 |
|

Legal news from Wednesday, November 14, 2007 |
 |
|


Opponents argue against UN death penalty moratorium
Mike Rosen-Molina on November 14, 2007 8:38 PM ET

[JURIST] Nations that support the use of the death penalty [JURIST news archive] Wednesday criticized a UN draft resolution [text; JURIST report] to impose a world-wide moratorium on the capital punishment. The UN Human Rights Committee [official website] is scheduled to vote on the resolution Thursday; if it passes, it will go to the full General Assembly later this year. Opponents of the resolution, including Singapore, Egypt, and Botswana, argued before the Committee Wednesday that it would infringe on nations' sovereignty, and presented a list of 14 last-minute amendments emphasizing nations' right to set criminal punishments. Reuters has more. The Independent has additional coverage.
Over 70 states [co-sponsor list, XLS] have backed the proposal. The draft resolution states that capital punishment "undermines human dignity," that "there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty's deterrent value" and that "any miscarriage or failure of justice in [its] implementation is irreversible and irreparable." Two previous attempts to abolish the death penalty failed to win a majority in the 192-member assembly. This time, however, the resolution calls for a suspension, rather than a complete abolition, of capital punishment.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Musharraf lawyers urge new Pakistan Supreme Court to endorse emergency
Bernard Hibbitts on November 14, 2007 7:17 PM ET

[JURIST] Lawyers for the Pakistani government Wednesday urged the reconstituted Supreme Court of Pakistan [official website] to validate General Pervez Musharraf's declaration of emergency. In court papers filed in response to a challenge petition [JURIST report] brought earlier this week, counsel for Musharraf argued that the petition was itself illegal under the Provisional Constitution Order [text] of November 3 which provided in its Article 3 that: No court including the Supreme Court, the Federal Shariat Court, the High Courts and any Tribunal or other authority shall call in question the PCO, the Oath of Office (Judges) Order 2007 or any order made in pursuance thereof. The reply brief also asserted that the challenge could not be sustained under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution [text] - empowering the Supreme Court to act on a question of public importance with regard to fundamental rights - as the fundamental rights protected under Articles 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 25 of the Constitution had been suspended under the PCO. Counsel additionally rejected the contention that the declaration of emergency had been made in bad faith:The allegation of malafide is baseless. Every thing has been done bonafide and in the interest of the State. It is also denied that the action has been taken to crush the judiciary and to make it subservient to the wishes of the respondent and the executive...For any State to function, all the three pillars of the State must act in harmony in the best national interest. A hearing of the case before the full bench of the reconstituted court is scheduled for Thursday. Most members of the pre-emergency court led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry were effectively dismissed by the declaration of emergency rule; Chaudhry and most of his colleagues are still under virtual house arrest at their residences in Islamabad. APP has more.
Top Pakistani bar sources told JURIST over the weekend that the original challenge filed by former provincial minister Tikka Iqbal was a "decoy petition...filed to wangle a stamp of legitimacy to the illegal acts of this government" and that the case was actually designed to elicit a high court ruling endorsing the emergency decree [JURIST report].


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Chevron settles SEC charges in oil-for-food scandal
James M Yoch Jr on November 14, 2007 3:58 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] on Wednesday agreed to a $30 million settlement of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act [materials; DOJ backgrounder] charges against Chevron [corporate website] in connection with the oil company's alleged involvement in a scheme to exchange illegal payments to Iraqi officials under the now-defunct UN Oil-for-Food program [official website; JURIST news archive]. The settlement [press release] requires Chevron to disgorge $25 million in profits, including $20 million by agreement with the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and $5 million by agreement with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. Chevron must also pay penalties of $3 million to the SEC and $2 million to the Office of Foreign Asset Controls [official website] of the US Treasury Department. According to the SEC complaint [PDF text], Chevron paid more than $20 million in kickbacks taking the form of surcharges from third-party oil sellers that were exchanged for inflated premiums on future oil purchases during the period from April 2001 to May 2002. The complaint [litigation release] alleges that Chevron knew or should have known that the surcharges were being paid directly to Iraqi bank accounts in Lebanon and Jordan. Chevron instituted a ban on paying surcharges and implemented several management checks on oil purchases, but the SEC claims that the measures were ineffective due to management's reliance on the misrepresentations of the company's purchasers. Chevron has neither denied nor admitted wrongdoing in the settlement agreement.
The UN Oil-for-Food program allowed the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein [JURIST news archive], under UN sanctions in the wake of the first Gulf War, to sell limited stocks of oil in return for foodstuffs and other humanitarian supplies. Hussein's regime nonetheless bribed foreign officials and commercial interests so it could sell oil on the black market, embezzling over $1 billion in program funds and perhaps as much another $10 billion from other sources. In August, David Chalmers, owner of Bayoil USA Inc and Bayoil Supply and Trading Ltd, pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to charges that he bribed Iraqi officials in connection with the scandal, while Ludmil Dionissiev, a Bulgarian oil trader who helped Chalmers buy Iraqi oil, pleaded guilty to smuggling. AP has more.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

State Department inspector general denies interfering with investigations
Gabriel Haboubi on November 14, 2007 1:09 PM ET

[JURIST] US State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard [official profile] Wednesday testified before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Committee [official website] and denied allegations [opening statement, PDF] that he politicized the Inspector General's Office by obstructing inquiries that could harm the Bush administration. The allegations brought against Krongard [Oversight Committee report, PDF] include claims that he blocked investigations of fraud and mismanaged spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and interfered with a Justice Department investigation into whether Blackwater USA [corporate website; JURIST news archive] was smuggling weapons into Iraq. The committee also raised concerns that Krongard had a conflict of interest in the Blackwater case, as his brother serves on Blackwater's advisory board [invitation, PDF].
The investigation into Krongard was announced in September [JURIST report]. At that time Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) [official profile] sent notice to Krongard asking for his cooperation, but the committee report notes that Krongard has refused to provide requested documents, even after the committee issued a subpoena for them. In addition, employees of the Inspector General's Office have said that Krongard's congressional liaison Terry Heide told them that they could lose their jobs [Post report] if they cooperated with the committee's investigation. Heide admitted to the committee that she had made statements to that effect, but denied they were meant to intimidate witnesses. Krongard said Wednesday that he has been working to "restore the capabilities of an [Inspector General] office that had fallen into disrepair," but has been hindered by lack of funding. AP has more.
6:55 PM ET - Krongard said Wednesday that he would not participate in any State Department decisions concerning Blackwater in light of his brother's attendance at a Blackwater advisory board meeting. Krongard said he was not previously aware of his brother's connection to the company. CNN has more.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Mukasey installed as US AG at DOJ ceremony
Brett Murphy on November 14, 2007 10:45 AM ET

[JURIST] New US Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey [official profile; JURIST news archive] was installed during a ceremony at the Justice Department Wednesday in front of hundreds of officials and DOJ lawyers. Although officially sworn-in [JURIST report] last Friday, Mukasey again took the oath of office in an installation ceremony led by US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. Addressing DOJ employees for the first time, Mukasey said [text]: I have said previously that much has changed since 1972, when I took the same oath I took today to serve in the United States attorney's office, and indeed it has. There are laws on the books today that did not exist when I was sworn in then, and there are problems that confront us now that did not confront us then, mainly but not entirely involving the threat to our security from those who believe it is their religious duty to make war on us.
But the oath, of course, has stayed the same. And so in many ways has the nature of the work the work that I did then and that you have been doing before I arrived here. You are, all of you, involved, day to day, in applying regulations or rules or laws or provisions of the constitution you have all sworn to protect, a sworn promise in which I joined this morning.
What each person here does, on a day to day basis, is law. If that sounds prosaic and rather limited, try thinking for a moment about the alternative, where the results depends on the opinion of one person or a group of people as to what they feel is right. We don't do simply what seems fair and right according to our own tastes and standards.
But when you step back and look at the thousands of decisions that are made every day under those rules and regulations and laws and Constitutional provisions that this Department enforces the cases you handle, the prisoners in your care, the investigations you pursue when you look at that, the result is something glorious. The result is what gives this Department its name. We do law, but the result is justice. And that is why our ultimate client the people of this country can and do rest secure in the knowledge that our unswerving allegiance is to the law and the Constitution, and that the result of faithful performance of our duty is justice.
That is the great work that each of you and all of you were doing before I showed up here this morning and took the same oath that you had already taken. But the reason why I believe that I was not in any meaningful sense the Attorney General until I came before you here is that my job involves not only an oath, but also a pledge, which I now give you.
And that is to use all of the strength of mind and body that I have to help you to continue to protect the freedom and the security of the people of this country and their civil rights and liberties through the neutral and even-handed application of the constitution and the laws enacted under it; to ask myself in every decision I make whether it helps you to do that; to take the counsel not only of my own insights but also of yours, and to pray that I can help give you the leadership you deserve. President George W. Bush also spoke at the ceremony, and in his remarks [text], said:The job of the Attorney General is one of the most important in our nation's government. The Attorney General must run the world's largest law firm, and the central agency for enforcement of our federal laws. He must aggressively prosecute gun criminals and drug dealers, hold corporate wrongdoers to account, protect victims of child abuse and domestic violence, and uphold the civil rights of every American.
In this time of war, the job of the Attorney General is also vital to America's national security. The Attorney General is responsible for our law enforcement community's efforts to detect, prevent, and disrupt terrorist attacks here at home. He must make certain that our intelligence and law enforcement communities work hand-in-hand to protect the American people from terrorist threats. He must ensure that we do everything within the law to defend the security of all Americans -- while at the same time protecting the liberty of all Americans.
Judge Michael Mukasey is the right man to take on these vital challenges. Michael understands the law from both sides of the bench. He served for more than 18 years as a U.S. District Court Judge in New York, including six years as the Chief Judge. He was a lawyer in private practice. He has served an Assistant United States Attorney in Manhattan, where he headed the Official Corruption Unit.
Judge Mukasey also understands the challenges facing our nation in this time of war. He has written wisely on matters of constitutional law and national security. He knows what it takes to fight the war on terror effectively. And he knows how to do it in a matter that is consistent with our laws and our Constitution. He will bring clear purpose and resolve to the job of Attorney General. I look forward to working with him as a member of my Cabinet, and a key player on our national security team. The US Senate voted 53-40 [JURIST report] last week to confirm Mukasey's nomination. Mukasey succeeds former US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [JURIST news archive] whose resignation [JURIST report] took effect in September. Gonzales resigned from his post after months of controversy over the Justice Department's handling of the firings of eight US Attorneys [JURIST news archive] and subsequent allegations that he may have perjured himself [JURIST report] in testimony before Congress. AP has more.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

ECHR rules against separate schooling for Roma children in Czech Republic
Brett Murphy on November 14, 2007 10:13 AM ET

[JURIST] The European Court of Human Rights ruled [opinion text] Tuesday that the educational separation of Roma children in the Czech Republic violates principles of human rights. By a vote of 13-4, the court held that the separation amounts to racial discrimination [ECHR press release] in violation of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights [PDF text], finding that the schools for Roma children offered sub-standard education. The court said that: the schooling arrangements for Roma children were not attended by safeguards [citations omitted] that would ensure that, in the exercise of its margin of appreciation in the education sphere, the State took into account their special needs as members of a disadvantaged class [citations omitted]. Furthermore, as a result of the arrangements the applicants were placed in schools for children with mental disabilities where a more basic curriculum was followed than in ordinary schools and where they were isolated from pupils from the wider population. As a result, they received an education which compounded their difficulties and compromised their subsequent personal development instead of tackling their real problems or helping them to integrate into the ordinary schools and develop the skills that would facilitate life among the majority population. The Czech Republic was ordered to pay 4,000 euro to each child, and the ruling could potentially speed educational integration throughout the European Union.
Roma children first complained of the lack of equal education in 2000, at which time the Czech Republic began to implement changes to the system. In 2005, special schools for Roma children were officially abolished, however, some observers maintain that the schools still operate with the same sub-par education under new names. Last year, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia reported that Roma gypsies, Jews and Muslims continue to experience significant racial and ethnic discrimination and violence [JURIST report] in EU countries. BBC News has more. The EUobserver has additional coverage.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Colorado high court OKs ballot initiative language on protections for fertilized eggs
Natalie Hrubos on November 14, 2007 8:47 AM ET

[JURIST] The Colorado Supreme Court [official website] on Tuesday approved [PDF text] the language of an anti-abortion group's proposed ballot initiative [PDF text] that would amend the Colorado constitution to define a fertilized egg as a "person" entitled to "inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law" under the state constitution. The group, Colorado for Equal Rights for Human Life, must collect 76,000 signatures in six months in order to place the measure on the 2008 ballot. Critics argue that the measure is misleading [NARAL Colorado press release] as its supporters have said their goal is to outlaw abortion, which is not specifically mentioned in the language of the ballot initiative. Critical have also said the proposed changes could also regulate in-vitro fertilization, stem cell research, and birth control.
According to anti-abortion activists, similar ballot initiatives are under way in Montana, Georgia, Oregon, Michigan and South Carolina. AP has more.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|
| For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...
|
|
|