[JURIST] Diplomats reached an agreement Wednesday on a draft treaty [text, PDF] banning the use, manufacture, and stockpiling of cluster munitions [ICRC materials; JURIST news archive] following ten days of negotiation at the Dublin Diplomatic Conference on Cluster Munitions [official website]. The treaty forbids signatories from acting in a way that would assist, encourage, or induce "anyone to engage in any activity prohibited" under the treaty. Countries possessing cluster munitions would be required to destroy them, and to provide medical assistance, rehabilitation and psychological support to any victim of cluster munitions within their jurisdictions. While the US was not present at the conference, a loophole [HRW press release] was built into the treaty to allow continued military and other cooperation between parties and non-parties to the treaty. Article 21 of the treaty allows the military personnel and nationals of treaty signatories to engage in military cooperation and operations with non-signatory states which might engage in prohibited activities. The treaty will be formally adopted on Friday, signed into law in December, and then must be ratified by individual signatory nations. BBC News has more.

No representatives were sent to the conference from the US, China, Russia, Israel, India, or Pakistan, whose governments collectively make up the world's largest producers and users of cluster bombs. Last month the US said it would not attend the 2008 Dublin conference [JURIST report], echoing June 2007 statements that it does not support a ban on cluster bombs [JURIST report] but that it is open to negotiations to reduce their impact on civilians. Cluster bombs break apart, releasing large numbers of smaller, self-contained explosives which spread out before detonating upon impact. Their design aims to stop large-scale troop movements by maximizing bodily injury over a wide area. Bombs which fail to detonate can present a serious hazard for civilian populations. Strong supporters of the ban include the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Canada, Japan, Mexico, and Australia. Earlier this month, Pope Benedict XVI urged [AFP report] all governments to adopt the ban. AFP has additional coverage.

[JURIST] Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] Wednesday sharply criticized [press release] Egypt's decision to extend [JURIST report] the country's emergency laws [EOHR backgrounder] for a further two year period, saying the move "shows contempt for the rule of law." Emergency laws have been in effect in Egypt since the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat [memorial website], giving the government and security services the authority to censor the media, arrest and detain anyone deemed a threat to state security, ban demonstrations, and try civilians in military courts [JURIST report]. Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif [official profile] has said that the emergency laws are necessary to combat terrorism, but HRW Wednesday urged the government to repeal the laws and instead enact new specially tailored terrorism laws [JURIST report] that are less repressive.

On Tuesday, US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the US was "disappointed" in the extension [DOS press briefing transcript] and urged Egypt to pass the new counter-terrorism laws. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation [official website, in Russian] ruled Tuesday that the law under which the former head of media advocacy NGO Educated Media Foundation (EMF) was charged in 2007 was unconstitutionally vague [press release], requiring that smuggling charges against her be dropped. Manana Aslamaziyan [profile] was arrested after she entered the country without declaring over $12,000 in cash; she was indicted under a law that made it illegal to bring a "large sum" of money over the border without declaring it, but the law did not define what constituted a large sum. Aslamaziyan has maintained that the charges against her were without merit. The Moscow Times has more.

EMF is a non-governmental organization working to train Russian journalists to encourage the growth of independent and alternative media. Last year, Russian authorities conducted a raid [BBC report] on EMF's main Moscow offices amid a growing Russian government crack-down on NGOs [JURIST report]; hundreds of Russian journalists later joined in a protest letter [text] to then-Russian President Vladimir Putin. In 2006, Putin signed a law [JURIST report] granting tighter state control over non-governmental organizations, including those that were foreign-funded. The law has been widely criticized [JURIST report], but its supporters have defended it as necessary to prevent foreign governments and organizations from using NGOs to undermine Russia's security.

[JURIST] A group of 35 members of anti-war activism organization Witness Against Torture [advocacy website] appeared in a DC Superior Court Tuesday. The 35 were arrested at a protest [JURIST report] in front of the US Supreme Court in January, where they were demonstrating for the closure of the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive], and were indicted on charges of violating an ordinance barring demonstrations on court grounds. Prosecutors had offered to drop the charges, but the protesters have insisted on appearing in court. The Washington Post has more.

At their court appearance, protesters wore orange jumpsuits similar to the ones worn by Guantanamo detainees and some identified themselves using the names of detainees as a way to "symbolically grant the Guantanamo prisoners their day in court" [advocacy press release]. The January 11 protest took place on the sixth anniversary of the opening of the Guantanamo Bay facility in Cuba.

[JURIST] Terrorism cases should be tried in the US federal criminal court system [official website], rather than by military tribunals [JURIST news archive] or special terrorism courts, according to a report [PDF text; HRF materials] released Wednesday by Human Rights First [advocacy website] in conjunction with two former federal prosecutors. Consolidating materials from over 120 international terrorism cases, the report argues that federal courts are versatile and creative enough to deal with defendant's rights, national security, and other concerns that might arise when trying terrorism cases:

The civilian justice system offers several different avenues, under existing law, for the government to secure the detention of an individual whom it believes is complicit in terrorism. If the government files criminal charges, it can seek detention under the bail statute. If the suspect is an alien not lawfully present in the United States, the government has broad latitude to arrest and detain him pending removal proceedings. The government may also seek an individual's arrest on a material witness warrant, but this approach is viable only for a limited time period and carries with it important procedural safeguards.

Of these three methods, the first is often the most direct and effective. However, the government may face a quandary in determining whether to bring criminal charges against a terrorism suspect. In some cases, the government may face the problem of insufficient admissible evidence to support a criminal charge — even though it may firmly believe, perhaps based on reliable but inadmissible intelligence information, that an individual presents a real danger. In other cases, an arrest may be feasible but could impair the government’s ability to successfully prosecute the defendant by interrupting the investigation and thus cutting off the government's ability to develop additional evidence. In some such cases, a public arrest may damage ongoing investigations of larger terrorism networks by revealing the government’s scrutiny and tipping off co-conspirators.

For years, prosecutors have faced these sorts of challenges in serious criminal matters such as organized crime and gang prosecutions.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of British Columbia [official website] Tuesday ruled [text] that Canadian laws on drug possession and trafficking are unconstitutional as they violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [text]. Justice Ian Pitfield gave the Canadian government until next June to amend the drug law to bring it in line with the Charter. The case concerns a Vancouver exemption to Canada's Controlled Drugs and Substances Act [text] that allows the city to create a "safe injection" zone known as Insite [VCH backgrounder]. The exemption, intended to encourage drug addicts to seek medical care, was set to expire on June 30, but advocates petitioned the Court to intervene before Ottawa could decide whether to extend or end the exemption. Pitfield's ruling extends the exemption until June 2009.

Pitfield compared drug addiction to alcoholism and smoking, noting in his ruling that similar sites existed to help people with those addictions and finding that the "safe injection" site provided a vital public service:

Denial of access to Insite and safe injection for the reason stated by Canada, amounts to a condemnation of the consumption that led to addiction in the first place, while ignoring the resulting illness. While there is nothing to be said in favour of the injection of controlled substances that leads to addiction, there is much to be said against denying addicts health care services that will ameliorate the effects of their condition. Society does that for other substances such as alcohol and tobacco. While those are not prohibited substances, society neither condemns the individual who chose to drink or smoke to excess, nor deprives that individual of a range of health care services. Management of the harm in those cases is accepted as a community responsibility. I cannot see any rational or logical reason why the approach should be different when dealing with the addiction to narcotics, an aspect of which is that the substance that resulted in the addiction in the first place will invariably be ingested in the short-term, and possibly in the long-term, because of the very nature of the illness. Simply stated, I cannot agree with the Canada’s submission that an addict must feed his addiction in an unsafe environment when a safe environment that may lead to rehabilitation is the alternative.

[JURIST] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official website] Tuesday promised to step up efforts to combat child exploitation and sexual abuse allegedly perpetrated by UN peacekeeping forces. In a short statement [text] released by his spokesperson, Ban expressed his concern over recent allegations of misconduct. The statement read, in part:

The United Nations is committed to training and monitoring our civilian staff and working with our troop and police contributing countries to ensure that all categories of United Nations personnel are both trained in - and are accountable for - the highest standards of conduct.

As pointed out in the report, the United Nations has already undertaken a series of measures designed to tackle this problem directly, from establishing Conduct and Discipline Units in all of our Missions to strengthening our training regimes for all categories of UN personnel. We are determined to redouble our efforts in this regard and to work with all of our partners to implement fully our policy of zero tolerance of sexual exploitation and abuse by UN personnel.

The United Nations will continue to depend on the active efforts of its troop and police contributing countries in investigating and disciplining their national personnel found to have committed misconduct, including acts of sexual exploitation and abuse while serving in UN operations.

[JURIST] Several public health and environmental groups filed a petition for review [PDF; press release] of new US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] standards in the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Tuesday. Non-profit environmental law firm Earthjustice [advocacy website] is handling the suit, which alleges that the EPA ignored the input of top scientists in issuing its smog regulations [EPA materials] in March. An EPA Advisory Board and many scientists had recommended placing the smog standards up to 15 parts-per-billion lower than the number ultimately set by the EPA [JURIST news archive].

The Earthjustice lawsuit alleges that the EPA made the decision as a result of pressure from the White House. Last week, a US House report suggested that California's request to implement stricter vehicle emissions standards was denied by the EPA last December due to White House influence [JURIST report]. A coalition of eleven states, including California, Maryland, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Maine, also filed a similar lawsuit Tuesday, alleging that the new smog regulations fail to adequately protect public health. AP has more.

[JURIST] Competing Palestinian governments controlled by Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas [BBC backgrounders] in Gaza have been committing human rights violations in their bids for dominance over the Palestinian territories, the Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens' Rights (PICCR) [advocacy website] said Tuesday. PICCR reported that it had received over 2,000 reports of human rights abuses in 2007, including illegal detentions and torture. A spokesman for the group also accused both governments of limiting the freedoms of speech and assembly. Reuters has more. AP has additional coverage.

In 2007, Amnesty International [advocacy website] released a 58-page report [text; JURIST report] criticizing the two main Palestinian political factions for causing wide-scale violence involving civilians. The report recognized the weakness of Palestinian institutions, but insisted that they stop the Gaza Strip [BBC backgrounder] and West Bank conflicts. Israel's occupation and repeated attacks on Palestinian targets have been used by some Palestinian officials as excuses for inaction.

[JURIST] The 601-member Nepalese Constituent Assembly voted Wednesday to abolish the country's monarchy and establish a republic. The decision gives King Gyanendera [JURIST news archive] fifteen days to abandon the royal palace in the capital Kathmandu, and declares him to be an ordinary citizen. Wednesday's vote finalizes a development that had been expected since December 2007, when Nepal's interim parliament voted to abolish the monarchy [JURIST report] as part of a plan to bring members of the Communist Party of Nepal - Maoists (CPN-M) [party website] back into government. In addition to dethroning the king, the Constituent Assembly will work on drafting a new constitution [JURIST report] and electing a president to head the new republic. BBC has more. eKantipur has local coverage.

The Constituent Assembly was elected in April [JURIST report] after voting dominated by the CPN-M. On Monday, Nepalese authorities banned protests near the royal enclaves [JURIST report] in anticipation of rallies and celebrations marking the expected abolition of the monarchy. The establishment of the Constituent Assembly and the abolition of the monarchy were the main parts of a 2006 peace agreement [text; JURIST report] between the CPN-M and the Nepalese government, which marked the end of a 10-year Maoist insurgency [JURIST report].

[JURIST] Amnesty International (AI) released its annual report [PDF; AI materials] on the state of human rights around the world on Tuesday. The major themes of this year's report include violence against women, US detention of terrorism suspects, persecution of human rights activists, and the continued use of the death penalty in criminal prosecutions. The organization's Secretary General, Irene Khan, called on world governments [AI press release] to address injustice, inequality, and impunity with respect to human rights. Khan also urged the international community to focus immediate attention on "human rights flashpoints," including Darfur, Zimbabwe, Gaza, Iraq, and Myanmar [JURIST news archives]. AP has more.

The report paid particular attention to human rights violations reported during the US "War on Terror". AI also pointed out inconsistencies and a lack of accountability in the US criminal justice system, especially with respect to the death penalty and race relations. China was also criticized in the report for its record on human rights, a growing issue in light of the upcoming Olympic Games [JURIST news archive]. AI focused on China's state-sponsored persecution of human rights activists and the repression of minority and religious groups. Many of the comments echo sentiments expressed in the 2007 annual report [JURIST report], in which AI condemned the US and its allies for secret detention, extraordinary rendition [JURIST news archive], and other alleged human rights violations.