Israel has been criticized recently for potential human rights violations, particularly with respect to the conflict in Gaza [JURIST news archive] and the West Bank. Recently the UN has urged [JURIST report] for Israeli forces to cease its use of live ammunition against civilians that may constitute excessive use of force in the West Bank. In December Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] accused the Israeli Defense Forces of war crimes [JURIST report] after a November aerial bombing raid killed 12 civilians in Gaza. In response, UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk called on Israel [JURIST report] to fully implement and continue to support the recent conflict-ending ceasefire agreement with Palestinians in Gaza.

Egypt has dealt with political unrest since the Egyptian Revolution [JURIST backgrounder] began in 2011. On Tuesday Egypt's Prosecutor General referred [JURIST report] 504 members of the Muslim Brotherhood for a mass trial. Earlier this month Egypt's deposed president Mohamed Morsi [BBC backgrounder] appeared in court in his trial [JURIST reports] for espionage and conspiring to commit acts of terrorism. Morsi's trial signifies Egypt's political transition from the authority of the Muslim Brotherhood into a new regime. Morsi appeared before the court earlier this month, but the trial was adjourned [JURIST report] to give a committee of media members time to inspect video evidence the court declassified for the trial. In recent months, hundreds of members of the Muslim Brotherhood have been convicted on criminal charges, with 113 supporters sentenced in January, and 139 sentenced [JURIST reports] in December.

The Chinese court's decision to hear this case is the most recent episode in a fight for compensation that has been going on for decades. In 2007 the Japanese Sapporo High Court upheld [JURIST report] a 2004 lower court decision rejecting a lawsuit brought by Chinese plaintiffs who say they were forced to work as slave laborers in mines and factories during World War II. The lawsuit, originally filed in 1999, sought nearly seven million dollars in compensation from the Chinese government and six companies. Also in 2007 a Japanese district court rejected [JURIST report] demands for compensation by 22 South Korean women, as well as the surviving relatives of other women, who were forced to work at a Japanese military hardware factory during World War II.

In November Wulff went on trial [JURIST report] in Hanover, denying allegations of corruption. German Chancellor Angela Merkel [official website, in German] selected Wulff to fill the largely ceremonial role of president in 2010. In 2011 German media sources accused Wulff of accepting a €500,000 (USD $650,000) low interest home loan from the wife of German businessman Egon Geerkens. Wulff reportedly gave false statements [BBC report] about the loan in front of parliament, leading to his resignation in February 2012. Corruption has been an issue in Germany in the past. In 2007 Germany introduced draft legislation [JURIST report] to tighten anti-corruption laws on the heels of scandals at Volkswagen AG and Siemens AG. The law sought to increase public prosecutors' power to investigate corruption of a broader range of implicated employees, and to allow employees of foreign corporations to be indicted in Germany.

Besides Germany, several countries have faced issues dealing with neo-Nazi movements and propaganda. In 2013 an Austrian court convicted [JURIST report] three neo-Nazis of glorifying Nazism over the Internet, sentencing them to as many as nine years in prison. In June 2011 the Supreme Court of Spain [official website, in Spanish] overturned [JURIST report] the convictions of four individuals charged with distributing neo-Nazi propaganda, reasoning that disseminating Nazi ideology is not a crime unless used to incite violence or certain danger, or create a hostile climate. In July 2010 a Russian court sentenced [JURIST report] 14 neo-Nazis, including a group leader and several teenagers, to jail terms for committing hate crimes against ethnic minorities in the country. Also in 2010 a criminal court in France convicted [JURIST report] 14 members of a neo-Nazi group.

Earlier this week the trial of the first suspect to be transferred from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) [official website] to the Rwandan national court system began [JURIST report]. The Tanzanian-based UN tribunal transferred [JURIST report] Jean Bosco Uwinkindi [ICTR indictment, PDF] in April 2012 to stand trial for his role in the 1994 Genocide. Last week a court in Frankfurt, Germany, sentenced [JURIST report] former Rwandan mayor Onesphore Rwabukombe to 14 years in prison for his role in the Genocide. Earlier this month the ICTR announced [JURIST report] that Augustin Ndindiliyimana, the former chief of staff of the Rwandan parliamentary police, and Francois-Xavier Nzuwonemeye, the former commander of a military reconnaissance battalion, had been acquitted on appeal. Also in February a French court opened the trial [JURIST report] against former Rwandan intelligence chief Pascal Simbikangwa in the country's first trial of a suspect related to the genocide.

The political atmosphere in Cambodia has been tense since last year's elections. Earlier this month Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] urged [JURIST report] the Cambodian government to take steps to stop the threats and intimidation of garment factory workers who are seeking to assert their labor rights through the formation of unions. In January the International Labour Organization (ILO) [official website] called for cooperation among all parties involved in escalating violence in Cambodia, demanding a release of detained union strikers and a government probe into anti-protest police tactics [JURIST report]. Earlier that month the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights urged [JURIST report] Cambodian authorities to exercise restraint when dealing with protestors. Days beforehand, Cambodia banned rallies and marches [Al Jazeera report] in the Cambodian capital Phnom Penh, and authorities removed more than 1,000 anti-government protesters [BBC report] from the capital the same day. Phnom Penh's governor Pa Socheatvong further stated that until "public order is restored to normal," the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party would not be permitted to hold demonstrations [AFP report].

In Highmark v. Allcare Health Management Systems [transcript, PDF], the Supreme Court is considering whether a district court's finding that a patent case is exceptional based on its judgment that a suit is "objectively baseless" is entitled to deference in higher courts. Allcare Health Management Systems notified Highmark [corporate websites] of patent infringement concerning a method of data entry and management used in medical treatment situations. Highmark then sought a declaratory noninfringement judgment and Allcare counterclaimed. Highmark prevailed in the district court and then moved to be granted attorneys' fees for an exceptional cases. The district court granted attorneys' fees for two of the claims, but the Federal Circuit Court reviewed the claims de novo [opinion, PDF] and reversed one of awards. The Supreme Court granted certiorari the same day as it did for Icon Health and Fitness v. Octane Fitness to determine what level of review the appellate court should have granted the claim.

The EU is not the first to face the issue of graphic warning labels for cigarette packagining. In August 2012 the High Court of Australia [official website] upheld [JURIST report] a law that requires cigarette packages to display graphic images warning of the dangers of smoking and bans brand logos. In the US, there is debate over the constitutionality of graphic cigarette warning labels. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] struck down [JURIST report] graphic warnings in August 2012, holding that the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) [official website] rule on graphic cigarette label warnings exceeded the agency's statutory authority and undermined tobacco companies' economic autonomy. However, in March 2012 the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit [official website] upheld the constitutionality [opinion, PDF] of graphic cigarette warning labels, ruling that portions of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) [HR 1256 text] is a valid restriction of commercial speech and also upheld the FDA's regulations requiring more prominent graphic health warning labels on packaging struck down in an earlier ruling.

Ukraine's interim officials have rapidly worked to alter the state of affairs within the government in the few days since Yanukovich fled from Kiev. The Ukrainian parliament voted on Tuesday to adopt a resolution [JURIST report] referring Yanukovich and other high-ranking state officials to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Yanukovich was last seen in the Crimean peninsula after state officials on Monday issued [JURIST report] a warrant for his arrest, implicating him in the "mass murder" of civilians during the recent protests. The Ukrainian parliament voted [JURIST report] on Saturday to remove him from power, after his repeated refusals to resign in response to the escalating violence. There has been substantial international concern over the mounting crisis in the country, and on February 19 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights made a statement urging [JURIST report] both sides of the conflict to reach a peaceful resolution and end the violence. This followed a January 31 statement by the office that called for [JURIST report] an investigation into allegations of torture against protesters. A day earlier the Ukrainian parliament passed a resolution granting [JURIST report] conditional amnesty to many protesters, a move that failed to conciliate the opposition groups.

The UN and other advocacy organizations have repeatedly urged the Yemeni government to investigate possible human rights violations and to reform the country's laws in accordance with international human rights standards. Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] in November called on Yemen's National Dialogue Conference (NDC) to endorse proposed legislation that would strike down a 2012 law providing blanket immunity [JURIST reports] to former president Ali Abdullah Saleh [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. The new legislation would allow Saleh to be prosecuted for any crime, including any human rights violations. HRW called on [JURIST report] the NDC in September to incorporate stronger protections for women's rights into its new constitution. In March HRW urged [JURIST report] the government to stop seeking and enforcing the death penalty for juvenile offenders. The group accused the Yemeni government, which has the fifth highest number of executions in the world, of executing at least 15 individuals since 2007 for crimes committed while under the age of 18. HRW also criticized [JURIST report] Yemeni authorities in February for failing to investigate top officials for the shooting deaths of 45 anti-government demonstrators who were killed in March 2011.

Where a place with a defined boundary is under the administration of a military department, the limits of the "military installation" for purposes of §1382 are coterminous with the commanding officer's area of responsibility. Those limits do not change when the commander invites the public to use a portion of the base for a road, a school, a bus stop, or a protest area, especially when the commander reserves authority to protect military property by, among other things, excluding vandals and trespassers.

The court heard arguments [JURIST report] in the case in December. Apel's attorney argued that the federal statute in fact was applied only if there is exclusive federal possession. He further noted that any other interpretation would infringe upon an individual's First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court however continuously advised the respondent's counsel to focus on the easement issue rather than the First Amendment. Justice Antonin Scalia noted that respondent's counsel keeps "sliding into the First Amendment issue, which is not the issue on which we granted certiorari. We're only interested in whether the statute applies." Apel's counsel claimed that the US wants the benefit of having an easement so that the state would be responsible for maintenance and liabilities while assuming control over the public road as it would within the base. However, he argued that "[o]nce they've created a public road, once they've created a designated protest zone, it is different, functionally, than the rest of the base."

LGBT rights continues to be a divisive issue, both in the US and abroad, with the primary focus being on the right of same-sex couples to marry [JURIST backgrounder]. Also Wednesday a federal judge struck down [JURIST report] Texas' same-sex marriage ban as unconstitutional. In January four Arizona same-sex couples filed [JURIST report] a lawsuit in federal court seeking to overturn the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriages. In December a federal court declared [JURIST report] Utah's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional, and a similar decision was reached [JURIST report] by the New Mexico Supreme Court just a few days prior, following an August order [JURIST report] to New Mexico district court clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In June the US Supreme Court overturned [JURIST report] the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal statute defining marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman, and which precluded same-sex couples legally married under state law from receiving federal benefits afforded to heterosexual couples.

The heated debate over same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder] is one of the most polarizing issues currently facing the american legal community, with legal challenges currently before numerous state and federal courts. Earlier this week Virginia appealed [JURIST report] a federal ruling against the state's same-sex marriage ban. Last week Oregon's Attorney General announced [JURIST report] her intention not to defend the state's ban on same-sex marriage in court. Since July attorneys general in Nevada, Virginia and Pennsylvania [JURIST reports] have made similar decisions not to defend bans on same-sex marriage. Also last week, a federal judge in Illinois ruled [JURIST report] that same sex couples in Cook County could be issued marriage licenses immediately, rather than wait until June, when the state's same-sex marriage law goes into effect. A federal judge in Kentuckey ruled [JURIST report] earlier this month that the state must recognize valid out-of-state same-sex marriages.

The Supreme Court's ruling is the latest legal development arising out of Stanford's Ponzi scheme. In August a federal judge in Florida dismissed [JURIST report] a lawsuit against the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] over the agency's alleged failure to report Stanford's Ponzi scheme to the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) [official website]. In June 2012 Stanford was sentenced [JURIST report] to 110 years in prison for his Ponzi scheme. The trial against Stanford began after a federal judged ruled [JURIST report] in 2011 that he was competent to stand trial, overruling a previous determination [JURIST report] that his anti-anxiety and anti-depression medications rendered him unable to meaningfully contribute to his defense. In February 2011, Stanford accused [JURIST report] several federal agents of depriving him of his constitutional rights through abusive law-enforcement methods.

Britons traveling to Syria is one of the major counter-terrorism threats facing the UK police. The estimated number of aspiring jihadists traveling from the UK to Syria has risen [WSJ report] to at least 400. Begg was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and he was one of a small group of UK nationals detained at Guantanamo Bay. The US claimed that he was a recruiter and fundraiser for al Qaeda, but he was released without charge in 2005 after the British government intervened to free their citizens from Guantanamo. Following his release Begg was outspoken about the conditions in Guantanamo and he made remarks [JURIST reports] about terroristic activity. In early 2005, the UK government denied passports [JURIST report] to some of the Britons released from Guantanamo Bay.

Turkish lawmakers have been on the defensive in recent months as the government faces allegations of corruption and authoritarianism. In February the Turkish parliament approved [JURIST report] legislation to heighten Internet restrictions, granting the country's telecommunications authority the ability to block websites or remove content without the court's approval. In December Prime Minister Recep Tayipp Erdogan [BBC backgrounder] named [JURIST report] 10 new members of his cabinet following the resignation of three members under investigation for graft. Also in December a Turkish court rejected [JURIST report] bids to release two members of the parliament for the Kurdish Peace and Democratic Party (BDP), Gulser Yildirim and Ibrahim Ayhan, who have been detained since 2010 when they were each charged with links to the militant Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

Apple has been defending itself in a lawsuit over anti-trust violations brought [Reuters report] by 33 state attorneys general and class action attorneys representing consumers from 16 states. Earlier this month, the Second Circuit court denied a motion [JURIST report] by Apple requesting a temporary hold on the duties of the court appointed external compliance officer Michael Bromwich. This ruling came a month after Apple sought to disqualify [JURIST report] Bromwich for exceeding his mandate. Bromwich was installed by Judge Cote of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York in October. In addition to installing Bromwich, Cote had also entered an injunction [JURIST report] against Apple in September, preventing the company from future anti-trust violations in connection with e-book price fixing. This all comes on the heels of a July ruling [JURIST report] by Cote, who found that Apple violated the Sherman Act and various state statutes in an e-book price fixing conspiracy. The US Department of Justice [official website] accused Apple of working with major publishers to increase the price of their e-books.

Last week a court in Frankfurt, Germany, sentenced [JURIST report] former Rwandan mayor Onesphore Rwabukombe to 14 years in prison for his role in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. Earlier this month the ICTR announced [JURIST report] that Augustin Ndindiliyimana, the former chief of staff of the Rwandan parliamentary police, and Francois-Xavier Nzuwonemeye, the former commander of a military reconnaissance battalion, had been acquitted on appeal [judgment, PDF]. Also in February a French court opened the trial [JURIST report] against former Rwandan intelligence chief Pascal Simbikangwa in the country's first trial of a suspect related to the genocide. In January the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association Maina Kiai praised [JURIST report] Rwandan authorities' accomplishments in developing infrastructure and ensuring stability and security since the 1994 genocide.

Navalny, who was sentenced to seven days of administrative arrest for allegedly resisting arrest, is currently serving [JURIST report] a five-year probation sentence for embezzlement. In November a Moscow court ruled that the government could seize Navalny's assets [JURIST report]. Charges for theft and money laundering were filed in October against Navalny and his brother. No trial date has been set, but the penalties include up to 10 years imprisonment for theft and money laundering. Navalny has criticized the charges as an improper attempt to silence people who dissent from the governmental authority. The seizure of assets occurred in connection with those charges. Investigators are accusing both men of defrauding two firms, a cosmetic firm and a cargo delivery firm, of more than 30 million rubles combined.

Holder's proposed legislation is the latest effort on the federal level to reduce the prevalence of identity theft in the US. Although approximately 46 states [advocacy website] have data breach notification standards, they vary in how much time they require companies to notify customers of such breaches. In a statement [text] before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month, Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman, pushing for the new federal legislation, reported "cybercrime has increased dramatically over the past decade" resulting in the access and exploitation of the personal information of others. Raman warned of millions of Americans potentially falling victim to identity theft every year. On February 12, President Barack Obama stated [press release] that "cyber threats pose one of the gravest national security dangers that the United States faces." He went on to announce the launch of the "Cybersecurity Framework," a guide for companies to control cyber risk. The Framework is the result of a year-long effort of the National Institute of Standards and Technology [official website] working closely with the private sector to educate organizations and businesses on best practices and standards to "better manage cyber risk" to our country's economy. The Bureau of Justice [official website] defines identity theft "as the unauthorized use or attempted use of existing accounts ... or personal information to open a new account or for other fraudulent purposes" and reports that roughly "seven percent of persons age 16 or older were victims of identity theft in 2012." The majority of these incidents were the result of stolen credit card or bank account information.

If the question in a pre-trial forfeiture case is whether there is probable cause to think the defendant committed the crime alleged, then the answer is: whatever the grand jury decides. ... Congress of course may strike its own balance and give defendants like the Kaleys the kind of hearing they want. ... But the Due Process Clause, even when combined with the defendant's Sixth Amendment interests, does not command those results.

Counsel for Robers argued in front of the Supreme Court that the amount owed in restitution should be based on the appraised value of the homes on the date of the foreclosure rather than their value on the date that the lenders sold the properties. In response, the government argued that the MVRA "focuses on ... how much of the property that was lost has been returned to the victim before sentencing." According to the government, the property lost was the money lent due to Rober's fraudulent mortgage, and so restitution should be valued when the houses are sold and money is returned to the victim: "When the property that was lost was a car, you don't get an offset for returning pineapples. When the property that was lost was money, you don't get an offset for returning the house."

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments [JURIST report] for the case in November. Counsel for Walden argued that the "plaintiff-centered approach is inconsistent with this Court's precedence which emphasize that the defendant himself must have meaningful contacts with the forum State." The Court granted certiorari [JURIST report] in May.

In this case, we consider whether Randolph applies if the objecting occupant is absent when another occupant consents. Our opinion in Randolph took great pains to emphasize that its holding was limited to situations in which the objecting occupant is physically present. We therefore refuse to extend Randolph to the very different situation in this case, where consent was provided by an abused woman well after her male partner had been removed from the apartment they shared.

The court heard oral arguments [JURIST report] in the case in November. One of the main issues in this case was whether defendant's objection barred his wife from giving a valid consent to the police to search the defendant's home without a warrant. The defendant argued that his objection to search cannot be nullified by his subsequent arrest because it would create possibilities of state abuse. The court granted certiorari [JURIST report] in the case last May.