 |
|

Legal news from Friday, February 1, 2008 |
 |
|


UN rights panel urges Saudi Arabia to end male guardianship system for women
Eric Firkel on February 1, 2008 4:24 PM ET

[JURIST] The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women [official website] Friday called for Saudi Arabia [JURIST news archive] to abolish laws that give men complete guardianship over women. Under current Saudi law, women have few or no rights as regards marriage, divorce, child custody, and property ownership. The committee also urged Saudi Arabia to outlaw polygamy, which it said is by its very nature counter to gender equality. The committee's experts said that Sharia law [CFR backgrounder], on which Saudi Arabia's legal system is based, should not supersede the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women [text], which Saudi Arabia signed in 2000. Saudi officials have denied that Saudi laws discriminate against women.
The committee's statement follows a November case in which a 20-year old gang-rape victim was sentenced to 90 lashes and six months in prison [NY Times report] for having been in the presence of a man who was not a relative when the attack occurred. King Abdullah pardoned the woman in December, but the incident sparked worldwide outrage over Saudi laws and demands for reform. Reuters has more.


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

|

UK military probing Iraq detainee torture allegations
Jaime Jansen on February 1, 2008 10:32 AM ET

[JURIST] The UK military is investigating allegations surrounding the 2004 deaths of 22 Iraqi detainees who may have been in UK custody and the alleged torture of nine other detainees, officials said Thursday after a court-imposed gag order on the probe was lifted. The investigation concerns a 2004 clash between insurgents and a British convoy in Majar al Kabir [Guardian report], north of Basra, in which approximately 22 Iraqis were said to have been killed and an additional nine taken into custody. Iraqi petitioners, however, allege that the deaths actually occurred while the Iraqis were detained in British custody rather than in battle, and that there is evidence that they were tortured. The nine survivors have also said that they were tortured while in British custody. The military opened the investigation in December, but did not publicize it because of the gag order, lifted [BBC report] by the UK High Court on Thursday.
The UK Royal Military Police [official website] first conducted an investigation [Guardian report] into the incident in 2004, clearing the UK soldiers of wrongdoing when an independent pathologist determined the Iraqis' deaths resulted from combat injuries. AP has more.


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

|

Federal judge rejects Conrad Black bid to remain free on bail pending appeal
Jaime Jansen on February 1, 2008 9:47 AM ET

[JURIST] Canadian-born financier and former media mogul Conrad Black [CBC profile; JURIST news archive] lost his bid Thursday to remain free on bail pending the appeal of his July conviction [JURIST report] on mail fraud and obstruction of justice charges. In December, Black was sentenced to 78 months in prison [JURIST report] and ordered to pay $125,000 and forfeit another $1 million for his conviction. US District Judge Amy St. Eve [official profile] of the Northern District of Illinois [official website] Thursday said that Black was not a flight risk nor a danger to the community, but ruled that Black's lawyers had not convinced her that his appeal would reverse his conviction or initiate a new trial. Black must report to prison by March 3. CBC News has more.
The US government originally accused [indictment, PDF] Black of diverting more than $80 million from Hollinger International and its shareholders [JURIST report] during the company's $2.1 billion sale of several hundred Canadian newspapers, but in July 2007 he was found not guilty on separate charges of racketeering, wire fraud, and tax evasion. In August 2007, Black and former Hollinger executives John Boultbee, Peter Atkinson and Mark Kipnis filed concurrent motions [JURIST report] requesting either new trials or acquittals after their July convictions. St. Eve largely rejected the motions [ruling, PDF; JURIST report], overturning one of Kipnis' mail fraud convictions while affirming all of the other convictions against the four.


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

|

Fourth Guantanamo Bay detainee faces military commission charges
Jaime Jansen on February 1, 2008 8:35 AM ET

[JURIST] The US military has charged [press release] a Guantanamo Bay detainee with attempted murder [charge sheet, PDF] and intentionally causing serious bodily harm, the Defense Department said Thursday. Mohammed Jawad [DOD materials], an Afghan national, allegedly threw a grenade at two US soldiers and an interpreter in their vehicle on December 17, 2002 in Kabul. Jawad is the fourth Guantanamo detainee to be formally charged with war crimes under the 2006 Military Commissions Act [PDF text]. David Hicks [JURIST news archive] pleaded guilty to a charge of supporting terrorism [JURIST reports] before a US military commission last March after spending more than five years in US custody since his capture in Afghanistan. Salim Hamdan and Omar Khadr [JURIST news archives] are awaiting trials. Both Jawad and Khadr allegedly committed war crimes while they were still minors. AFP has more. Reuters has additional coverage.
In 2006, Hamdan successfully challenged the military commission system when the US Supreme Court ruled [JURIST report] that the commissions as initially constituted violated US and international law. Congress subsequently passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and Hamdan again challenged the system, arguing that it still violates his rights, but the Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal [JURIST report] in October. He had hoped the Supreme Court would consider his case along with those of other detainees challenging their detention at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST report].


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

|

Senate panel approves federal judiciary pay raise
Jaime Jansen on February 1, 2008 8:00 AM ET

[JURIST] The US Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] approved a 29 percent pay raise for all federal judges Thursday by a margin of 10-7. If passed by Congress, the Federal Judicial Salary Restoration Act of 2007 [S 1638 materials] would mark the first significant raise federal judges have received since 1991. The bill stops judicial pay from being set at the same level as members of Congress and would raise salaries for district judges to $218,000 per year; federal appeals judges would earn $231,000 per year and associate Supreme Court justices would earn $267,900. The Chief Justice would earn $279,900. The House Judiciary Committee approved [JURIST report] HR 3753 [bill materials], the House version of the bill, in December.
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has called for a federal judiciary pay raise since he began his tenure on the court, arguing that experienced district court judges receive salaries comparable first year associates at many law firms. Last month, Roberts used his 2007 year-end report [PDF text] on the federal judiciary to urge Congress to increase the salaries of federal judges and to increase communications between all branches of government. AP has more.


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

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