions between individuals to be tried in each venue based on the target of the terrorist act, the evidentiary rules available in each forum, and the national security considerations stemming from each method. Holder then defended the competency of judges in civilian courts in dealing with disruptive defendants, who would attempt to use their trial as a podium for their views. In discussing the possible safety of communities where the trials may be held, Holder said, “ook at history, look at the way in which these cases have been conducted safely, without incident to communities and neighborhoods that surround the courthouses where these cases have been held,” specifically citing the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. In terms of a timeline for when the final decision on the venue for these trials might be made, Holder indicated that a decision is still “weeks away.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a group that has been persistent in its advocacy of civilian trials for 9/11 suspects, expressed support for Holder’s decision. Earlier this month, the ACLU released a full-page advertisement in the New York Times urging President Barack Obama to uphold his pledge to try 9/11 suspects in civilian criminal court. That release came just days after reports that White House advisers are considering recommending that Mohammed be tried in a military court rather than through the civilian criminal justice system. Holder announced in November that Mohammed would be tried in a civilian court in Manhattan, drawing intense criticism. Holder has previously defended his decision to charge suspected terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called Christmas Day bomber, in US federal court.

[JURIST] The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Tuesday sent to Congress its National Broadband Plan, which seeks to enact regulations to update the communications infrastructure in the US and to make broadband service available to millions of Americans. The plan is mandated by provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Notable goals of the plan include providing 100 million households with affordable 100-megabits-per-second Internet service, making 500 megahertz of wireless spectrum available for licensed and unlicensed use by mobile applications, and ensuring that all children are literate in digital technology by the time they leave high school. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski commented on why the project is so important:First, because broadband is essential to our global competitiveness – essential to job creation in a digital economy, to ongoing investment in vital 21st century infrastructure, and to our ability to lead the world in innovation.
Second, because broadband is essential for opportunity in America – for all Americans, from all communities and backgrounds, living in rural towns, inner cities, or in between. And, third, because broadband is essential to solving so many of the challenges facing our nation – including education, health care, energy and public safety, each of which is specifically mentioned in the Congressional directive.The broadband plan calls for action on all branches of the federal government, state and local governments, and private and nonprofit business sectors.Going forward the plan will be the subject of a number of Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which allow for public comment on the proposed regulations. The plan follows the FCC’s vote in October to approve the formation of rules mandating so-called “net neutrality”, promising openness commensurate with the ideals of the Internet itself. The idea of net neutrality, supported unanimously by the FCC commissioners, is to allow an open flow of information over the Internet, regardless of the amount of revenue generated by the information. The implementation of the new rules has been vigorously opposed by telecommunications giants Verizon and AT&T, among others, which argue that such rules would inhibit their ability to effectively manage Internet traffic.

[JURIST] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Wednesday that he would not delay his plan to set up a UN panel to investigate allegations of human rights violations during the Sri Lankan civil war. Ban made the statement during a press conference in response to a question about a letter from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) to the secretary-general last week. Ban responded that the letter, which challenged the UN’s authority to form the panel, was a misunderstanding, and he made clear his intention to form the panel:his panel will report to me directly and not to any other body. It is well within my power, I believe. I am convinced that it is well within my power as Secretary-General of the United Nations to ask such a body to furnish me with their advice of this nature. This does not in any way infringe on the sovereignty of Sri Lanka.Ban added that there would be, “no delay in the establishment of the panel.”Earlier this month, Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa rejected Ban’s plan to appoint a panel of experts to look into alleged rights abuses in the island nation’s civil war, saying it “is totally uncalled for and unwarranted.” Just prior to Rajapaksa’s statement, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay criticized the state of human rights in Sri Lanka, while presenting her annual report to the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka has faced numerous allegations of human rights violations originating from incidents that took place during the final months of the civil war by both the government and the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

[JURIST] The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled Tuesday that the practice of segregating Roma minority primary school students in Croatia from other pupils is discriminatory. The court declared the practice to be in contravention of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits discrimination, and of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1, which guarantees the right to an education. The court also found that the plaintiffs, 15 Roma citizens of Croatia, were deprived of their right to a fair trial within a reasonable amount of time, pursuant to Article 6 of the convention. The plaintiffs attended schools in northern Croatia between 1996 and 2000 and reported that they were segregated from other students and taught an inferior curriculum, suffering emotional and psychological harm as a result. Croatia’s government countered that the Roma students were put in special classes because they lacked adequate command of the Croatian language. Tuesday’s decision differs sharply from the ECHR’s unanimous July 2008 decision in this case, which found no violation.
Prior to this decision, the ECHR found segregated classes for Roma to be discriminatory in two other cases: DH and Others v. the Czech Republic and Sampanis v. Greece. However, discrimination against Roma in schools remains widespread throughout Europe, according to the European Roma Rights Center (ERRC). Roma have also faced inequitable treatment in other spheres. The US State Department’s 2009 human rights report noted an increase in the killings of Roma people in Italy, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. In February of last year, Italian authorities dismantled illegal immigrant camps heavily populated by members of the Roma minority following the alleged rape of a 14-year old girl by East European immigrants, which led to public outcry and vigilante reprisals. In 2008, then-secretary general of the Council of Europe Terry Davis called on officials to end discrimination against Europe’s Roma minority, after a confrontation between Czech police and far-right protesters attempting to attack a Roma suburb near the town of Litvinov.

[JURIST] The Afghanistan Office of the President openly confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that the government has enacted a law providing a blanket pardon for all war crimes and human rights violations occurring before December 2001. Spokesperson Waheed Omar said that the National Stability and Reconciliation Law was passed in 2007 by two-thirds of the Parliament, and therefore, under the constitution, did not require the signature of President Hamid Karzai. The new law has been heavily criticized by human rights groups, which became aware of the law when it was published in Afghanistan’s latest official gazette. In an interview with Reuters, Asia director for Human Rights Watch (HRW) Brad Adams called the law an “absolute disgrace” and “a slap in the face to all the Afghans who suffered for years and years of war crimes and warlordism.” Adams questioned the validity of the two-year process taken to enact law, which was passed by a parliament made up largely of former members of armed groups, some of whom have been accused of war crimes. Adams has called on the US to pressure Afghanistan to repeal the law stating that “the US needs to decide whether they’re with the victims or the perpetrators, and make their views known publicly.” US President Barack Obama, who held a teleconference with Karzai on Monday concerning the “continued strategic partnership” between the US and Afghanistan, has yet to release a statement concerning the amnesty law.
HRW released a statement last week urging the Afghan government to retract the amnesty law. HRW claims that the law protects alleged war criminals and human rights abusers, many of whom remain in positions of power within the government. The group says the law will also grant future immunity to people involved in current fighting in Afghanistan if they agree to reconciliation with the government. Supporters of the law note that criminal claims may still be brought by individuals, but HRW disputes this claim saying the court system is “barely functioning in much of the country, corruption is rampant, and there is no witness protection system.”

[JURIST] Chinese officials on Tuesday repeated warnings to Google that even if the company decides to leave the country, it must obey Chinese laws and continue to filter search results. Spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce Yao Jian said that Google agreed to follow Chinese laws when it entered the market in 2006 and again warned the company to continue to respect the country’s legal regulations. Although Google has threatened to stop filtering search results, spokesperson for Google China Marsha Wang said Monday that the company is currently complying with censoring regulations and has not received any instructions to shut down. Last week, China’s Minister of Industry and Information Technology Li Yizhong told reporters that a failure by Google to follow Chinese laws would result in consequences, but did not state any specific actions.
In February, China issued new regulations tightening restrictions on Internet use by requiring citizens operating websites to submit identity cards and meet with regulators before their sites can be registered. The new policies came as the Chinese government continues negotiations with Google regarding the Internet company’s January threat to discontinue operations in China due to the country’s overarching Internet censorship. Google’s action was in response to a cyber attack on its Gmail service in December, which targeted the e-mail accounts of human rights activists in China and drew the ire of rights groups around the world. Google indicated that it would work with the Chinese government to find a way to allow an, “unfiltered search engine within the law as well,” but also noted that if an agreement cannot be reached, it may close its offices there and shut down its Google.cn website. China responded by reiterating its commitment to open Internet, but stressed that international Internet companies must follow Chinese law. A week later, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton referenced the threat by Google in a speech promoting Internet freedom and criticizing censorship, declaring that China “risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ma Zhaoxu criticized Clinton for her remarks stating that they were harmful to bilateral relations between the US and China.

[JURIST] A judge in Sierra Leone ruled Tuesday that a woman has the right to become a regional political leader in the country. The High Court of Justice reversed a previous ban that had prevented Iye Kendor Bandabla from her birthright to compete for the position of paramount chief in her local district. The decision also upheld the 2009 Chieftaincy Act, which includes both gender pronouns in describing paramount chief candidate qualifications, suggesting that the legislators’ intent was to allow both men and women to run for the position. Women are allowed to become chiefs in the southern regions, but traditionalists have banned women from holding the powerful position in rest of the country.
In December, a Sierra Leone court ruled against another woman, Elizabeth Simbiwa Sogbo-Tortu, saying that she could not become chief in her region. Tortu filed a complaint after traditionalists prevented her from running for the position, and she is currently pursuing a Supreme Court hearing. There is also evidence of discrimination against women running for parliament, where only about 13 percent of the representatives are women. Sierra Leone has a history of human rights violations, but has been working to improve its rights record. The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) was established ten years ago in a joint endeavor by the government of Sierra Leone and the UN to provide a forum to try those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law, committed in Sierra Leone. In November, the SCSL handed over its detention facility to the Sierra Leone Prison Service in a monumental step towards the court’s resolution. After upholding the sentences of several former soldiers in October, and with only one remaining indictment against former Liberian president Charles Taylor, the SCSL has largely fulfilled its purpose and will continue taking steps to close down.

[JURIST] Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee on Monday introduced the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, aimed at increasing financial regulation in the wake of the recent financial crisis. The bill includes a provision meant to protect consumers from predatory lending by creating a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau housed within the Federal Reserve. The proposed legislation would also give the government the power to break up financial institutions that have been deemed “too big to fail” in order to prevent future situations where the failing of one firm could threaten the entire economy. The “Volcker Rule,” prohibiting banks from owning, investing in, or sponsoring hedge funds, private equity funds, or proprietary trading funds for profit where the funds do not benefit the banks’ customers, was also included in the proposed legislation. Other provisions included in the bill involve the restructuring of the federal banking system, regulation of the credit-rating agencies, and the creation of a committee to identify and manage risks to the economy. The executive session to mark up the bill is scheduled to begin on Monday.
This bill is the second financial reform bill to be proposed by the Senate Banking Committee following the 2008 financial crisis. The 2009 bill was met with resistance and resulted in the committee’s development of the new bill. In December, the US House of Representatives approved a similar bill. The US House Financial Services Committee had approved a bill to create a consumer financial protection agency in October, after originally delaying it at the behest of financial industry leaders in July. The creation of the agency is a key step in achieving the Obama administration’s stated goal of tightening financial industry regulations. In June, the administration proposed a broad series of regulatory reforms aimed at restoring confidence in the US financial system.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the execution of Lawrence Reynolds, an Ohio inmate challenging the state’s lethal injection procedure. Reynolds, who was convicted of strangling an elderly neighbor to death in 1994, asked the Supreme Court to postpone his execution in order to allow him time to assert his challenge. The court declined to delay the execution without comment. This is the state of Ohio’s third attempt at executing Reynolds. Ohio Governor Ted Strickland delayed Reynolds’s original execution date last fall, as the state was reviewing its execution method. Reynolds’s execution was again delayed last week when prison guards found the inmate unconscious in his cell due to an overdoes on pills. Reynolds is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday.
In December, Ohio prison officials conducted the first execution using a new single-drug lethal injection protocol. Death row inmate Kenneth Biros was executed after the US Supreme Court rejected a last-minute stay application. Biros’s attorneys had argued that the use of the new procedure constitutes human experimentation, but some commentators have said that the single-drug protocol is more humane than the previous three-drug method. Ohio became the first state to adopt the single-drug protocol in November. The state undertook a review of its lethal injection practices in September after the planed execution of inmate Romell Broom failed when a suitable vein for the drugs’ administration could not be found. The new protocol consists of the intravenous injection of a single anesthetic, and provides for the intramuscular injection of two other drugs if an appropriate vein cannot be found.11:45 AM ET – Reynolds was executed at 10:27 AM.