[JURIST] US senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) [official websites] said Friday that they would support the nomination of Michael Mukasey [WH profile; JURIST news archive] as US attorney general, according to preliminary reports. Their endorsements in combination with those of GOP colleagues would likely give Mukasey the ten votes that he needs for his nomination to pass the Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] and advance to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation. Schumer said Friday after meeting Mukasey privately that his decision to support the hard-pressed nominee was "extremely difficult". Feinstein said in press release [text] last week that

Michael Mukasey is not Alberto Gonzales. Rather, he has forged an independent life path as a practitioner of the law and a federal judge in the Southern District of New York. In this capacity, he has presided over 1,600 cases over 19 years. He has developed extensive experience on national security issues....

Judge Mukasey’s answers to hundreds of questions, both in our confirmation hearing and in writing, were crisp and succinct, and demonstrated a strong, informed, and independent mind.

[JURIST] US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice [official profile] and other senior administration officials must testify about whether they shared classified national defense information with two American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) [advocacy website] lobbyists, a federal judge ruled [opinion, PDF] Friday. Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, indicted [PDF text; JURIST report] in 2005 under the 1917 Espionage Act [18 USC 793 text] for allegedly conspiring to receive and disclose classified US defense information over a five-year period dating back to 1999, maintain that they played an unofficial but sanctioned role in crafting American-Israeli foreign policy, and that Rice and others can confirm it.

In August, Rice and other senior administration officials argued they should be exempt from testifying [JURIST report], but US District Judge T.S. Ellis III said that the defendants have a right to argue that they regarded the meetings as simply another back channel for diplomacy. If the White House is unable to successfully challenge the subpoenas it could be forced to drop the case against the AIPAC officials. AP has more.

[JURIST] The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) [official website] Friday asked the US Supreme Court to review a decision [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York vacating an FCC determination [FCC order] that Fox Television broadcasts violated the FCC's indecency and profanity prohibitions. The appeals court ruled that the FCC's "fleeting expletives" standard breached the terms of the Administrative Procedure Act [text] because the FCC failed to articulate a reasoned basis for its change in policy. The decision nullified the policy until the FCC could provide "any explanation for why" the separate ban on profanity was necessary, which was not regulated by the FCC prior to 2004.

The two alleged indecency violations were unscripted expletives uttered during the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards. Fox challenged the FCC's determination, saying during oral arguments [JURIST report] on appeal last December that the FCC's decency standard was unclear and violated free speech protections. AP has more.

[JURIST] The UN Human Rights Committee [official website] expressed concern Friday over continuing human rights violations in Algeria. In its 2007 report [PDF text, in French; press release] on the North African country, the Committee flagged massacres, torture, rape and disappearances, as well as religious and political oppression. It concluded that the violence was a product of both armed groups and government security forces, but it urged Algerian leaders to take steps to stop the abuses, recommending in particular that Algerian judges, lawyers and citizens be educated in basic human rights.

Internal conflict erupted in Algeria in 1992 [Amnesty International backgrounder] when the Algerian military intervened in national elections, preventing the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) [backgrounder] from gaining power. Since the early 1990s, over 200,000 Algerians people are believed to have been killed as a result of violence by both government and non-government armed groups. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] The International Court of Justice (ICJ) [official website] at The Hague announced [press release, PDF] Friday that hearings in a case involving France and Djibouti will begin January 21, 2008. The dispute [ICJ case archive] between the two countries is over whether a French judge has the authority to summon high-level Djibouti witnesses to investigate the possible assassination of French judge Bernard Borrel [advocacy website, in French] who was found dead near the city of Djibouti in 1995 while engaged in a money laundering probe. Borrel's death was originally ruled a suicide, but French investigators now claim he may have been murdered.

In January 2006, Djibouti filed an application [text, in French, PDF] asking the ICJ to arbitrate [JURIST report] the disagreement over testimony. Djibouti maintains that France has no right to summon Djibouti officials because of diplomatic immunity. France consented to ICJ jurisdiction [JURIST report; French Foreign Affairs letter, in French, PDF] in the matter in August 2006. The UN News Service has more.

[JURIST] Amnesty International Friday urged governments worldwide not to transfer genocide suspects to Rwanda [press release] until fair trials there can be guaranteed. The human rights group is concerned about the Rwandan justice system's fairness and impartiality with respect to international standards of justice. The director of the group's Africa Programme, Erwin van der Borght, said:

The various national governments where suspects reside should immediately start proceedings in their own courts applying universal jurisdiction laws to investigate and, where there is sufficient admissible evidence, prosecute the horrific crimes committed during the genocide -- on behalf of both the Rwandan people and the international community.... Where universal jurisdiction laws allowing for prosecutions do not exist, they should be enacted immediately.

We recognize the importance of Rwandan national courts taking responsibility for investigating and prosecuting persons accused of the heinous crimes that were committed in Rwanda during the genocide. However, there is still a lot of work to be done to ensure that the rights of both the accused and the victims will be fully respected and protected by these courts.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of Pakistan [official website] judge presiding over the case challenging the legality of President Pervez Musharraf's re-election bid said Friday that the court will move ahead with hearings and will likely issue a verdict by November 6. Although Judge Javed Iqbal has previously said that hearings would be delayed [JURIST report] until November 12, he said Friday that the court will continue with the case next week because of the climate of political uncertainty. There have also been rumors that Musharraf will declare martial law [JURIST report] if election results are invalidated; the government has denied such allegations. Aitzaz Ahsan, president of Pakistan's Supreme Court Bar Association, filed an application with the Court Friday, asking it to issue an order barring Musharraf from taking any unconstitutional steps.

Musharraf won an overwhelming victory [JURIST report] last month in legislative elections for the presidency, according to unofficial results. The Supreme Court ruled before the election that the controversial ballot could proceed even though Musharraf continued to serve as army chief, but it barred the Election Commission of Pakistan [official website] from officially declaring a winner until the high court rules on whether Musharraf was in fact eligible to run under the circumstances. Musharraf's opposition has challenged the landslide victory on the grounds that he should have first stood down as head of the army. The Guardian has more. PTI has additional coverage.

[JURIST] US Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) [official website] said Friday that he will not support the nomination of Michael Mukasey [WH profile; JURIST news archive] as US attorney general, citing Mukasey's continuing reluctance to unequivocally denounce waterboarding [JURIST news archive] as torture. Mukasey must receive ten votes from the Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] for his nomination to advance to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation. Four Democratic committee members, including Joe Biden (D-DE), Richard Durbin (D-IL), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and most recently, Edward Kennedy (D-MA) [official websites], have already said they will not vote for Mukasey. AP has more.

On Thursday, Kennedy said in remarks delivered on the Senate floor that he will not support the Mukasey's nomination for the same reason. Kennedy said that US reliance on waterboarding increases the chances in the future that US soldiers captured by enemy forces will be subjected to the practice as well. Both Democrats and Republicans [JURIST reports] have said they will consider opposing Mukasey's nomination if he does not clarify his position on the issue. The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to consider Mukasey's nomination [JURIST report] next Tuesday. AP has more.

4:05 PM ET - According to Leahy's statement [text] Friday:

It is the duty of the Attorney General to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law — not to try to bend the law to a President's agenda. When the infamous Bybee Memo came to light, even this Administration had to formally withdraw it. Yet I am concerned that the defining down of torture, of the rule of law and of American values continues in this Administration.


The United States and its Attorney General must stand for the rule of law – and stand in the breach, if need be. There is no question in my mind that waterboarding is torture and is illegal under our laws and treaty obligations. ...

There are fundamental issues that require moral and legal clarity, and the willingness to act on our convictions -- and this is one of them. The United States does not torture. The United States does not inflict cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. This is part of the moral fiber of our country and our historical place as a world leader on human rights, and it has long been fixed in our laws, our constitution, and our values. ...

There may be interrogation techniques that require close examination and extensive briefings. Waterboarding is not among them. No American should need a classified briefing to determine whether waterboarding is torture. Waterboarding was used at least as long ago as the Spanish Inquisition. We prosecuted Japanese war criminals for waterboarding after World War II.

As Rear Admiral John Hutson, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, testified this year before the Judiciary Committee: "Other than perhaps the rack and thumbscrews, water-boarding is the most iconic example of torture in history.... It has been repudiated for centuries. It's a little disconcerting to hear now that we're not quite sure where water-boarding fits in the scheme of things. I think we have to be very sure where it fits in the scheme of things." Unquote.

Judge Mukasey was not asked to evaluate any secret "facts and circumstances." He was asked whether waterboarding is illegal. Our law makes torture illegal, and waterboarding is torture, and it is illegal. It is frankly not dependent on any, quote, "relevant facts and circumstances of the technique’s past or proposed use."

When it comes to our core values - the things that make our country great and that define America's place in the world - these values do not waver from president to president. America should continue to stand against torture.

I agree with Senator John McCain, who sadly knows too much about the issue of torture. He said recently: "Anyone who knows what waterboarding is could not be unsure. It is a horrible torture technique used by Pol Pot and being used on Buddhist monks as we speak." No presidential signing statement or secret Administration memo can be allowed to change our laws' prohibitions against waterboarding. ...

I am eager to restore strong leadership and independence to the Department of Justice. I like Michael Mukasey. I wish that I could support his nomination. But I cannot. America needs to be certain and confident of the bedrock principle - deeply embedded in our laws and our values - that no one, not even the President, is above the law.

Accordingly, when the Judiciary Committee considers this nomination on Tuesday, I must vote no on this nomination.

[JURIST] The Chad Supreme Court ruled Friday that a group of European citizens connected to the attempt by French charity Zoe's Arc [advocacy website, in French] to fly 103 children believed to be orphans [ZA backgrounder, in French] from the embattled Darfur region of Sudan [JURIST news archives] to France will be transferred to stand trial in the capital of N'Djamena. Six French nationals have been charged with kidnapping [JURIST report] and face five to 20 years in prison if convicted. Three French journalists and a seven-person Barcelona-based flight crew have also been charged with complicity in the alleged kidnapping.

Two UN agencies and the Red Cross have determined [press release] that the children were actually not orphans, as originally reported by Zoe's Arc. According to UNICEF [advocacy website], 91 children have said they had been living with their family, consisting of at least one adult they considered to be their close relative. Most of the children, aged one to 10, came from villages in Chad [JURIST news archive] near the Sudan border. Some parents have said they were persuaded by foreigners to give up their children in return for promised education in nearby towns. The botched flyout occurred just before the European Union planned to deploy a 4,000-man peacekeeping force [IHT report] in Chad and the Central African Republic [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] to aid in the refugee crisis created by the Darfur conflict. Reuters has more. BBC News has additional coverage.

[JURIST] A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit heard arguments Thursday on whether a 2003 Virginia law banning so-called partial-birth abortions is constitutional. In a 2-1 split in 2005, a panel of judges on the same court ruled the law unconstitutional [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] because it lacked an an exception to protect the mother's health. Virginia Solicitor General William E. Thro appealed that ruling in light of a Supreme Court decision [text; JURIST report] earlier this year upholding a similar federal law [PDF text] which also lacks a health exception. Lawyers for the Center for Reproductive Rights argued that the Virginia law is distinct and still unconstitutional. The Richmond Times-Dispatch has more.

The D&E abortion procedure is often called "partial-birth" abortion [JURIST news archive] by abortion opponents because the undeveloped fetus is partially extracted from the uterus before the abortion is performed. In June, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down a Michigan "partial-birth" abortion ban [JURIST report], because it deviated from the express limitations established in the April Supreme Court decision.

[JURIST] The UN Human Rights Committee [official website] Friday called on Libya to end the use of torture [UN materials, PDF] and to investigate torture allegations by five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who had been detained in Libya for eight years on suspicions that they deliberately infected hundreds of Libyan children with the HIV virus [JURIST news archive]. The call came after the recent completion of an intensive study [UN materials] of the civil and political rights records of Libya, Algeria, Georgia, Austria and Costa Rica. Although Libya told the Committee that torture had been banned, committee vice-chairman Ivan Shearer said the investigation found "widespread and systematic" torture in the country. Reuters has more.

In August, the five Bulgarian nurses and one Palestinian doctor, who was later granted Bulgarian citizenship reiterated their allegations [JURIST report] that Libyan authorities forced a confession out of them via torture. The six medics consistently maintained their innocence, despite their confessions. The son of Libya's leader, Seif al Islam Gaddafi, acknowledged [JURIST report] that the six medics had been subjected to electric shocks and threats of retaliation against their family. The medics were initially sentenced to death, but a Libyan judicial body commuted their sentences after the families of the infected patients each received $1 million in compensation [JURIST reports]. All six were pardoned by Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov after their release by Libyan authorities [JURIST reports] under the pretense that they would serve their sentences in Bulgaria.

[JURIST] Canada's ruling Conservative Party [party website] government said Thursday that it will not ask Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer to commute the death sentence of a Canadian-born man on death row in Montana [CCADP backgrounder]. The announcement marks a sharp departure in Canadian foreign policy; the Canadian government has traditionally tried to save Canadians from execution in foreign countries. Though no state-supported executions have taken place in Canada since 1962 [AI backgrounder], opposition Liberal Party lawmakers contend the policy shift indicates that the Conservative government supports the death penalty. The Canadian Press has more.

Montana, like many other US states, uses lethal injection [JURIST news archive] for executions. Many states have recently declared an effective moratorium on lethal injection executions pending the outcome of a Supreme Court case - Baze v. Rees (07-5439) [docket; cert. petition] - that challenges lethal injection as a form of "cruel and unusual punishment."

[JURIST] Two environmental advocacy groups Thursday filed an amended complaint [press release] challenging the constitutionality of the Real ID Act [PDF text] in response to actions taken by US Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff last month. Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club [advocacy websites] argued that Chertoff violated the constitutional separation of powers by using his power under the Real ID Act to circumvent a federal district court decision [JURIST reports] that ordered the delay of 1.5 miles of fence construction on the San Pedro river along part of the Arizona-Mexico border. Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle [official profile] of the US District Court for the District of Columbia held that the federal government did not take into account the environmental impact [AP report] of that portion of the fence. The San Pedro river is considered a National Conservation Area (NCA) by the government. AP has more.

President George W. Bush signed the Secure Fence Act of 2006 [PDF text; JURIST report] in October 2006. The legislation authorizes the construction of approximately 700 miles of fencing along the 2,000 mile US-Mexican border. Critics of the fence include locals in border communities, who feel that the the federal government has not addressed their concerns that a border fence would interfere with irrigation, harm wildlife, as well as disrupt Mexican consumers and investors that positively contribute to the local economy. In May, the International Boundary and Water Commission said that construction of the fence could violate a boundary treaty [JURIST report] between the United States and Mexico.

[JURIST] The government of Pakistan [JURIST news archive] plans to amend the Pakistan Army Act to include a provision enabling the army to court-martial civilians for certain offenses, Pakistan Attorney General Malik Qayyum said Friday. The offenses that could subject civilians to court-martial trials include abduction, use of arms and terrorism, and will particularly apply to offenses committed by tribal militants. The proposed changes would also permit intelligence agencies to detain civilians without charges indefinitely. Internews has more.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) [advocacy website] immediately objected to the proposed provision, saying the Pakistan intelligence agencies should not have any additional powers. The HRCP added that the provision could lead to the creation of summary military courts, which the Supreme Court of Pakistan [official website] has already banned. ANI has more.

[JURIST] The military junta in Myanmar has released an additional 46 people detained during the recent government crackdown [JURIST report] on opponents of the military junta, officials said Friday, after releasing 87 other demonstrators [JURIST report] last week. Six other dissidents were released [JURIST report] on Tuesday. Most of the demonstrators released are members of the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Aung San Suu Kyi [BBC profile]. UN Special Envoy for Myanmar Ibrahim Gambari [official profile] will arrive in Myanmar on Saturday for his second visit [UN press release] to the country since the protests began. Gambari will continue to encourage Myanmar's military junta to move towards democratization and reconciliation. Myanmar monks resumed protests [JURIST report] in central Myanmar earlier this week, marking their first demonstration since the September protests.

The government crackdown against protesters began in August, when Myanmar [JURIST archive] security officers arrested hundreds of Buddhist monks demonstrating against rising fuel prices and human rights abuses by the military regime. Protests only subsided when junta troops effectively locked down Myanmar's major cities. At least 10 people were killed when government soldiers shot into protesting crowds [JURIST report] and the government has said that some 3,000 people were arrested for participating in the protests. It is unclear how many protesters remain in detention. BBC News has more.

2:01 PM ET - The Myanmar government Friday ordered Charles Petrie, the most senior UN diplomat currently serving in the country, to leave Myanmar. After a meeting with government officials, Petrie was given a letter ordering his expulsion. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed disappointment [statement] at the decision, which was made after Petrie urged the Myanmar government to listen to protesters. The New York Times has more.

[JURIST] The Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal [official website] has denied former Australian Guantanamo detainee Mamdouh Habib [BBC profile] a request to regain his passport, Habib's lawyer said Friday, citing his likelihood "to engage in conduct that might prejudice the security of Australia or of a foreign country" if Habib were allowed to travel outside Australia. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer canceled Habib's Australian passport in 2005 when Habib was released from Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] without charge and returned to Australia. Habib appealed that decision, which was based on an Australian secret service assessment declaring Habib likely to threaten security if he left the country. Habib's lawyer said they will appeal the Tribunal's decision to the Federal Court.

Habib was detained in 2001 in Pakistan and was held in Egypt and Afghanistan before being sent to Guantanamo Bay for three years, where the US accused him of aiding terrorist militants. The US released him without charge [JURIST report] in 2005. Habib and his lawyers have repeatedly said that he was tortured while in US custody [JURIST reports]. AP has more. The Australian has local coverage.