Author: JURIST – Paper Chase

[JURIST] The Chinese government responded on Friday to the release of a US human rights report critical of China by issuing its own report criticizing the US human rights record. The report covered issues relating to crime, racial discrimination, and poverty, and accused the US of using its hegemonic power to continue “trampling” on the sovereignty of other countries while “posing as the world judge of human rights”:For a long time, has placed itself above other countries, considered itself “world human rights police” and ignored its own serious human rights problems. It releases Country Reports on Human Rights Practices year after year to accuse other countries and takes human rights as a political instrument to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, defame other nations’ image and seek its own strategic interests. This fully exposes its double standards on the human rights issue, and has inevitably drawn resolute opposition and strong denouncement from world people. At a time when the world is suffering a serious human rights disaster caused by the US subprime crisis-induced global financial crisis, the US government still ignores its own serious human rights problems but revels in accusing other countries. It is really a pity. While the US report is drawn largely from the work of rights groups and American diplomats, China’s response mainly cited US media reports as evidence of its claims, along with data from non-governmental organizations and federal and state governments.
The annual dueling between the US and China on human rights has lasted over a decade. In 2008 the Department of State accused the Chinese government of denying its citizens basic human rights while also urging judicial reform and improved governmental transparency. Special mention was made of violence in Tibet.

[JURIST] The US Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday unanimously approved a bill to reduce sentencing disparities for powder and crack cocaine offenses. The Fair Sentencing Act, introduced by Senator Dick Durbin, is intended to bridge the gap between crack and powder cocaine sentencing by amending the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act. The Act directs the US Sentencing Commission (USSC) to review its trafficking guidelines to reflect aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon or commission of violence. It would increase the amount of crack cocaine required for imposition of a mandatory trafficking prison term and eliminate the five year mandatory prison sentence for simple possession of crack.
Last July, the US House Judiciary Committee approved a similar bill that would eliminate the distinction between crack cocaine and powder cocaine under federal law. Crack cocaine sentencing policies have raised controversy by virtue of their disparate impact on African American offenders. Last June, US Attorney General Eric Holder urged sentencing reform for crack cocaine, calling for a review of disparities between sentencing guidelines for powder and crack. In April, other DOJ officials said Congress should eliminate the sentencing disparities between crimes committed involving crack and powder cocaine during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs. In April 2008, a study by the USSC reported that more than 3,000 prison inmates convicted of crack cocaine offenses have had their sentences reduced under an amendment to sentencing guidelines. In 2007, the USSC voted unanimously to give retroactive effect to an earlier sentencing guideline amendment that reduced crack cocaine penalties.

[JURIST] The Swedish Parliament on Thursday voted 131-130 to approve a resolution that recognizes the Ottoman Empire’s killing of Armenians between 1915 and 1923 as genocide. Of the 349 assembly members, 88 were absent. The resolution was opposed by the ruling center-right coalition and supported by the opposition left. It passed when several members of the ruling party sided with the opposition. The Turkish government has condemned the resolution, recalling its ambassador to Sweden.
The vote comes only a week after the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs voted 23-22 to adopt a resolution labeling the killings as genocide. The US government has indicated that it will seek to block the resolution from being put before the full House of Representatives. A similar resolution was passed by the committee in 2007, but it never reached the House floor.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled Thursday that a teacher-led recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools does not violate the constitution. Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow had challenged the practice on behalf of several families, arguing that the phrase “under God” violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. In reversing a lower court decision that had ruled in Newdow’s favor, the appeals court ruled 2-1:that the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the Establishment Clause because Congress’ ostensible and predominant purpose was to inspire patriotism and that the context of the Pledge – its wording as a whole, the preamble to the statute, and this nation’s history—demonstrate that it is a predominantly patriotic exercise. For these reasons, the phrase “one Nation under God” does not turn this patriotic exercise into a religious activity.
Accordingly, we hold that California’s statute requiring school districts to begin the school day with an “appropriate patriotic exercise” does not violate the Establishment Clause even though it permits teachers to lead students in recitationof the Pledge.In a separate case decided Thursday, the Ninth Circuit upheld the use of the phrase “In God We Trust” on currency. That challenge was also brought by Newdow.Newdow originally sued to have the phrase “under God” removed from the pledge in 2000. The Ninth Circuit ruled in Newdow’s favor in 2002, but the Supreme Court dismissed his case in 2004 for lack of standing. Newdow also filed suit to ban the recitation of a prayer during the 2005 presidential inauguration, but that claim was rejected.

[JURIST] The US House of Representatives voted Thursday to impeach federal judge Thomas Porteous of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The case will now proceed to the US Senate where a two-thirds majority is required to convict Porteous of committing high crimes and misdemeanors while in office, specifically perjury and accepting bribes from lawyers. The investigation of Porteous was opened by the US House Judiciary Committee in 2008. The committee unanimously approved a resolution creating a task force to conduct the inquiry, which was the first of a sitting federal judge in nearly 20 years.
After an investigation by a special committee, the Judicial Conference found “substantial evidence” that Porteous had signed false financial disclosure forms, falsified statements in a personal bankruptcy proceeding, made false representations to secure a bank loan, and violated criminal laws and ethical rules by soliciting and receiving “cash and other things of value” from lawyers in a bench trial over which he was presiding. Porteous’s decision in that case, In re Liljeberg enters v. Lifemark Hospitals, was later partially reversed by the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which last week publicly reprimanded Porteous. The US Constitution gives the House the power to impeach “all civil Officers of the United States” on suspicion of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Thirteen federal judges have been impeached, of which seven have been convicted.

[JURIST] The US State Department (DOS) on Thursday released its 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Announcing the release, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the US has recommitted “to continue the hard work of making human rights a human reality.” In its introduction to the reports, which covered 194 countries, the DOS noted that human rights violations have continued throughout the world, noting several global trends:In 2009, governments across the globe continued to commit serious violations of human rights. As we survey the world, there still are an alarming number of reports of torture, extrajudicial killings, and other violations of universal human rights. Often these violations relating to the integrity of the person are in countries where conflicts are occurring. These violent attacks are a central concern wherever they take place.
In a significant number of countries, governments have imposed new and often draconian restrictions on NGOs. Since 2008, no fewer than 25 governments have imposed new restrictions on the ability of these organizations to register, to operate freely, or to receive foreign funding, adversely impacting freedom of association. In many countries, human rights defenders are singled out for particularly harsh treatment, and in the most egregious cases, they are imprisoned or even attacked or killed in reaction to their advocacy.These restrictions and repressive measures are part of a larger pattern of governmental efforts to control dissenting or critical voices. This pattern also extends to the media and to new forms of electronic communications through the Internet and other new technologies. Restrictions on freedom of expression, including on members of the media, are increasing and becoming more severe. In many cases, such restrictions are applied subtly by autocrats aiming to avoid attention from human rights groups and donor countries, such as through the threat of criminal penalties and administrative or economic obstacles, rather than through violence or imprisonment; the end result is still a chilling effect on freedom of expression.A third trend we observed is the continuing and escalating discrimination and persecution of members of vulnerable groups – often racial, religious, or ethnic minorities, but also women, members of indigenous communities, children, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups that lack the political power in their societies to defend their own interests.In Africa, the DOS criticized continuing conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. It also criticized Uganda for its treatment of homosexuals and Nigeria for extrajudicial killings.In East Asia and the Pacific, the DOS criticized China for its increased Internet censorship and Myanmar for attacks on ethnic minorities. The DOS also criticized North Korea for denying citizens freedoms of expression, assembly, and association, and Vietnam for suppressing dissent.In Europe and Eurasia, the DOS said that the situation in the North Caucasus region of Russia has worsened. The DOS also criticized Belarus for restrictions on civil liberties and Switzerland for passing a constitutional amendment banning the construction of minarets. The Department noted an increase in the killings of Roma people in Italy, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic.In the Near East and North Africa, the DOS criticized Egypt for failing to respect the freedom of association and the freedom of religion and Saudi Arabia for violence against women. The DOS also criticized Iran for human rights violations following the disputed presidential election last June, Israel for violations during last year’s Operation Cast Lead, and Iraq for ongoing rights abuses.In South and Central Asia, the DOS said human rights had deteriorated in Afghanistan because of increased insurgent attacks. The Department said that civilian authorities had taken positive steps in Pakistan, but that significant challenges remain. The DOS criticized Sri Lanka for using excessive force before the end of the conflict with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) last May and Uzbekistan for restricting freedom of the press.In the Western Hemisphere, the DOS praised Colombia for an active independent media, but warned of intimidation by members of illegal armed groups. The DOS criticized Cuba for interfering with the right to privacy and Venezuela for attacking private media owners.The DOS issues its yearly reports on human rights practices to Congress under a legal mandate, and has filed similar reports for 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002 and previous years.

[JURIST] A group of delegates from the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) concluded a meeting in Moscow Wednesday over Russian claims of war crimes committed by Georgia during the South Ossetia conflict in August 2008. The meeting, which was not attended by chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, was held at the invitation of the Russian Federation and was based on Moreno-Ocampo’s announcement of a preliminary investigation at the time of the conflict. Officials from the OTP meet with members of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defense, the Office of the Prosecutor General, and Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, where the OTP was presented with the progress of Russia’s national judicial proceedings related to the alleged war crimes. Moreno-Ocampo expressed his full support for honest proceedings on the allegations, and said his office has “offered to support in every possible way efforts by the Russian judiciary to do justice for all victims of these crimes.” A similar visit to Georgia is to take place later this year.
The South Ossetia conflict lasted for five days in August 2008 when Georgia tried to take control of its breakaway region, and Russian troops defended the region, entering Georgia. According to a report released by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia (IIFFMCG) in October, Georgia violated international law when it shelled the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali in August 2008. The IIFFMCG also found that military action against Russian forces was not justified because the commission could not substantiate Georgian claims of a large-scale Russian military presence in the region prior to the Georgian offensive. In August, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev proposed a bill in response to the conflict that would allow the Russian army to intervene beyond its borders to protect Russian citizens abroad. In February 2008, the US State Department released its annual country reports on human rights, accusing both Russia and Georgia of violations during the conflict. Georgia and Russia are currently exchanging allegations of war crimes in the ICC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

[JURIST] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Wednesday that recently announced election laws in Myanmar do not meet international standards for an inclusive political process, in particular because they do not allow pro-democracy opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi to participate. Ban’s statement was issued the same day the ruling military junta introduced the Political Parties Registration Law, which prevents political prisoners from participating in the election and also makes it illegal for members of religious orders, insurgent groups, and foreigners to join political parties. Ban called on the Myanmar leaders to ensure that country’s first election in 20 years is “fair, transparent and credible” and allows all of Myanmar’s citizen’s to be involved. The election law also drew criticism from the Human Rights Watch (HRW), which said ” continues the sham political process that is aimed at creating the appearance of civilian rule with a military spine.” Additionally, on Thursday the military junta nominated a 17-member commission to supervise the elections and invalidated the 1990 election, which brought Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) to power.
On Monday, the military junta enacted five laws to govern the upcoming election and has been publicly announcing them one at a time in state-run newspapers. One of the most notable ramifications of the new laws is that Suu Kyi will be prevented from participating in the election unless she is released from prison. The new law would also prevent Suu Kyi from remaining as the head of the NLD if the party wishes to participate in the election. The NLD has not committed to taking part in the polls, claiming that the 2008 constitution is unfair because it bans Suu Kyi from taking part in the polls and reserves a quarter of parliamentary seats for the military. Suu Kyi, speaking through her lawyer, on Thursday called on the Myanmar people to give a unified response to what she called the unjust election law.

[JURIST] The Cambodian parliament passed a controversial anti-corruption bill Wednesday meant to further transparency in government while opposition parties staged a walkout, saying the new law would stifle criticism and foster corruption. The law will create a national anti-corruption council to oversee investigators, but critics have said that the lack of independence from the government is troubling. Members of the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) and foreign NGOs criticized the law because it could potentially punish whistle blowers with prison terms, and does not require government officials and their spouses to disclose their assets. The UN mission in Cambodia released a statement tentatively supporting the bill but calling on the government to allow more time for public debate.
Transparency International (TI) has criticized Cambodian corruption, and the country is ranked near the top of the list of most corrupt countries in the world. Last year, the UN cut off funding for the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, a court set up to prosecute Khmer Rouge officials, after it was accused of corruption through a kick-back scheme. The UN and Cambodian officials later failed to reach an agreement on a system to monitor corruption and the court had to rely on international donations to make up for the shortfall.

[JURIST] The Virginia General Assembly on Wednesday passed a bill that will ban any federal mandate for individuals to have health insurance. The bill, called the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, is the first of its kind passed by any state, and says that no individual shall be held liable if they refuse to sign up for health care. Governor Robert McDonnell has said that he will sign the bill into law. About 30 other states are working on a similar measure to negate the widely expected federal mandate for health insurance.
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. In December, 13 state attorney generals threatened to sue unless a provision in the Senate bill exempting Nebraska from much of its health care costs was removed. 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] Nigerian police officials said Wednesday that 49 people, predominately Muslims, will be charged with murder following the recent killing of Christian villagers near the city of Jos. Reports have varied as to the number of people killed in the weekend attack, but police now put the number at 109. The attacks were apparently in retaliation for the January violence between Muslims and Christians which left more than 300, mostly Muslims, dead. The city of Jos is located in an area of central Nigeria, which divides the predominately Muslim northern part of the country from the primarily Christian south. Authorities have indicated that the area is being patrolled by security forces to prevent further violence. Earlier this week, Human Rights Watch (HRW) called on the Nigerian government to prosecute those responsible for the violence.
Last month, HRW urged acting President Goodluck Jonathan to to “tackle the culture of impunity” in Nigeria. While HRW has called on Jonathan directly, other rights groups have petitioned international authorities to take action to prevent recurring rights abuses. Earlier in February, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) called for an International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation into the violence that took place in Jos in January. The ICC is considering the petition.

[JURIST] The Afghan government should retract a law granting amnesty for war crimes and human rights abuses committed prior to December 2001, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Wednesday. The National Stability and Reconciliation Law was originally passed by the Afghan Parliament in 2007, but did not take effect until it was recently published in the official gazette. 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.” Afghan President Hamid Karzai had previously indicated he would not sign the act into law.
In 2007, Karzai signed a bill granting amnesty to groups that allegedly committed war crimes. The 2007 resolution barred the state from independently prosecuting individuals for war crimes absent accusation from an alleged victim. A previous version of the same bill drew popular support, but Karzai refused to sign the bill in the original form.

[JURIST] The US Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing Wednesday on the effects of the recent Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which eased restrictions on political campaign spending by corporations. The hearing, entitled “We the People? Corporate Spending in American Elections after Citizens United,” did not focus on any specific bill, but rather on general legislative efforts to limit the ruling’s effects. Committee chair Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said that the “Citizens United decision turns the idea of Government of, by and for the people on its head.” Witness Bradley Smith, law professor and chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics, countered that “the Court’s decision in Citizens United is one of the most clearly correct decisions of the Court’s term,” and that “Congress need not ‘fix’ this sound decision.”
In January, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to ease restrictions on political campaign spending by corporations. The court was asked to consider Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech defined as an “electioneering communication” or for speech expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate. President Barack Obama sharply criticized the decision in his State of the Union Address in January. Obama warned of the increased potential for powerful interest groups, both foreign and domestic, to wield excessive influence over American elections and called for bipartisan support of legislation to counteract the decision. The decision has caused a deep partisan divide over the topic, with Democratic officials largely opposing the decision, and Republican officials mostly in support.

[JURIST] The Italian Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a bill that would allow cabinet ministers, including Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, to postpone criminal proceedings against them on the grounds that they would interfere with official duties. The legislation, passed by a vote of 169-126 with three members abstaining, will allow officials to suspend trials against them for up to 18 months by claiming a “legitimate impediment” to appearing in court. Critics contend that the legislation is specifically designed to protect Berlusconi from the prosecutions he faces, while supporters claim that it will modernize the country’s judicial system and allow elected officials to perform their duties.
The bill was approved by the Chamber of Deputies last month. In January, hundreds of Italy’s judges walked out of their courtrooms to protest the passage of legislation that placed strict time limits on the trial and appeals process. That bill was also criticized as being tailored for Berlusiconi’s benefit and would result in the automatic dismissal of two pending cases against him. Later that month, it was reported that Berlusconi could also face a third trial based on information that surfaced recently. Berlusconi currently faces a corruption trial and a tax fraud trial, both of which have been postponed. The leader has been previously acquitted of false accounting and bribery, and has had other charges against him dropped.

[JURIST] Myanmar’s military junta announced the implementation of another election law on Wednesday that establishes procedures for the country’s first election in 20 years. The Political Parties Registration Law prevents political prisoners from participating in the election and also makes it illegal for members of religious orders, insurgent groups, and foreigners to join political parties. The most notable ramification of the new law is that it would prevent pro-democracy opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from participating in the election unless she is released from prison. The new law would also prevent Suu Kyi from remaining as the head of the National League for Democracy (NLD) if the party wishes to participate in the election. The NLD has not committed to taking part in the polls, claiming that the 2008 constitution is unfair because it bans Suu Kyi from taking part in the polls and reserves a quarter of parliamentary seats for the military. An election date has not been set.
The Political Parties Registration Law is one of the five laws being enacted by the military junta in anticipation of the election. On Tuesday, the junta unveiled the Union Election Commission Law, which states that the military government will appoint a five-member commission that will supervise and have the final say on all electoral matters. In February, UN High Representative for Human Rights Tomas Ojea Quintana expressed great disappointment during his visit to Myanmar, stating that without certain action the elections “will not be credible.” Also in February, Myanmar’s Supreme Court dismissed the latest appeal by Suu Kyi against the extension of her house arrest. Suu Kyi, who has been in prison or under house arrest for 14 of the past 20 years, will be released in November according to a government official, likely after the elections have taken place.

[JURIST] An Iranian court on Tuesday began the trial of 12 Iranian prison officials accused of torturing three prisoners to death, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). The three victims, identified as Mohsen Rouholamini, Mohammad Kamrani, and Amir Javadifar, were arrested for their involvement in the protests following the June 12 presidential election. The names of the defendants are unknown because the presiding judge has prevented any trial information from being disclosed. The 12 Kahrizak prison officials were charged with murder in December. The Iranian government acknowledged in August that the detainees had been tortured, yet initially claimed that the three men had died from meningitis.
Observers have accused the Iranian government of conducting the trial as a mere political move. In January, an Iranian parliamentary inquiry found that Tehran prosecutor Saeed Mortazavi was responsible for the deaths. The report alleged that Mortazavi, the prosecutor responsible for overseeing the Kahrizak prison, ordered that the prisoners be transferred to Kahrizak, where they were tortured and beaten to death. Last month, the US government and EU issued a joint statement condemning the human rights violations following the presidential election. In December, Amnesty International (AI) labeled the human rights violations committed by the Iranian government following the election among the worst of the past 20 years.

[JURIST] An international group of human rights lawyers on Tuesday petitioned the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to condemn to the detention of Chinese human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng, missing for more than a year. The group is seeking a declaration that Gao’s detention is a violation of international law. According to the petition, Gao’s detention violates both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR):
Mr. Gao’s current predicament is merely the culmination of a pattern and practice by which the Chinese government has consistently and clearly violated Article 19 of both the Universal Declaration and the ICCPR. Without an arrest warrant to attest otherwise, we can only assume that Mr. Gao’s current detention is related to his outspoken criticism of the Chinese government’s human rights record relating to religious freedom. Detaining Mr. Gao as punishment for or to prevent his defense of persecuted religious groups is a violation of Article 19(2).The group also clams that Gao’s detention violates Chinese law.Last month, human rights organization Dui Hua Foundation reported that the Chinese Embassy in Washington DC claims that Gao is working in the Urumqi region of China. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ma Zhaoxu said in late January that Gao is “where he should be.” Earlier in January, Chinese lawyers and US-based rights group ChinaAid called on Beijing police to conduct a search for Gao. Gao has been detained since February 4, 2009.

[JURIST] India’s upper house of parliament, the Rajya Sabha, on Tuesday approved a bill to ensure that one-third of seats in parliament are reserved for women. The Women’s Reservation Bill, introduced Monday, would increase the number of women serving in the 543-seat legislature, which currently has no gender quota, from 59 to at least 181. The bill was passed by a vote of 191-1 after seven lawmakers were suspended for causing a disturbance Monday by tearing up the bill and throwing it at the chairman. The bill, which requires a constitutional amendment, will now go before the Lok Sabha, the lower house of parliament, where it is expected to pass. It must then be approved by at least half the states.
The controversial legislation was originally proposed in 1996, but has been repeatedly blocked. Last year, India elected its first woman president and first woman speaker of parliament. India currently reserves one-third of seats on local governing bodies for women, and, last year, increased the quota to 50 percent.

[JURIST] UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism Martin Scheinin on Tuesday urged the Obama administration to hold civilian trials for accused 9/11 conspirators, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Scheinin called the military commissions system “fatally flawed” and said that reforming the system would not help. Meanwhile, UN Special Rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak also argued that the suspects should face a civilian trial. A White House official said Monday that while a civilian trial for Mohammed may no longer be a realistic option, the Obama administration is working with lawmakers to allow for civilian trials for other suspected terrorists.
On Sunday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a full-page advertisement in the New York Times, imploring President Barack Obama to fulfill his pledge to try suspected 9/11 terrorists in federal courts. It was reported on Friday that White House advisers are considering recommending that Mohammed be tried in a military court rather than through the civilian criminal justice system. Attorney General Eric Holder announced in November that Mohammed would be tried in a civilian court in Manhattan, drawing intense criticism. Last month, Holder defended his decision to charge suspected terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called Christmas Day bomber, in US federal court. Holder, who has resisted calls from high-level Republicans to try Abdulmutallab in front of a military tribunal, said that the civilian criminal justice system was capable of handling his trial.

[JURIST] China and India agreed Tuesday to endorse the non-binding Copenhagen Accord, which calls for self-imposed limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Some 100 countries have already agreed to be associated with the non-binding accord, which arose from the UN Climate Change Conference (COP15) held in Copenhagen in December. China and India, nations that are among the world’s largest and most quickly growing producers of greenhouse gas emissions, were the last major players to sign on to the agreement. Their delay caused some concern about the agreement’s credibility and potential future impact.
The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) announced in February that another round of formal climate talks will be held April 9-11 in Bonn, Germany, to follow up on the recent Copenhagen conference. While no legally-binding agreement was reached at the conclusion of the COP15 in December, 192 UN member countries agreed to “take note” of the non-binding accord developed by leaders from the US, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa in an effort to limit the global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius. In January, more than 50 countries, including the US, China, and EU member states, submitted plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the UNFCCC. Relative to 2005 levels, the US has pledged to reduce emissions to 17 percent, while China has targeted a 40 to 45 percent reduction per GDP unit. EU members pledged a 20 percent reduction below 1990 levels.