Author: JURIST – Paper Chase

[JURIST] Women’s rights and opportunities have increased in nearly all Middle Eastern and North African countries over the last five years, but women in those countries still face many obstacles in achieving equality, according to a Freedom House report released Wednesday. The report found that in general, women in those countries had more opportunities for employment, education, and political participation than they did five years ago. Only the politically unstable countries or territories of Iraq, Yemen, and Palestine saw a decrease in their treatment of women, according to the report, whilehe greatest progress was made in the Persian Gulf countries, which were ranked as the worst violators of women’s rights five years ago. Despite the progress, the report found that women in the region still have little recourse for domestic violence and face employment, education and politics. The report cautioned, “While it is possible to identify net gains or losses for women’s rights in a given country, the situation is rarely as simple as that, and the course of events often reflects a great deal of contestation.”
Last month, Saudi Arabia proposed a new law that would allow female lawyers to practice in some areas. In October, Kuwait’s Constitutional Court ruled that female lawmakers are not required to wear the hijab, the traditional Islamic headscarf, and that women do not need permission to get a passport. A 2008 Human Rights Watch report found that female domestic and migrant workers faced frequent abuse throughout Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.

[JURIST] Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa announced Wednesday that the dissolved Sri Lankan Parliament will reconvene to ratify a one-month extension to the current state of emergency. Rajapaksa dissolved parliament last month to prepare for April elections, but, under the Sri Lankan Constitution, the president’s emergency powers can be extended for only one month at a time, and the extension must be approved by parliament within ten days of the president’s declaration. Rajapaksa announced the extension of emergency powers on Tuesday, claiming that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elan (LTTE) still pose a threat. Parliament is expected to reconvene next week.
Last month,the Sri Lanka Supreme Court rejected a petition to release opposition presidential candidate and former general Sarath Fonseka, who is being held over an alleged coup plot. It is believed that Rajapaksa called early parliamentary elections to harness momentum from the presidential election in January, in which he was re-elected, to gain more seats in parliament for his political party, Freedom Alliance. Earlier last month, 37 people, most of them military officers, were arrested in connection to an alleged assassination attempt against Rajapaksa. The Sri Lankan Supreme Court ruled last month that Rajapaksa’s second term will begin in November. The apparent victor in January’s elections, Rajapaksa defeated Fonseka by an official margin of 18 points, winning re-election to a second term in office. Fonseka has disputed the results, saying violence and vote-counting irregularities invalidated the outcome.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Samantar v. Yousuf on whether a foreign state’s immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act extends to an individual acting in an official capacity on behalf of the foreign state. The plaintiffs allege that former Somali defense minister and prime minister Mohamed Ali Samantar committed acts of torture during the regime of Somalian dictator Mohamed Siad Barre. They brought suit against Samantar, who now resides in Virginia, under the Torture Victims Protection Act. The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that immunity did not apply to individuals, allowing the suit to proceed and reversing the district court’s opinion. Counsel for the petitioner argued:The FSIA applies to suits against foreign officials for acts taken on the state’s behalf, because such suits are the equivalent of a suit against the state directly. …
The Torture Victim Protection Act creates a cause of action but is silent about immunity, and therefore has to be interpreted consistently with background immunity principles and consistently with a preexisting statute codifying immunity…Counsel for the respondents argued:the Torture Victim Protection Act, in which Congress did create a cause of action was – that cause of action was created for – to impose a liability, personal liability, for acts that were done with “actual or apparent,” but included with actual, authority of the foreign state.Now, if Congress believes that the FSIA immunized everyone who undertook acts under color of law, or at a minimum with actual authority of the foreign state, that was a very empty statute.The US supported respondents as amicus curiae.

[JURIST] International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo on Wednesday submitted to ICC judges the names of 20 senior political and business leaders who “bear the gravest responsibility” for the deadly violence perpetrated after Kenya’s 2007 presidential election. According to Moreno-Ocampo, the 20 officials, whose names are confidential, organized and financed the post-election attacks against civilians and have yet to face prosecution for their alleged crimes in Kenya. Ocampo stressed that the officials have not been formally charged, but remain under investigation:
At this stage, the names are indicative only. The allegations concerning the named individuals will have to be measured against the evidence gathered independently by my office. If the Judges authorize the investigation, I will engage those who wish to clarify their role or provide further information.The list includes officials from both the Party for National Unity (PNU) and the rival Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), both of whom Ocampo alleges used their political and tribal power to achieve “political objectives to retain or gain power.” Under the ICC’s complementarity principle, the investigation may only proceed if Kenya does not conduct its own investigation into the matter, which it has thus far failed to do.Last month, the ICC judges requested that Ocampo provide additional information regarding his request to open a formal investigation into allegations of crimes against humanity committed during the post-election violence in Kenya. The judges stated that clarification and additional information was necessary to properly exercise their review function authorized under Article 15 of the Rome Statute. The ICC assigned three judges to the Kenyan situation in November after receiving a letter from Moreno-Ocampo in which he said that he intended to request formal authorization to initiate an investigation. Moreno-Ocampo’s submission to investigate the Kenyan situation is historic, in that it is the first time he has used his proprio motu power, which allows him to initiate formal investigations upon authorization by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The allegations of fraud following the 2007 elections led to violence that caused the deaths of more than 1,000 people and displacement of 500,000 others.

[JURIST] An Iranian appeals court on Wednesday upheld the death sentence for a 20-year-old student who took part in anti-government protests in December. Mohammad Amin Valian was convicted of Moharebeh, which means waging war against God and is punishable by death under Iranian law. At trial, Vilian testified that he threw stones at the security officers during the protests, but that he did not hit anyone. The protests, which interrupted the Shia Muslim celebration of Ashura, were the largest since those that followed the disputed presidential election in June.
Last month, an Iranian court sentenced one person to death and eight others to prison for their involvement in the December protests. Also in February, Iranian authorities arrested seven people for allegedly planning to provoke rioting on February 11, the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, including several in the employ of the US Central Intelligence Agency. The seven allegedly played a key role in the Ashura protests. The protests resulted in at least four deaths, numerous injuries, and more than 300 arrests.

[JURIST] Former Russian oil executive Mikhail Khodorkovsky on Wednesday criticized Russia’s justice system as an “assembly line” that inevitably finds the government’s political enemies to be guilty. In an article published in the newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Khodorkovsky warned that the current system must be reformed before change occurs “in Russia’s traditional way,” with violence. The former chief executive of the Yukos oil company described the Russian justice system with an industrial metaphor:
The System – the conveyor belt of a gigantic plant, which lives inside a logic of its own that does not submit, in general, to any kind of regulation from the outside. If you have become the feedstock raw material for this conveyor belt, then at the end of it there is always a Kalashnikov machine-gun, i.e. a guilty verdict. Any other outcome to the processing of the feedstock by the System is regarded as a defective product. Therefore – again, in general – you should abandon the very thought that somebody someplace is actually going to be try to figure something out and get to the bottom of things in your case.The statement echoes concerns Khodorkovsky has previously expressed about the fairness of Russian trials and the need for widespread reform of the Russian court system. Khodorkovsky and his former business partner Platon Lebedev are currently serving eight-year prison sentences after being convicted in 2005 on fraud and tax evasion charges stemming from an attempt to embezzle and strip Yukos of valuable assets. In December, the Russian Supreme Court ruled that the 2003 arrest of Platon Lebedev was illegal. The two are currently on trial on additional related charges of money laundering and embezzlement, to which they have pleaded not guilty. They could face up to 20 additional years in prison if convicted. Critics have claimed that the charges against Khodorkovsky and Lebedev are politically motivated due to Khodorkovsky’s opposition against former Russian president and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

[JURIST] The Spanish National Court on Tuesday sentenced a former Basque separatist party leader to two years in prison for promoting terrorism. The court found that comments made during a 2005 speech by Arnaldo Otegi, a former leader of Batasuna, the political wing of ETA, praised the terrorist acts committed by other ETA members. Otegi compared his imprisoned associates to South African leader Nelson Mandela. The court criticized the comparison because, unlike the ETA, which is blamed for more than 800 deaths, Mandela was nonviolent. The court also disqualified Otegi from holding public office for 16 years. Otegi faces additional charges that could result in up to 30 years in prison.
The Spanish government continues to actively pursue charges against ETA. On Monday, the court accused the Venezuelan government of aiding ETA in a plot to assassinate members of the Colombian government in Spain. Last month, the Interior Ministry of Spain said that it took into custody the suspected ETA leader, along with two other people who are believed to be senior members of the group. In January, Spanish Judge Fernando Grande-Marlaska ruled that ETA had tried three times to assassinate former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar in 2001 but had failed. Last June, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld Spain’s ban of Basque political groups Batasuna and Herri Batasuna for their alleged ties to ETA.

[JURIST] Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna filed a motion with the state Supreme Court Tuesday announcing the adoption of a single-drug execution method. The state had previously used a three-drug cocktail to lethally inject those sentenced to be executed. The change comes as three death row inmates are challenging Washington’s previous execution method that included the use of sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide, and potassium chloride. The single-drug system will involve only the sodium thiopental. The state Supreme Court previously issued a stay on the executions to allow more time to review the system. The Washington Department of Corrections is currently rewriting the state’s execution policy Individuals sentenced to death can still choose the three-drug method or can choose to be hanged.
Washington is the second state to make the move to a single-drug execution protocol. Ohio conducted the first single-drug execution in December after the US Supreme Court rejected a last-minute stay application. 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.

[JURIST] A court in East Timor on Wednesday sentenced 24 individuals for the attempted assassination of the country’s president and prime minister in 2008. The individuals, former government and military officials displaced after civil unrest resulted in a change in government in 2006, had been accused of attacking President Jose Ramos-Horta at his home in the capital of Dili, resulting in injuries. Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao, the country’s first president, was also attacked, but he escaped harm. Sentences varied for each defendant, with some receiving up to 16 years in prison. One of the most high-profile defendants, Angelita Pires, was found not guilty. Pires was romantically linked to Alfredo Reinado, a former military leader who led the attack on Horta. Reinado was killed in the attack, and Pires has long professed his innocence, going so far as to offer a defense that Reinado was lured to Horta’s home in order to be assassinated. The attempted assassinations led to the declaration of a state of emergency in East Timor, in an attempt to quell the long-standing tension between the government and those former members of the military.
The attempted assassination of Horta and Gusmao is often cited as an important factor in the calming of tensions in the tumultuous country. Much of the conflict within East Timor stems from the country’s attempts to gain independence from Indonesia in 1999, following a 25-year occupation. Last August, Horta, who won the 1996 Nobel Peace Prize for his work in attempting to resolve the Timor-Indonesian conflict, rejected a call for a criminal tribunal to investigate abuses during the Timorese bid for independence, saying that such a tribunal would harm reconciliation between the two nations. The request for a criminal tribunal, to be appointed by the UN, had been made by Amnesty International, which cited the lack of investigation into abuses during that period. In 2008, Indonesia accepted a truth commission report that indicated it was responsible for rights abuses during the 1999 referendum for independence.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court on Tuesday denied an emergency appeal to prevent Washington DC’s same-sex marriage law from taking effect. Chief Justice John Roberts, acting as circuit justice for the DC area, denied an application requesting a stay pending further review of the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009. The request was filed by Reverend Harry Jackson and other petitioners seeking to delay enforcement of the new law. Roberts rejected the request because the court was unlikely to grant certiorari for the following reasons:First, as “a matter of judicial policy” – if not “judicial power” – “it has been the practice of the Court to defer to the decisions of the courts of the District of Columbia on matters of exclusively local concern.”
Second, the Act at issue was adopted by the Council and placed before Congress for the 30-day period of review required by the DC Charter. A joint resolution of disapproval by Congress would prevent the Act from going into effect, but Congress has chosen not to act.Finally, while petitioners’ challenge to the Act by way of a referendum apparently will become moot when the Act goes into effect, petitioners have also pursued a ballot initiative, under related procedures in the DC Charter, that would give DC voters a similar opportunity to repeal the Act if they so choose. Their separate petition for a ballot initiative is now awaiting consideration by the DC Court of Appeals. …he DC Court of Appeals will have the chance to consider the relevant legal questions on their merits, and petitioners will have the right to challenge any adverse decision through a petition for certiorari in this Court at the appropriate time.The law entered into force Wednesday, and the DC Superior Court began accepting marriage license applications from same-sex couples.In December, the Council of the District of Columbia gave both its preliminary and final approval to the legislation. After the bill was signed by DC Mayor Adrian Fenty, the US Congress had 30 legislative days to veto it under the Home Rule Act, which it declined to do. DC has now become the sixth US jurisdiction to recognize marriage between same-sex couples, joining five US states: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and New Hampshire.

[JURIST] Apple filed a lawsuit Tuesday in the US District Court for the District of Delaware against rival smartphone maker HTC alleging that several of HTC’s products infringe 10 patents owned by Apple. The patents involve various areas of technology including hardware designs, touch-screen interfaces, and graphical user interfaces. Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs explained the reason for the lawsuit:
We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it. We’ve decided to do something about it. We think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours.Apple also filed a complaint against HTC with the US International Trade Commission (ITC) claiming infringement of 10 other Apple patents, seeking to bar the importation of infringing devices.Apple has recently been involved in numerous legal actions over alleged patent infringement. In October, Finnish telecommunications company Nokia filed suit against Apple alleging that Apple infringed 10 of its patents since the first iPhone was released in 2007. The patents cover wireless data transmission, speech coding, and security/encryption, specifically GSM, UTMS (3G), and WLAN standards. In November 2008, EMT Technologies Inc. sued Apple, claiming that Apple infringed its patent for “apparatus and method of manipulating a region on a wireless device screen for viewing, zooming and scrolling Internet content.” Earlier that year, Apple settled a 2007 suit with Klausner Technologies, which alleged Apple infringed a patent relating to its visual voicemail function. Also in 2007, Apple was sued for patent infringement based on the iPhone keyboard.

[JURIST] The General Court of the EU on Tuesday rejected a challenge to the EU’s Emissions Trading Directive brought by Luxembourg-based Arcelor, the world’s largest steel producer. The company sought both the annulment of certain articles of the directive and damages for the harm suffered as a result of the adoption of the directive. It argued that several principles of community law were violated by certain provisions of the directive, including the right of property, the freedom to pursue an economic activity, the principle of equal treatment, freedom of establishment, and the principle of legal certainty. The General Court rejected Arcelor’s claim that the directive led to an unequal treatment of operators, noting that the directive applies in a general and abstract manner to all operators. Regarding the application for damages, the court held that Arcelor had failed to prove the breach of the aforementioned principles.
Under the EU emissions regulation scheme, based on community obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, member states set thresholds on the quantity of emissions produced each year and allocate allowances to national producers. The Emissions Trading Directive was adopted in 2003 to encourage operators to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, by allowing them to sell their surplus allowances to other operators.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in McDonald v. City of Chicago on whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is incorporated as against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities or Due Process Clauses. The appeal challenges a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which upheld a Chicago handgun ban. In 2008, the Supreme Court struck down a similar handgun ban in the District of Columbia in District of Columbia v. Heller, but circuit courts have so far refused to extend that ruling to other municipalities’ handgun bans. Counsel for the petitioners argued:Although Chicago’s ordinances cannot survive the faithful application of due process doctrines, there is an even simpler, more essential reason for reversing the lower court’s judgment. The Constitution’s plain text, as understood by the people that ratified it, mandates this result.The National Rifle Association (NRA) also argued on behalf of petitioners. Counsel for the respondent, the city of Chicago, argued:The Second Amendment should not be incorporated and applied to the States because the right it protects is not implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. States and local governments have been the primary locus of firearms regulation in this country for the last 220 years. Firearms unlike anything else that is the subject of a provision of the Bill of Rights are designed to injure and kill.The majority of justices appeared to favor petitioners’ view.
Also Tuesday, the court heard arguments in Hui v. Castaneda on whether the Federal Tort Claims Act is the sole remedy for claims regarding the care provided by Public Health Services personnel. The Court will decide if the act precludes the cause of action recognized in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the legislation did not preclude a Bivens action, while the Second Circuit has held that it does. Counsel for the petitioners argued:Congress extended an absolute immunity to officers and employees of the Public Health Service. That provision, reflecting Congress’s policy judgment that the immunity was necessary to revitalize the Public Health Service, makes a claim against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act the exclusive remedy for injury or death resulting from the performance of medical or related function and precludes any other civil action or proceeding against the individuals by reason of the same subject matter.Counsel for the respondents argued that a Bivens claim is not barred by statute.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled unanimously in Mac’s Shell Service, Inc. v. Shell Oil Products Co. that a service station operator cannot recover for constructive termination under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (PMPA) when the operator continues to run the franchise with the same trademark, fuel, and premises. The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that a franchise could recover for constructive termination even if it continues to use the same trademark, fuel, and premises. The First Circuit also reversed the district ruling on constructive non-renewal of an agreement, holding that a franchisee faced with an unlawful lease has to either sign the lease and forgo any potential actions under the act or refuse to sign and bring a challenge to it after receiving a notice of non-renewal. Partially reversing the decision below, Justice Samuel Alito wrote:
We hold that a franchisee cannot recover for constructive termination under the PMPA if the franchisor’s allegedly wrongful conduct did not compel the franchisee to abandon its franchise. Additionally, we conclude that a franchisee who signs and operates under a renewal agreement with a franchisor may not maintain a claim for constructive nonrenewal.The court remanded the case for further proceedings.The PMPA regulates the relationship between oil companies and gas retailers. When Shell Oil assigned its rights under several franchise agreements to a third party, the gas station owners signed the new agreements but brought suit under the PMPA alleging constructive non-renewal and constructive termination.

[JURIST] Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic claimed Tuesday that attacks against Bosnian Muslims were “staged,” denying any involvement in war crimes. Karadzic was appearing before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for second consecutive day to continue opening statements in his trial for war crimes allegedly committed during the 1992-1995 Bosnian conflict. In his statement, Karadzic accused Bosnians of planting corpses and embellishing reports about fatalities. Karadzic also called the Srebrenica massacre a farce promulgated by Bosnian Muslims to incite hatred against Serbian forces. Regarding the 1994 and 1995 bombings of Markale market, Karadzic said the attacks were actually carried out by Bosnians who shelled their own people. The court adjourned after Tuesday’s hearing, pending an appeal from Karadzic for more time to prepare his defense.
On Monday, Karadzic began his opening statement by denying any plan to expel Muslims from Serbia, and by blaming Muslims and Western countries for triggering the Bosnian civil war. His trial resumed on Monday after a series appeals by the defense, which have been viewed as a way for Karadzic to delay the legal process. 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 dismissed Karadzic’s appeal against the imposition of his court-appointed lawyer. In December, the Trial Chamber rejected Karadzic’s motion challenging the legitimacy of the court. The ICTY began Karadzic’s trial in absentia in October after Karadzic failed to appear in court. The ICTY has also repeatedly rejected Karadzic’s argument that he should be immune from trial based on an alleged agreement with former UN ambassador Richard Holbrooke. In June, the ICTY said that Karadzic’s trial, scheduled to be the tribunal’s last, is expected to conclude in early 2012.

[JURIST] Spain’s Interior Ministry announced Tuesday that national police agents have arrested accused Montenegrin war criminal Veselin Vlahovic in southeastern Spain. Vlahovic, known as the “monster of Grbavica,” is wanted on three international arrest warrants, including one for the rape, torture, and murder of more than 100 women and children during the 1992-1995 Bosnian war. The police captured Vlahovic after he was accused of several burglaries near his home in Altea. Vlahovic is wanted for a series of additional violent crimes. In 1998, he was imprisoned in Montenegro for armed robbery, but escaped on June 18, 2001. Three days later, he shot a man outside a bar in Serbia and was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in abstensia. He is also wanted in Spain for armed robbery. Bosnia’s Presidency Chairman Zeljko Komsic is requesting that Spain extradite Vlahovic to Bosnia where he is wanted on charges of genocide. Official documents will be drawn up by Bosnian officials on Wednesday and delivered to Spanish authorities within the same day. Spanish officials stated that Vlahovic would first stand before a local judge for the burglary allegations and would then be taken to the National Court in Madrid where extradition procedures are handled.
Vlahovic’s arrest comes as former Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadzic, stands trial before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for alleged war crimes and genocide during the Bosnian War. Karadzic appeared before the ICTY for the second consecutive day on Tuesday to continue opening statements. In his statement, Karadzic referred to a “holy war” against Bosnian Muslims and accused Bosnians of framing him by planting corpses and embellishing reports about fatalities. Karadzic had announced that he planned to boycott his trial because he had not been given adequate time to prepare a defense. The ICTY has also repeatedly rejected Karadzic’s argument that he should be immune from trial based on an alleged agreement with former UN ambassador Richard Holbrooke. Karadzic faces 11 charges, including genocide and murder, for war crimes allegedly committed during the 1992-1995 Bosnian conflict. In June, the ICTY said that Karadzic’s trial was expected to conclude in early 2012. His trial is planned to be the tribunal’s last.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick that a federal law requiring copyright holders to register their works before suing for copyright infringement does not remove federal court jurisdiction if the copyright holder failed to register. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had invalidated a lower court’s approval of a settlement in a class action lawsuit on the grounds that the court lacked jurisdiction. In reversing that decision, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote:
Subject to certain exceptions, the Copyright Act (Act) requires copyright holders to register their works before suing for copyright infringement. In this case, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that a copyright holder’s failure to comply with § 411(a)’s registration requirement deprives a federal court of jurisdiction to adjudicate his copyright infringement claim. We disagree. Section 411(a)’s registration requirement is a precondition to filing a claim that does not restrict a federal court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer. Justice Sonia Sotomayor took no part in deciding the case.The case arose when a group of freelance writers filed a class action lawsuit against a group of publishers alleging copyright infringement for electronically reproducing their work without permission. The parties settled the suit with the district court’s approval. When some of the plaintiffs objected to the settlement, they appealed to the Second Circuit, which ruled sua sponte that the federal court lacked jurisdiction over the case.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled 7-2 in Johnson v. United States that a “violent felony” requires the use of physical force. The court found that the Florida battery offense does not meet the physical force requirement of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) to be considered a violent felony for sentencing enhancement purposes. The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that such a battery does constitute a violent felony. In reversing the opinion below, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:Section 924(e)(2)(B)(i) does not define “physical force,” and we therefore give the phrase its ordinary meaning. The adjective “physical” is clear in meaning but not of much help to our inquiry. … It is the noun that poses the difficulty; “force” has a number of meanings. … In more general usage it means “trength or energy; active power; vigor; often an unusual degree of strength or energy,” “ower to affect strongly in physical relations,” or “ower, violence, compulsion, or constraint exerted upon a person.” Black’s Law Dictionary … defines “force” as “ower, violence, or pressure directed against a person or thing.” And it defines “physical force” as “orce consisting in a physical act, esp. a violent act directed against a robbery victim.” All of these definitions suggest a degree of power that would not be satisfied by the merest touching.Justice Samuel Alito filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, asserting that, “the crime of battery, as traditionally defined, falls squarely within the plain language of ACCA.”
The defendant, Curtis Johnson, pleaded guilty to knowingly possessing ammunition after having been convicted of a felony, and the government sought an enhanced penalty under the ACCA, which provides longer sentences for defendants who have previously been convicted of three violent felonies. Johnson disputed that his conviction for simple battery should be considered a violent felony.

[JURIST] Turkish prosecutors have charged an army general and a state prosecutor with belonging to the Ergenekon network and plotting to uproot Turkey’s ruling Justice Development Party (AKP), according a Monday report by state news agency Anatolian. General Saldiray Berk and prosecutor Ilhan Cihaner were arrested last month in the eastern province of Erzincan following the extensive probe into the secular Ergenekon network. A 61-page indictment charged Berk and Cihaner with plotting to discredit the AKP and other Islamic networks in Erzincan. Berk, the first currently serving officer to face trial in connection with the secular group, was specified as the head of a local Ergenekon group with Cihaner acting as a key collaborator. Cihaner’s arrest has increased tensions between the judiciary and the government, after threats from Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Sunday to seek a public referendum if a constitutional amendment to curb the power of judges cannot be reached.
The indictment of Berk and Cihaner follows last week’s arrests and charges of more than 30 military officers in connection with a separate plot to overthrow the Islamic-rooted government. The arrests and charges began after the newspaper Taraf revealed the 2003 Balyoz Security Operation Plan, or “Sledgehammer plot,” in January. The plot included detailed plans to bomb Istanbul mosques and provoke Greece into shooting down a Turkish plane as part of an effort to undermine the government. The Sledgehammer plot is similar to the Ergenekon conspiracy, in which the secular group is suspected of planning to overthrow the AKP. The Ergenekon group is also alleged to be involved in bombings, political assassination plots, and the death of journalist Hrant Dink. The probe into the Ergenekon conspiracy has been criticized as an attempt by the AKP to silence opposition and further its imposition of Islamic principles in violation of Turkey’s secular constitution. Trials against the Ergenekon group opened two years ago with more than 200 suspects in custody. The suspects include journalists, academics, army officers, policemen, and Turkish Workers’ Party leader Dogu Perincek.

[JURIST] The widow of assassinated Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana, Agathe Habyarimana, was arrested Tuesday in France on suspicions of complicity in genocide and was later released on bail. French police complied with an international arrest warrant issued by the Rwandan government that accused Habyarimana of helping to plan the 1994 genocide between Hutus and Tutsis in which more than 800,000 people, primarily Tutsis, were killed in the span of 100 days. After her husband’s assassination, which led to an escalation of violence that sparked the genocide, Agathe Habyarimana was transported from Rwanda by the French military and has since been living outside Paris, although the French government has twice refused to grant her asylum as a refugee. Her arrest comes only a few days after French President Nicolas Sarkozy visited Rwanda and said that he would cooperate in finding those accused of genocide.
In January, the Rwandan government released a report concluding that the assassination of then-president Juvenal Habyarimana was the work of Hutu extremists. An independent committee of experts, established in April 2007 by Rwanda’s Tutsi President Paul Kagame, found that Hutu extremists, including members of the president’s own family, were opposed to the 1993 Arusha Accords, a power-sharing agreement supported by Habyarimana, designed to end his 20-year monopoly on power. The report asserts that Hutus used the assassination as a pretext for the 1994 genocide. As of May 2009, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), established for the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law during the Rwandan genocide, has rendered judgments or has trials underway for 68 suspects, with six suspects awaiting trials, one retrial, and 13 fugitives.