[JURIST] Executives from several Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and broadband internet service providers urged the US House of Representatives [PDF witness list] on Tuesday to pass HR 3914 [draft materials], a bill that would make it harder for companies to avoid Federal Communications Commission (FCC) [official website] anti-competitive practice rules. Under current rules [FCC materials], if a telecom company files a petition to be exempted from an FCC competition-related rule, the exemption is typically granted by default unless the FCC explicitly denies the request. The result, according to the broadband and VoIP companies, is that traditional phone companies can effectively obstruct competitors' access to consumers and maintain de-facto service monopolies. An identical bill [S 2469 materials] is being considered by the Senate. AP has more.

The testimony came before the US House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet [official website], chaired by Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) [official website]. At the center of of the witnesses' complaints was the so-called "last mile" of service - local telephone poles and other systems that are owned by traditional phone companies and deliver internet, cable, and phone service directly to customers' homes. Despite rules that prohibit them from excluding competitors from utilizing these government-subsidized systems, non-traditional telecom companies say [press release] the so-called "Baby Bells" have disconnected copper phone lines they depend upon, and charge exorbitant rates for the addition of competing, non-cable broadband wires.

[JURIST] The Canadian Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) [official website] announced Monday that it appealed a Federal Court [court website] decision in which the Court found that certain notes, records and correspondence generated by government ministers and their staff are not subject to public access under the Access to Information Act [text]. In Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (National Defence) [opinion text], the Federal Court held that the only records and correspondence in ministers' offices that are subject to the Act are those that can be requested and obtained by a deputy minister or senior official to deal with departmental matters. The OIC said in a press release [text]:

The court ruled that records in ministers’ offices are not subject to disclosure under the Act, apart from certain records deemed to be under the department’s control. The criterion set by the court for establishing which records fall into this category is that they can be requested and obtained by the Deputy Minister or by senior officials to deal with departmental matters. The Information Commissioner’s position is that this criterion leaves the determination of which records come under the control of the department open to interpretation and could severely limit the scope of the Access to Information Act. In the Commissioner’s view, a record generated or obtained by a Minister, or on his behalf, relating to the administration of their department, is subject to the Act regardless of where the record is located.

[JURIST] The China Ministry of Commerce [official website, English version] said Tuesday that Chinese officials disagreed with and could challenge a World Trade Organization (WTO) panel report [materials; conclusions and recommendations, PDF] which states that the country illegally taxes and disfavors imported auto parts. The US, EU, and Canada [WTO dispute summaries] submitted complaints in March, alleging that China was taxing auto parts imported from those countries at the same rate that it taxed foreign-made finished cars in violation of promises made upon accession to the WTO and in violation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) [text]. The panel recommended Friday in its report that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body [official website] "request China to bring these inconsistent measures as listed above into conformity with its obligations under the GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement," but Chinese officials maintain that the country's policies are in line with its obligations. AP has more.

Since its accession to the WTO in December 2001, China has been the subject of a number of complaints, most prominently disputes with the US regarding the protection of US intellectual property from piracy in China. China has also initiated two disputes with the US in the WTO over anti-dumping laws and US steel tariffs. In April 2007, China denounced a US decision to file a copyright enforcement case against China in the WTO [JURIST reports]. In August 2007, the US requested WTO mediation [JURIST report] in the same copyright dispute.

[JURIST] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit [complaint, PDF; press release] Monday in Alabama's Montgomery County Circuit Court, challenging an Alabama law that prevents some convicted felons from voting. A 2003 amendment to the state constitution [text] says that felons convicted of "crimes of moral turpitude" are ineligible to vote, and specifies 15 qualifying crimes. Alabama Attorney General Troy King [official website] put forth a list of additional crimes that would bar voting in 2005, and the ACLU alleges that his action was in violation of the state constitution, which only allows the legislature to make such designations. The lawsuit seeks to restrict disenfranchising crimes to only those listed by the legislature. AP has more. The New York Times has additional coverage.

In February, the ACLU filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in federal court challenging a Tennessee state law that requires convicted felons to pay "all outstanding legal financial obligations" before their voting rights are restored. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee [official website], alleges that such a financial burden violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment [LII text] by "discriminat[ing] among citizens on the basis of wealth."

[JURIST] Louisiana state prosecutors on Monday petitioned [PDF text] the US Supreme Court to reconsider its June decision in Kennedy v. Louisiana [Duke Law backgrounder; JURIST report], where it found that imposing the death sentence for child rape where the victim was not killed constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. The Court had noted in that ruling that very few states had such laws and that - incorrectly - there were no federal laws allowing the punishment for rape, but lawyers for Louisiana argued in their bid for rehearing that a 2006 amendment to the Uniform Code of Military Conduct [LII materials] does in fact allow the death penalty at court-martial for rape and child rape. It is highly unusual for the Court to agree to such petitions, but Louisiana lawyers say a review is warranted because of that oversight. AP has more. The New York Times has additional coverage.

The US Department of Justice said earlier this month that it had mistakenly failed to brief the Supreme Court [JURIST report] on the existence of the military law [PDF text] allowing capital punishment for child rape before the court decided the case. The oversight was first raised [CAAFlog post] by a civilian Air Force lawyer in his blog on military justice. The Supreme Court's holding reversed a 2007 decision [PDF text] by the Supreme Court of Louisiana.

[JURIST] A Serbian prosecutor said on Tuesday that the government plans to extradite Bosnian Serb leader and former fugitive Radovan Karadzic [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] to the Hague to face an International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official site] war crimes indictment [text]. Karadzic was originally indicted by the court in 1995, but had been in hiding under an assumed identity until his arrest Monday [JURIST report]. Karadzic's defense has three days to appeal the extradition, but if unsucessful, he will be sent to the Netherlands where counsel will be appointed and he will be given the opportunity to enter a plea on the charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Karadzic is accused of being involved in the Srebrenica [JURIST news archive] massacre and other crimes against Bosnian Muslims and Croats during ethnic conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. His capture has been a major goal of the ICTY [press release], and follows the June arrest [JURIST report] of former Bosnian Serb police commander Stojan Zupljanin [Trial Watch profile]. The Herald has more. The Guardian has additional coverage.

ICTY Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz [ICC profile; JURIST report] has long criticized Serbia for its seeming reluctance to cooperate with the ICTY, exemplified by its failure to find and capture [JURIST report] the remaining war crimes suspects. Brammertz took over the prosecution's leadership in January, saying that he would continue his predecessor's tough stance on Serbian cooperation [JURIST report] with the tribunal. The EU has made Serbia's cooperation with the ICTY a key element of its membership negotiations [EU accession materials]. Brammertz has vowed to try all war crimes suspects [JURIST report] before the expiration of the ICTY's mandate in 2010.

[JURIST] Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win has called for the newly-established Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) [official website] to refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of ASEAN member nations. The comments, made during a Monday meeting to organize the new ASEAN human rights committee, indicate that Myanmar [JURIST news archive] may block attempts to give the new body any authority to investigate alleged human rights violations. Other member states reportedly objected to the restrictions on the committee, which critics note already lacks authority [JURIST report] to issue sanctions against member states which violate human rights. AP has more.

Myanmar signed on [ceremony speech; JURIST report] to a new ASEAN charter Monday, despite other ASEAN members' criticism [statement text] of the country's human rights record and continued detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi [BBC profile; JURIST news archive]. The charter [PDF text] was designed to create stronger economic and security ties within the region, and Article 14 establishes a body to monitor human rights in member countries. Myanmar's inclusion in the in charter has long been controversial [JURIST report] because of its human rights record..

[JURIST] New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo [official profile] wrote in a letter [text, PDF] Monday that his office would bring legal action within five days against Comcast Cable Communications [corporate website] unless the company agrees to block child pornography websites and strengthen its reporting requirements. Verizon, Time Warner Cable, and Sprint agreed to block access to the sites in June, promising to eliminate any such sites hosted on their servers under Cuomos's so-called "Code of Conduct." Earlier this month, AT&T and AOL signed similar agreements [press releases]. Last week, Comcast agreed to different terms [press release] to limit the spread of online child pornography, but Cuomo said that they were too weak and criticized Comcast for its refusal to sign his agreement:

Because the possession or distribution of child pornography is both a federal and state felony, it is not protected by the first amendment. I have crafted the Code of Conduct each of these companies has signed as narrowly as possible to ensure that the actions they volunteer to take are surgically directed at only that felonious material and not at any protected content. Despite both the groundswell of corporate concern and action to reduce the supply of child pornography and the narrowly tailored provisions of the Code of Conduct, Comcast has remained on the sidelines.

[JURIST] Thai and Cambodian officials agreed Monday that neither country will use military force against the other in their dispute over the border area surrounding the Preah Vihear temple [Telegraph backgrounder], over which both countries claim ownership. The meeting was designed to resolve the major border dispute issues, but the sides made no further agreements because Thai officials want to employ US cartography [TNA report], while Cambodian officials want French materials to be controlling because they mark the border at a different place. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) [official website] Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo said [statement text] of the meeting:

Thailand and Cambodia gave the assurance that they would exercise utmost restraint and resolve the issue amicably in the spirit of ASEAN solidarity and good neighbourliness. Both sides also reiterated that they would handle the situation in accordance with their ASEAN and international obligations.

[JURIST] Navy Capt. Keith Allred, the judge presiding over the military commission trial of Salim Ahmed Hamdan [DOD materials; JURIST news archive], ruled [text, PDF] Monday that Hamdan is not entitled to the protection against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution [text]. In the same order, Allred also barred evidence obtained in Afghanistan immediately after Hamdan's capture there in 2001 because of the "highly coercive" conditions of his detention. Hamdan pleaded not guilty to charges [charge sheet] of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorism at the beginning of the trial Monday at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive]. Hamdan is the first so-called "enemy combatant" to be tried by a military commission at Guantanamo. Ruling against Hamdan's right to protection under the Fifth Amendment, Allred wrote:

In summary, the commission finds that (1) the accused has been found to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a full, fair, open and adversarial hearing; (2) that the site of his apprehension and detention, in the Court's own words "is a factor that weighs against a finding that he has rights under the [Constitution]"; (3) there are substantial practical arguments against applying the 5th Amendment "with full force and effect" in Guantanamo Bay; (4) that the alternative remedy Congress has provided, is considerably less protective than the 5th Amendment but is consistent with the minimal protections guaranteed to unlawful combatants under Common Article 3; (5) that there is no necessity for the 5th Amendment to prevent injustice, and (6) that application of the 5th Amendment in Guantanamo Bay would be anomalous in some respects. The preponderance of these factors analyzed weigh against the application of the 5th Amendment in Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court has expressly disclaimed extraterritorial application of the 5th Amendment as recently as 1990 "The claim that extraterritorial aliens are entitled to rights under the 5th Amendment has been emphatically rejected."[citation omitted]